CHAPTER VIII.

CHARLES I. NAVY--_continued_.

Considering the failure of his foreign policy and the inglorious fiasco

of the first ship-money fleet, it might be supposed that Charles would

pause in the unusual method he had adopted of wringing money from

the country for empty displays. While the Earl of Lindsey was still

cruising at sea, and before the issue of the second ship-money writs,

he knew that his schemes had miscarried. He was left drifting about

without any definite policy, but still clinging to the plan of the

restoration of his nephew to the Palatinate as the one thing before

him. He was equally ready to ally himself with France against Spain, or

with Spain against France, whichever would be most likely to aid him in

realising that object;[520] and as he had neither money nor troops to

attract a Continental alliance, his only pawn lay in the navy. In the

summer of 1635, while Selden was busy in the Temple at his book, it was

resolved to equip a fleet far more formidable than Lindsey’s for the

following year. Coventry made his speech to the Judges in June, and in

August the second writs for ship-money were sent out. In this case, as

is well known, they were addressed not only to the coast towns but to

the whole of England, with consequences notorious in English history.

The number of ships it was at first intended to set out was forty-five,

totalling 21,850 tons, and with 8650 men, the estimated cost being

£218,000.[521] At the beginning of December the Admiralty considered

what number should be set out in the spring; and by an Order of the

King in Council on December 27th, it was decreed that twenty-four

should be prepared “for guarding the narrow seas,” while ten other

ships should be got ready as a second fleet to reinforce the first, or

to take its place later.[522]

The second ship-money fleet was placed under the command of the Earl

of Northumberland, an able, accomplished, and high-spirited young

nobleman, much better fitted than Lindsey was for the office of

Admiral. This fleet is usually said to have been the most powerful ever

set out by England up to that time.[523] According to Northumberland’s

Journal, it consisted of twenty-seven vessels, all of which were

king’s ships, except three which had been fitted out by London. Sir

John Pennington was appointed Vice-Admiral and Sir Henry Mervin,

Rear-Admiral.[524]

But what was to be done with the fleet? That was a question put by

Windebank in the autumn of the previous year. The king had remitted

to the Foreign Committee two inquiries: what answer he should make to

the French ambassador concerning “a nearer conjunction” with France;

and whether he should declare his neutrality. Windebank argued against

either a French alliance or a declaration of neutrality. Against the

former proposition he urged four reasons, one being that the French

“had challenged a joint sovereignty on the sea with his Majesty”;

and against the latter that the French and Hollanders would besiege

Dunkirk or some part of Flanders, and the king would have to sit still

and suffer it to be lost, or break his neutrality. “Besides,” said

Windebank, clinching his arguments, “what was to be done with the

fleet next year if his Majesty declared his neutrality? it must lie

still and do nothing.”[525] Apparently the problem of what was to be

done with the fleet was not quite solved until the February following,

though there had been several tolerably clear indications that one part

of its duty at least would be the suppression of unlicensed fishing on

the British coasts. Selden’s _Mare Clausum_ was issued from the press

in December 1635, and it was with great satisfaction that Charles

welcomed it (see p. 368). The idea of playing the more distinguished

_rôle_ of Lord of the Sea was not therefore likely to be abandoned

because Lindsey’s fleet had been able to do nothing.

At the same time Charles thought he might get some money as well as

honour by means of his fleet, and he submitted two propositions to the

Lords of the Admiralty for their consideration in employing the fleet

“for his honour and profit”: first, in “wafting and securing” foreign

merchant vessels passing through his seas; second, in protecting all

such fishermen as should fish under his license upon his seas and

coasts. With reference to the latter suggestion, Sir Henry Marten

delivered an elaborate opinion to the Admiralty. He recited how King

James, after long and mature deliberation, had satisfied himself

and resolved that the fishing “in his seas and upon the coasts of

his dominions, did justly appertain unto him as a right incident to

his crowns,” and had issued a proclamation declaring his title and

forbidding unlicensed fishing by foreigners. He also explained that the

United Provinces had then sent over commissioners who alleged continued

custom and present possession of the fishings, “mentioning withall

some treaties that had been heretofore between the Kings of England

and the Dukes of Burgundy” in favour of their liberty of fishing.

After hearing Sir Henry, the Admiralty expressed a unanimous opinion

that “the right and royalty of that fishing upon your Majesty’s coasts

doth undoubtedly belong unto your Majesty by inheritance, so as you

may justly prohibit or license all strangers at your royal will and

pleasure.” They further declared that by reason of his strength at sea,

the time was then most fitting to put his claim into execution; and

they recommended that the States’ ambassador should be informed that

the king had not relinquished his right to the “royal fishing,” but

was “resolved to defend it as the hereditary right and possession of

any other of his dominions.” This intimation was to be wrapped up in

sophistries, lest the Dutch should think the king challenged it at a

time when they had most need of his favour and grace. James had offered

them a bare license for liberty to fish; Charles was to offer them

safety and security as well, and the depredations which the Dunkirk

privateers had committed on the herring-busses were to be used as an

impressive argument to convince them of the benefits they would receive

from his protection. The privateers had driven them from the fishing,

even in sight of English harbours, by which the king was prejudiced

both in honour and interest; but if they accepted his licenses he might

feel justified in drawing his sword in their defence, in spite of any

league or treaty. If, however, the Hollanders should be so wanting in

discretion as to refuse the royal licenses, the Lords of the Admiralty

were “all clear of opinion that his Majesty should renew and publish

the like proclamation to that of the King his father, and prosecute

the settling of that his right as a thing so highly concerning him in

honour, dominion and profit.”

As to the second proposition, the convoying of foreign merchant

vessels, the Admiralty were more guarded in their opinion. They all

agreed that the king was entitled to have profit by it, but not by

way of a general imposition on all ships passing through his seas,

as Charles, fresh from the perusal of _Mare Clausum_, apparently had

proposed. That, they said, would doubtless “draw a just complaint and

clamour” from the neighbouring princes and their subjects. The best

course, they thought, was for a tribute to be taken from such vessels

as desired convoy, in proportion to the value of the ship and the

length of the waftage. The King of England was thus to hire out his

ships of war when any foreign vessels were willing to pay for their

employment.[526]

The instructions to the Earl of Northumberland were issued by the

Admiralty on 7th April, and they were substantially the same as those

given to Lindsey in the previous year. In the clause referring to

hostilities in the presence of the king’s ships, the phrase, “in any

part of the Narrow Seas,” in Lindsey’s instructions, was replaced by

the words “in any part of his Majesty’s seas,”--an alteration of some

importance in view of Coke’s description of the extent of them; and the

same change was made in the title of his instructions.[527] The king

also gave the Earl private and verbal commands, particularly as to the

operations to be conducted against the Dutch herring-busses.

The fleet mustered in the Downs, the Earl embarking in the _Triumph_

on 14th May. Leaving some of the ships to convoy merchant vessels and

guard the Straits of Dover, he hoisted sails on the 20th, and stood

away westwards in search of the French fleet. It was known that a large

number of ships had been equipped by France and lay at Rochelle; and

Pennington had reported at the end of February that twenty-four States’

men-of-war were at Amsterdam, ready to come out and join the French,

and that they were to wear French colours. It was believed that the

intention of the allies was to lay siege to and blockade Dunkirk, and

Northumberland was ordered to keep a watch on them and to force them

to strike. On leaving the Downs he passed over to the French coast,

sailing along it within sight of Calais, Boulogne, and Dieppe, and

then stood over for the English coast. On 26th May he was at Portland;

thence he passed westwards to the Lizard, and cruised between it and

Ushant and within sight of the French coast till 11th June, when the

fleet put into Plymouth. During all this time they got no glimpse of

the fleet for which they were seeking, but they had frequent reports

from passing vessels that it was at the Isle de Rhé, and numbered

between forty and fifty sail, most of which were small and unprepared

to put to sea. Within ten days of leaving the Downs, Northumberland had

apparently satisfied himself that they would see nothing of the French

that summer; he thereupon reminded the Admiralty that the fishing

season was approaching, and requested to know the king’s pleasure as to

whether he should go northwards. On the 14th, the Admiralty informed

him that as the season for fishing began about the 20th June, he was

to repair to the northwards as soon as his other business would permit.

Northumberland received this letter at Plymouth on the 22nd, together

with other information that the French fleet had passed towards

Dunkirk. He thereupon hurried eastwards, arriving at the Downs on 24th

June, and finding that the report as to the movement of the French

fleet was false, prepared for the campaign against the Dutch fishermen.

The Channel cruise of Northumberland’s fleet was thus as barren of

result as had been Lindsey’s in the year before. He fell in with a

few Dunkirk privateers, far too nimble to be caught up by the “great

unwieldy” English ships. When in Portland Road, a glimpse was got

of eight large ships at a great distance, which were thought to be

States’ men-of-war. Northumberland stood towards them, but as soon as

they perceived the movement they tacked about and were speedily out

of sight. “They are so well built and fitted for sailing,” remarked

the Earl, “that I can never come near when they have a mind to avoid,

unless by chance.” It has indeed been well said that whether Charles

was sovereign of the seas or not, he could not build ships that would

sail.[528] For the same reason the English vessels were unable to find

the “Turkish” pirates, which, when the Earl put into Plymouth, came

out of the Irish seas, and carried off about thirty English fishermen

into captivity. During Northumberland’s cruise, Captain Carteret with

six ships was busily employed in convoying such trading vessels “as

desired it” from the English coast to Dunkirk or Ostend, “taking an

acknowledgment in money of strangers.”[529]

But if Northumberland was foiled by the Fabian tactics of Richelieu, as

they had foiled Lindsey, with regard to the striking of the flag, he

succeeded in forcing the Dutch fishermen to take the king’s license,

a policy which Charles had contemplated long before even the first

ship-money fleet was equipped. We have already seen how the Scottish

burghs in the course of the negotiations about the Fishery Society,

repeatedly insisted that the unwelcome Hollander should be driven

from their seas (see pp. 227, 234). As early indeed as 1630 rumours

were rife in Paris that a fleet of fifteen English ships, under the

command of Sir Kenelm Digby, was to be equipped for this purpose;[530]

and there were signs from other quarters of what was impending. In

1634 Sir Nicholas Halse addressed a treatise to the king on Dutch

trade and fisheries, like those so profusely bestowed on James, in

which he drew a lively picture of the ills which arose from their

predominance. The yearly profit derived by the Hollanders from their

fishing in the British seas he placed at £6,000,000 sterling, which

enabled them to maintain their wars; and yet they were so ungrateful

as to say that England would never be well governed until they had

the governing of it. He recommended that the Hollanders should be

licensed to enjoy half the fishings, a course which he said would make

Charles the most powerful sovereign in Christendom,--superlatives

and hyperbole never being stinted in such forecastings.[531] Then

a very influential body, the Merchant Adventurers, exasperated by

certain measures taken by Holland and the States-General with respect

to their staple at Amsterdam, petitioned the Council to retaliate,

and among their retributory suggestions was the prohibition of the

Hollanders from fishing on the British coasts or drying their nets on

the English shore.[532] It would appear indeed that originally one of

the principal ostensible objects of the fleet of 1635 was to force

licenses on the Dutch. Thus Nicholas, the Secretary to the Admiralty,

who was not in the secret of the Spanish negotiations, in a memorandum

drawn up in that year, suggested that the duties of the fleet should

be the suppression of piracy about the mouth of the Straits, and the

establishment of the king’s rights to the fishings in the eastern and

northern seas.[533]

The course upon which Charles had now embarked in reference to

foreign fishermen was a revival of the policy of the “assize-herring”

of James. No foreigner was to be allowed to fish in the British seas

without obtaining, and paying for, a license from the king. James,

as we have seen, demanded his right in a pettifogging way, sending a

scarcely-armed and half-dismantled pinnace among the busses, with a

lawyer on board, to ask the tribute in fair and gentle words, and if

refused “to take out instruments upon the said refusal.” Charles sent

his Admiral with a powerful fleet, and with instructions to force the

fishermen to take the licenses in spite of all opposition. The first

step was to issue a formal proclamation like that issued by James in

1609, forbidding unlicensed fishing by foreigners. The opinion of the

Lords of the Admiralty and their legal adviser (to whom appertained

the jurisdiction of the fisheries) being emphatically in favour of the

king’s claims, the draft proclamation was drawn up and submitted to

them on 3rd May.[534] It was approved, and published to the world on

May 10th, four days before Northumberland joined the fleet.

In this proclamation Charles recited the provisions contained in

the earlier one of 1609, “since which time,” he said, “neither Our

said father nor Our Self have made any considerable execution of the

said Proclamation, but have with much patience expected a voluntary

conformity of our neighbours and allies to so just and reasonable

prohibitions and directions as are contained in the same.” But finding

by experience that all the inconveniences which occasioned the previous

proclamation had rather increased than abated, being “very sensible

of the premises, and well knowing how far we are obliged in honour

and conscience to maintain the rights of our Crown, especially of so

great consequence,” he thought it necessary, by the advice of his

Privy Council, “to renew the aforesaid restraint of fishing upon our

aforesaid coasts and seas, without license first obtained from Us, and

by these presents to make public declaration that Our resolution is (at

times convenient) to keep such a competent strength of shipping upon

Our Seas, as may (by God’s blessing) be sufficient, both to hinder such

further encroachments upon Our regalities, and assist and protect those

our good friends and allies, who shall henceforth, by virtue of our

license (to be first obtained) endeavour to take the benefit of fishing

upon our coasts and seas, in the places accustomed.”[535]

In connection with the proclamation several hundred licenses were

prepared, the precise form of which appears to have occasioned some

trouble.[536] The duty of drawing them up had been remitted in April

to Nicholas and Sir Henry Marten, and on June 14th a hundred of

them were sent to Deal Castle for the Earl of Northumberland, with

instructions from the Lords of the Admiralty. The king, they said, had

told them he had already verbally given the Earl directions to charge

the busses which took the licenses at the rate of twelvepence a ton;

with respect to such as might refuse to accept the license, he was “to

take order that they may not fish in the said seas; and in case they

shall fish without license, he is to send their vessels and fish into

some of his Majesty’s ports till further order.” The Admiralty left

to his own discretion what ships he should take with him, but they

said he would require the bigger ships to repel such force as he might

encounter, and the smaller ships to apprehend the fisher-boats.

The fleet remained at the Downs, victualling, taking in stores, and

waiting for pilots acquainted with the northern coasts, from 24th June

to 19th July. The masters of the ships were unwilling to risk the

large vessels among “the sands and flats” of the east coast, or where

there were no good harbours; and they were all of opinion that if they

went at all, they ought to leave before 12th July, in order to fall in

with the herring fleet north of Buchan Ness. In any case they declined

to go unless pilots were provided, and these had to be obtained from

the Cinque Ports and Yarmouth. There was obviously much reluctance in

the fleet to go on this expedition. The objections and difficulties

were brought to the notice of the king, but Charles stood firm, and

expressed his “pleasure” that the northern voyage should be undertaken;

and Northumberland before leaving wrote to Windebank to assure him

that the fleet would decide the business they had in hand, for either

the Dutch would take the licenses and pay the acknowledgment, or else

the fleet “would put an end to that work.” There could be no doubt of

success, because the men, he assured Windebank, were full of resolution

to do the king’s service and gain credit to themselves. At the same

time, he asked for further instructions with regard to his stay among

the busses--those he had received, he said, being like oracles.[537]

On July 19 the English fleet weighed anchor and shaped its course

northwards in its expedition against the Dutch herring-boats. It

consisted of sixteen ships, one Whelp, and a frigate; and both

Vice-Admiral Sir John Pennington and Rear-Admiral Sir Henry Mervin

accompanied the Earl. Contrary winds compelled them to come again to

anchor, but on the 22nd a fair breeze carried them to the north of

Cromer, on the Norfolk coast. On Sunday, 24th, when at Tynemouth,

the Admiral called all his captains together and gave them precise

instructions in the event of their meeting with any considerable

opposition from the States’ men-of-war guarding the busses. On the

25th, 26th, and 27th, foul and misty weather caused them to ride at

anchor ten leagues off the coast. About noon on the 28th they descried

sixteen sail of herring-busses accompanied by one man-of-war; and

immediately the Dutch skippers observed the English fleet they made

off “with all the sails they could pack on.” Northumberland’s unwieldy

ships started in pursuit--“but in vain,” wrote the Earl, “for none

of our ships could come near them.” The States’ man-of-war was less

fortunate or more courageous. It was from the first far astern of the

busses, and it was soon overtaken by the _Swan_--which, it may be

noted, was a Dunkirk privateer that had been captured and converted

into an English warship. Northumberland kept the Dutch captain on

board his own ship, the _Triumph_, all night, expecting, as he said,

that the busses would not go far without him--for of course they were

liable to be swooped upon by the privateers. But the fishermen now

feared the Dunkirkers less than they feared the English fleet, and

the Earl’s ruse failed. After dark he sent off four ships to try to

surprise them at their nets, but “they plied away all night without

making any stop.”[538] They were well aware of the mission of the

fleet, but they had no mind either for the license or the protection of

the King of England. Next day Northumberland, finding that the busses

“trusted only to their good sailing” and did not return, and that the

convoying men-of-war were not likely to be able to oppose him,--two

or three “very meane ships only able to defend them from the Dunkirk

frigates” accompanying each fleet of busses,--and hearing, moreover,

that the principal fishing was past and most of the busses gone home,

resolved to divide his fleet into three squadrons, the better to meet

in with those which remained. Sir John Pennington was sent to the north

as far as Buchan Ness, and Sir H. Mervin to the south as low down as

Flamborough Head, each with instructions to use his best endeavours to

get the Dutchmen to take the king’s licenses, while the Earl himself

plied “to and again” between them. Next day--Saturday, 30th July--being

misty and calm, Northumberland’s squadron lay at anchor. About noon

they espied four or five sail at a distance, and as there was not a

breath of wind, the boats were ordered to take the frigate in tow and

go towards them; but a breeze soon springing up, all the ships weighed

anchor and stood after them. On getting up to them they proved to be a

Hollander man-of-war and a few busses; but the fog was so great that

they were unable that night to get more than three of the busses,

the skippers of which, as well as the commander of the man-of-war,

were brought on board the _Triumph_. On Sunday four other busses were

captured, and having been manned with English sailors and threats made

that their nets would be taken from them, they at last consented to

receive licenses and pay the acknowledgment, and Northumberland sent

them away “very well satisfied.”[539]

[Illustration: Fig. 10.--_Dutch Herring-busses under sail._ After Van

der Meulen.]

On August 1 the Admiral stood into the Firth of Forth and despatched

to Edinburgh a missive for the Court, telling the good news. Then

the squadron from the 2nd to the 8th of August beat off and on the

coast, going as far north as Aberdeen (5th August) and reaching twenty

to thirty leagues off without seeing any busses. It then turned

southwards, and on the 9th gave chase to two men-of-war guarding a

fleet of busses, the latter, as before, making all haste away. The

Dutch men-of-war coming up to the English squadron, no doubt to inquire

and protest, were promptly manned with English sailors and sent in

hot haste after the busses that had fled. “Yet,” said the Earl, “with

all the wayes we could use, we gott not above 20 of them, though wee

spent divers shott to make them come in.”[540] On the same afternoon

Pennington’s squadron came up from the northwards, where they had

succeeded in distributing only three licenses; and on this day three of

the ships were sent back to port by reason of “divers desertes,” which

made them unfit to keep the sea longer.[541]

[Illustration: Fig. 11.--_Dutch Herring-busses hauling their nets, with

convoying ship-of-war._ After Van der Meulen.]

Passing to the southward of the Firth of Forth on 10th August, the

English squadron, before the day broke on the 11th, had the good

luck to sail into a great fleet of about two hundred busses, which

were guarded by five States’ men-of-war. To thirty-five of these

fishing-boats Rear-Admiral Mervin, whose squadron was found here, had

given licenses on the previous day, and Northumberland now distributed

about a hundred more amongst them, and left the _Convertive_, the

_Bonaventure_, and the _Fifth Whelp_ to act as a guard to them on

behalf of the King of England, with spare licenses for any other busses

that might require them. Next day Northumberland disposed of a few

more licenses and came to anchor, lest the ships should damage the

long drifting-nets of the fishermen. But a heavy gale coming on and

threatening to increase, the Admiral fired a warning gun and weighed

at break of day on the 13th: so furious was the wind and sea that two

of the vessels broke loose, and others had the greatest difficulty in

getting up their anchors, and the English fleet was dispersed. The

_Triumph_ made for Scarborough, where it was joined during the next few

days by the rest of the fleet, and then they all left for the Downs.

On the morning of the 20th they descried twenty sail of good ships,

and on filling sails and standing to them they found they were Dutch

men-of-war, under Van Dorp, who, as we shall see, had been sent by the

States-General to protect the busses and prevent the acceptance of

the English licenses. The Dutch ships, as the Earl carefully recorded

in his Journal, “tooke in all their flaggs, strucke their topsails,

and every ship one after another saluted us with their guns, which

we answered.” Van Dorp went on board the _Triumph_ to explain to the

English Admiral the reason of the presence there of the Hollander

squadron, and when they departed they again saluted. On 22nd August the

English fleet cast anchor in the Downs, and Van Dorp, having arrived

too late to carry out the instructions of his Government, returned to

the Flemish coast.[542]

From the foregoing narrative it is clear that the Dutch fishermen

evaded as much as they could the acceptance of the king’s licenses.

They endeavoured to escape when escape was possible, and only

yielded when they were threatened with the loss of their nets and

the interruption of their fishing; and it would have shown little

wisdom for the few small men-of-war guarding them to have attempted

resistance to a force so superior. Northumberland, however, in his

report, while explaining that from the lateness of the season they had

encountered fewer busses than they expected, said that “those we could

come to speak with, when they were made to understand the business,

have been very willing to take licenses, and are most desirous of the

King’s protection.” About two hundred licenses, he stated, had been

distributed among the busses, and others were left with the ships he

had appointed as their guard.[543]

As was to be expected, the revival in England of the policy of James as

to unlicensed fishing by foreigners on the British coasts occasioned

serious concern in the United Provinces. Since Charles came to the

throne the Dutch had been careful to repress as much as they could

any cause of further complaints from Scotland. In 1628, when they

were informed of the continued “insolencies” of their fishermen, the

States-General renewed their previous edict (see p. 179), and gave

instructions that extracts from it should be sent to the Chancellor

of Scotland; and they issued peremptory orders to the captains of the

convoying ships and the masters of the busses and others to obey it

strictly.[544] When the Fishery Society was instituted, the States were

kept advised by their ambassador in London of its progress and of the

measures proposed to be taken at the Hebrides and on the east coast;

and although they soon perceived that they had very little to fear from

it in the sphere of commercial competition, they rightly suspected

that the project foreshadowed the revival of exclusive claims to the

fishery, such as had given them so much trouble under James.[545] We

have noted also how anxiety was aroused in Holland over the equipment

of Lindsey’s fleet, and that Joachimi, their ambassador, had got wind

of the intention to send some of the ships northwards among the busses.

But the proclamation of 10th May as to “restraint of fishing” removed

any lingering doubts they had of the king’s intentions, especially as

it appeared so soon after the publication of _Mare Clausum_. At that

time the policy of the Dutch was earnestly directed towards detaching

England from the side of Spain and bringing her into line with France

and the Republic, and a special ambassador, Van Beveren, was sent

over to the English Court to help Joachimi in bringing this about.

He arrived in London in March 1636, and in April Coke and Windebank

explained to him that the intention of the king in setting forth the

fleet was to preserve and maintain his sovereignty and hereditary

right over the sea, as well as to furnish convoys for the protection

of traffic; and further, that no one could be allowed to fish in the

British seas without express license from the king, and the rendering

of a proper acknowledgment for the liberty. They told him that the

Dutch fishermen would find the king’s protection against the Dunkirk

privateers both advantageous and profitable. On asking for a statement

in writing of the king’s claims, the Dutch ambassadors were coldly

referred to Selden’s _Mare Clausum_.

In notifying the States-General of this conversation, Van Beveren

asked for prompt and precise instructions how to deal with what he

described as an important, dangerous, and far-reaching business. He

was told by De Seneterre, the French ambassador, that he had received

a similar notification, and that he had expressed the opinion that

it was inopportune to raise at that time a prickly question that had

been sleeping for five-and-twenty years, and which was equivalent to a

tacit declaration of war against the United Provinces. At an interview

which Van Beveren had with Charles on April 25th, he explained that the

main object of his coming was to arrange for open and combined action

against Spain and help to the young Elector to recover the Palatinate;

but the king in a few words put the proposed alliance aside, and began

to speak of the herring fishery. The States-General, always anxious

to burk discussion of this matter, had postponed giving Van Beveren

definite instructions about it, in the hope and expectation that it

would be submerged in the more important business of the alliance.[546]

There were other circumstances which led them to think the king would

not press his claim to the fishery. One was that the publication of the

proclamation for restraint of fishing had been delayed, and even its

promulgation denied. It seems, indeed, that the opinions of Charles as

to his policy on this question were constantly fluctuating, and that

he could scarcely make up his mind as to what it were best for him to

do. Both the young Elector, his nephew, whom Van Beveren had gained

over to his views, and his sister, the Elector’s mother and Queen of

Bohemia, were against any interference with the Dutch fishermen at that

time. It was doubtless with some knowledge of the state of affairs,

that the Earl of Northumberland inquired in May if the king was still

desirous that he should go north against the busses. But in June all

scruples had vanished: the instructions were sent to Northumberland

and the proclamation was widely disseminated. In the States of Holland

the king’s edict was discussed at the beginning of June, and it was

remitted to a committee, with Joachimi (then in Holland) and the Prince

of Orange, for consideration, and to report as to what measures should

be taken to protect the interests of the fishermen. The States finally

resolved to do two things--first, to endeavour by all diplomatic means

to get the proposed action of the king delayed, and second, to equip a

strong fleet to protect the fishermen by force lest diplomacy failed.

In these anxious days Van Beveren kept a tireless eye on the English

fleet lying in the Downs, and reported to the States-General from time

to time anything he learned of its movements or the rumours he heard

concerning it.[547] Twelve days before it sailed for the north, he

informed them that the general opinion was that it would return to the

westwards to look for the French fleet. A few days later he discovered

its real destination, and at once demanded an audience of the king.

Charles received him very courteously at Windsor on the 17th July;

assured him that he would treat the Dutch “as friends”; and explained

that the measures to be taken by the fleet were of a peaceful nature,

and were intended to benefit the fishermen by extending to them the

protection of England against the Dunkirk privateers, from whom they

had suffered so much in the previous year. The payment of a small

acknowledgment would in reality, he said, be very profitable to them.

Van Beveren had accordingly to content himself as well as he could with

these assurances. He received the condolences of the French ambassador,

with whom he had frequent interviews, and who pointed out to him that

the circumstances of the time were such that the wisest course would

be to deprive the king of every pretext for open hostility. If the

matter could only be prolonged under the pretence of negotiations

until peace was concluded with Spain, then indeed France--ay, and even

Spain too, he added--would join with the States in bringing the King

of England speedily to reason. When Northumberland actually departed

for the north, Van Beveren immediately informed the States-General of

the important fact; but it was not long until the king was able to

tell him that the fishermen had accepted the licenses and paid the

acknowledgment “with good contentment.”[548]

The ambassador’s reports, and still more the accounts which soon poured

in from the busses and the convoys of their treatment by the English

fleet, raised a storm of indignation in the United Provinces. Captain

Ruyter sent on, for visual inspection, the safe-conduct or passport

which the Earl of Northumberland had forced upon him; and Joost

Bouwensz, and some of the other skippers who had taken the licenses,

were loud in their complaints. The unheard-of proceeding was discussed

in every seaport town.

The ordinary ambassador, Joachimi, then in Holland, was hurried back to

England--at such a pace, indeed, that two of the horses in his carriage

dropped dead in one day from exhaustion as he sped Londonwards. He was

to express to the king the regret of their High Mightinesses that he

should send his powerful “armada” among the poor herring fishermen, who

had been so much scared and frightened that many had withdrawn from

the fishing altogether and returned home; and the king was to be urged

to suspend further action until the matter had been considered by

commissioners to be appointed by both sides.[549] In his audience with

Charles, Joachimi avoided the long juridical arguments which used to

tire the patience of King James. He laid stress on the close connection

of the fishery question, so dear to the United Provinces, and the

restoration of the Palatinate, in which the States might be able to

afford valuable aid; expatiated on the long and close friendship that

had existed between England and the Netherlands; and depicted in moving

terms the poverty and hard life of the poor fishermen. But it was all

in vain. Charles declared that to ask him to abdicate his sovereignty

of the sea was as absurd as if Spain should ask him to give up Ireland;

and he added--probably with the knowledge that the States-General

had commissioned Graswinckel to answer Selden (see p. 375)--that the

publication of books in France, Spain, and the Netherlands, contesting

his rights, made it necessary for him to vindicate his sovereignty with

all the more strength. The same attitude was maintained in a formal

paper handed to Joachimi a little later, in reply to his proposals

and representations. In this Charles announced his firm intention to

control the fisheries in his own seas. He would only permit foreigners

to fish there if they accepted his license and “acknowledged” his

right, that is, paid tribute. The request for a conference of

commissioners to consider the question was rejected. The king could

not with honour, it was said, listen to such a proposal. His right

had already been publicly confirmed before the whole world, and was

sustained and recognised by all the great kings in performing homage

to the fleet at sea, as well as by the Dutch themselves, who were very

glad of the protection afforded to them.[550] Joachimi had to return to

The Hague without having accomplished anything.

By another channel influence was brought to bear on the king to induce

him to suspend the campaign against the Dutch fishermen. Elizabeth,

the widowed Queen of Bohemia and the sister of Charles, resided at The

Hague, patiently waiting for some lucky turn in the wheel of fortune

which might replace her son in possession of the Palatinate. She

was led to believe that the States would aid in this project, and in

her correspondence with Sir Thomas Roe and Archbishop Laud she often

murmured gently against her brother’s policy. When Joachimi was hustled

back to London, she wrote to Roe that the Dutch were in great alarm

about the herring-busses, and she breathed the wish that “all might

be laid aside at that time” when they had so much need of the States;

“the king,” she said, “might do it upon that consideration, and keep

his claim still good, to take it up again when he would.”[551] Roe

argued on the other side. He thought it would show wisdom on the

part of Holland, and be greatly to her advantage, if, avoiding an

open breach with England, she acknowledged the right of the king and

accepted his protection for her fishermen. In this way the States

would reap all the advantages they already had, and be relieved of

the expense of maintaining a fleet to protect the busses. The king,

he felt sure, could not now recede “without weakening or blemishing

his right, or his power, to all posterity”; he was prepared to guard

the Dutch fishermen and to fight for them as his own subjects; and

as for the “acknowledgment,” that would be really only a small thing

and would not burden the fishing--which would never be thought of. “I

doe confidently affirme to your Majesty,” continued Roe, “that this

affair of ye king is a safetye, an honour, an happines, and utilitye

to them, and will, if they know how to use it as a medicine, heale all

ulcerations and discontents that have beene bred, or aggravated, by

enemies of our mutuall and necessarye amitye.... Therefore I beseech

your Majestie to inform the Prince of Orange clearely, there is noe

other way, if they desire to reconcile, and to oblige the king at once;

and if our amity be to them of any value, lett them beginn to doe right

and honour to his Majestie,”--and they would get more than they hoped

for in other things. At all events, he said, Joachimi had failed to get

any satisfaction of his request to have the “execution” on the second

fishing suspended, for a new command had been sent to the Admiral to

visit the busses again.[552]

This was indeed the case. Northumberland’s success had gratified the

king, and yet it was felt it had fallen short of what it might have

been if they only had got among the busses in time. It was therefore

resolved to send the fleet among the Dutch fishermen who came to the

Yarmouth fishing in September and October, and to continue the process

of forcing licenses upon them. The Earl of Northumberland left the

Downs for Yarmouth on 16th September, taking with him eight ships and

a pinnace; another ship was to follow later. He felt that his task at

Yarmouth would be more difficult than his first had been. Then, the

only advantage the busses had was their good sailing; now they would

have others owing to the season and the place--shoal waters; and if

they avoided the king’s ships, he said, as they did in the north, it

would be impossible to bring any numbers of them into “conformity.” He

also requested fresh licenses, because some words in those he had would

require to be blotted out, which “would not be so handsome to be seen

abroad.”[553]

The weather being stormy, they had to anchor one night off the

North Foreland and the next off Lowestoft, reaching Yarmouth Roads

on the 18th, where they lay for a few days getting pilots and

gathering information about the Dutch fishermen. Hearing that some

Holland men-of-war were cruising outside, the Earl guessed that the

herring-boats would not be far off, and the wind being fair, the

fleet weighed anchor on the morning of the 22nd and stood out to sea.

When clear of the sands they again anchored, and the ketch was sent

out during the night to discover the whereabouts of the busses, but

without success. Next day the fleet stood off farther to sea, but

failed to see or to hear anything of the Hollanders, and being joined

by a ninth ship, the _Swallow_, the fleet lay at anchor in “blowing

weather” about ten leagues from the coast until Monday, September 26.

Two of the ships, the _James_ and the _Nonsuch_, had been driven out

of sight by the gale; two, the pinnace and the _Fortune_ pinck, had

to run nearer shore for fear of foundering; and the Admiral sent the

two London ships, the _Jonas_ and the _Neptune_, into port, because

they were insufficiently victualled. On this day news was brought from

Yarmouth, received from a Scottish ship which had arrived from Zealand,

that the Dutch had forbidden any more busses to go to the fishing that

year, and the Earl advised Windebank to this effect.[554] The rumour,

however, was false, for on the 28th a fleet of fifty sail of busses and

two or three men-of-war was descried to windward, but Northumberland

was able to speak to only three of them that “wanted licenses.” On the

next day, as they were following the busses that “would not come near

them,” they caught sight of another fleet of about sixty sail, with

three men-of-war, and the English ships went amongst them and cast

anchor, and made the convoyers anchor also; “then,” said the Earl, “all

the busses of both fleets came about us; most of them had formerly

taken licenses, and such as were unprovided were then furnished by us.”

Next day, finding no more of the herring-boats “that wanted licenses,”

the English squadron weighed anchor and shortly afterwards perceived

a third large fleet of busses, guarded this time by ten men-of-war.

To this fleet they gave chase, plying up to windward all night, and

on October 1, as the wind prevented the boats being sent out, they

anchored in sight of them. All Sunday it also “overblew,” but as the

weather grew calmer at night the squadron again got under way, and by

daybreak was among the busses, which were, no doubt, busily engaged in

hauling their nets. Northumberland stayed amongst them until October

5, the ships’ boats being kept occupied each day in distributing the

licenses; but they “found it a very troublesome business,” as the

busses dispersed, and it became difficult to distinguish those that

had taken licenses from those that had not. The weather growing misty

and unsettled, and the Admiral being “out of all hope to give out any

more licenses,” the squadron quitted the herring fleet and made for

Yarmouth, where the Earl landed on October 9 and journeyed to the

Court. Altogether, at the Yarmouth fishing, more than 200 licenses

were distributed among over 400 busses which were present, and no

opposition was offered by any of the fifteen men-of-war which were

guarding them. “The unwillingnesse of the busses to come neere us,”

wrote Northumberland to the Admiralty, “hath found us intertainement

for 8 dayes together in following them, but now we have left verie few

of them unprovided of his Majesty’s licenses.”[555]

Thus ended the campaign against the Dutch herring-boats, from which, as

we have seen, Charles desired to reap profit as well as honour. So far

as the profit went, it did not amount to much. Appended to the official

journal of the voyage of the fleet is a statement of the sums received

for convoying shipping,--which, in accordance with the advice of the

Admiralty, was voluntary,--and also of the “acknowledgment money”

taken from the fishing-busses. The former amounted to £999, nearly

all of which was earned by the convoying of merchantmen and small

traders to Dunkirk and Ostend.[556] Small as the amount was, it greatly

exceeded what was exacted from the Dutch busses for king’s license and

protection, the total being £501, 15s. 2d., collected in a variety of

coins.[557] The detailed schedule is as follows:--

“In Rix Dollo^{rs} 878 163 10 08

In halfe Crownes 145 018 02 06

In pieces of 3^s 40 006 00 00

In Kunnings Dollo^{rs} 100 025 00 00

In Ryalls of 8 134½ 029 02 10

English money 018 12 08

English Gold 119 13 00

Dutch and Scotch Angells 015 15 00

Hungare Duckats 7 002 09 00

Dutch and French money 001 05 00

Dutch shillings 066 00 00

Double Stivers 030 00 06

Single Stivers 005 06 00

In Silver 000 18 00

------------

501 15 02”

[Illustration: Fig. 12.--_Facsimile of the official account of the

monies received from the Dutch herring fishermen for the king’s

licenses._]

There is probably no circumstance connected with the English claims

to the sovereignty of the seas that has been more frequently

misrepresented by historians, pamphleteers, and writers on

international law than the operations of Northumberland’s fleet, and

in particular the amount paid by the Dutch herring fishermen for the

king’s licenses; and so far as appears, the account given here is the

first that is authentic and correct. Although Northumberland’s Journal

is preserved among the national records, only one author seems to have

quoted from it, namely, Evelyn, and he deliberately misrepresented it.

Under the hands of various authors the sum of money gradually became

swelled to £30,000, or even to £100,000, and it was represented as a

rent paid by the Dutch for permission to fish, and played an important

part in all later controversies and negotiations.[558]

The doings of Northumberland’s fleet at the Yarmouth fishing caused

increased excitement in Holland. Van Beveren knowing, as he said, that

the English ships had not gone northwards “to catch flies,” immediately

sent intelligence of its departure to Admiral Van Dorp, so that he

might extend his protection to the Dutch fishermen. Early in August the

Admiral had been expressly instructed to guard the fishermen “from the

Spanish and all others inclined to molest them”; and he had a fleet

of fifty-seven sail under his command for this purpose.[559] But Van

Dorp was too late. As we have seen, he met the Earl of Northumberland

on the 20th August returning triumphantly to the Downs. On asking the

English Admiral why he was among the busses, he was politely told

“to protect the fishermen,” and when Northumberland asked the reason

of the presence of the Dutch fleet, he received the same answer, “to

protect the fishermen.” It was a perplexing position for Van Dorp.

His instructions were to guard the busses from molestation, but they

contained no article which covered the case as it now presented itself,

and to attack the English squadron under the circumstances would have

been foolish. He therefore sailed back to the coast of Flanders to

watch the Spanish ships. He returned to the English coast in September,

and on the very day that Northumberland left the Downs for Yarmouth the

Dutch fleet was actually lying at that port. Van Dorp again missed both

the English squadron and the herring-busses, and resumed “plying to

and again” between Dover and Calais.[560] The States-General were much

incensed at this failure of their Admiral to prevent the distribution

of the licenses. As they well knew, it furnished Charles with a

precedent, and with the argument that the Dutch fishermen desired his

protection and were willing to accept and pay for his licenses. When a

suitable opportunity occurred in the following year, they forced Van

Dorp to resign his office.[561]

As the herring-fishing was now over for the year, the States had time

to consider what they ought to do in the following season if Charles

persisted in his attempts. On two occasions it was resolved to issue

an edict forbidding the fishermen to accept licenses from any foreign

prince;[562] and this would certainly have been done had Charles

adhered to his policy. But the States naturally hesitated, until it

should be absolutely necessary, to take a step which would at once have

placed them in direct antagonism to England in the eyes of the whole

world, and the publication of the edict was from time to time delayed.

This cautious conduct served their purpose much better, for before

the fishing season of 1637 arrived, the kaleidoscope of Charles’s

foreign relations had taken another turn, and he was anxious to avoid

further trouble with the Dutch. The Earl of Arundel, who had been

sent to Vienna on one of the king’s wild-goose missions, to negotiate

a treaty with the Emperor for the restoration of the Palatinate,

returned unsuccessful to England at the close of the year. He came back

full of bitterness at the perfidy of Spain, and persistently urged a

French alliance, even if it should lead to war with the former Power.

The strenuous arguments of Arundel, as well as the treatment of his

mission, caused Charles to turn again to France, the ally of the Dutch

Republic; and Richelieu promptly proposed an alliance against Spain and

the Emperor, one result of which would have been to range England and

the States on the same side in a maritime war.[563]

At such a conjuncture the promulgation of the edict of the

States-General would have been unfortunate, and Arundel requested

George Goring, who had gone to The Hague, to see the Prince of Orange

in order to get it suppressed. But the Prince of Orange, while anxious

enough to avoid further trouble with England, desired, before he

consented, to receive an assurance that the king would cease from

molesting the Dutch fishermen in the ensuing season. The Queen of

Bohemia urged the same course. She “humbly besought” her royal brother

to suspend further execution of his right, which, she said, he might

take up again when he would, without any prejudice, “as the king,

our father, did.” Charles was loth to give an assurance so wounding

to his vanity, and so opposed to what he conceived to be a chief

prerogative of his crown. In the autumn Sir Thomas Roe had declared

that the difficulty in the way for the benefit of the Prince Elector

arose from the fishery dispute, and that upon nothing was the will

of the king more firmly bent: if the Dutch did not yield, he feared

“another procedure” next season. Even in February, Archbishop Laud told

Elizabeth that the king was “so set to maintain the dominion of the

sea” that he durst not speak to him any more about it. At the same time

he gave a broad hint that nothing further would be attempted against

the Dutch fishermen in the approaching season. He much wondered,

he said, that the Prince of Orange and the States should trouble

themselves to gain an overt concession from his Majesty to leave their

fishing that year, since it was “more than manifest” there would

be so much other work for his navy that the business of the fishing

must needs fall asleep of itself. He would advise a silence on all

hands in regard to it, and not to interrupt “business with moving a

question about that which would necessarily do itself (_sic_) without

questioning.” Sir Thomas Roe also sent the queen assurances in the same

sense. The king, he said, would never retract his declaration of the

dominion of the sea, but “only for this year, and at the request of

the Prince (her son) and in contemplation of concurrence expected with

him, he will not trouble their fishing.” These assurances seemed so far

satisfactory to the States that the edicts were suppressed. They would

be well content, they informed Elizabeth, if the king “forgot it and

spoke no more of it,” which she told them she was confident he would

not, having things of greater importance on hand.[564]

The young Elector, Prince Charles Louis, took a considerable part

in the conversion of the king; or rather, he was made use of by the

Dutch ambassador for this purpose. When Van Beveren first arrived in

London, he let it be known that the States were desirous of doing

something for the Prince; but his hint was not then taken up, since

hopes were entertained that Arundel’s mission to Vienna would make

other aid unnecessary.[565] Arundel was recalled in September; it was

known that his mission had failed, and early in October Van Beveren saw

his opportunity. Through a trustworthy friend[566] the suggestion was

made to the Elector that if some arrangement could be come to about

the fishery question, negotiations might be begun for a treaty between

the States and England relating to the recovery of the Palatinate.

The ambassador learned that the Prince had already taken steps in the

same direction. Through the intermediary of Laud, the proposal had

been made to Charles that the Dutch, instead of paying license-money

for liberty to fish in the British seas, should place at the disposal

of the Elector some ships and soldiers, the king’s proclamation for

restraint of fishing being meanwhile suspended. Charles would not

agree to this. The ambassador, he said, had offered assistance when he

arrived without any hope of an equivalent on his part, and he could

not give up his claim to an acknowledgment of his rights. Van Beveren,

on the other hand, informed his confidant that it was a question of

principle with the States, and that it would be better to break off all

negotiations if the “acknowledgment” was insisted on. Nevertheless,

these private negotiations continued, and finally a draft treaty was

prepared embodying two proposals. The first agreed well enough with

Van Beveren’s instructions. It was to the effect that a fleet should

be equipped to which England should contribute thirty ships and 8000

men, and the States fifteen ships and 4000 men; and France was to be

asked to furnish the same force as England. The combined fleet was to

attack Spain by sea and effect a landing. The second proposal related

to the fishery, and it provided that while these operations were going

on, the Dutch herring fishermen would be allowed to fish freely and

in security, as they had always done from the time of Queen Elizabeth

and King James, approaching the coasts near enough to carry on their

fishing profitably, and to dry their nets on shore, without the king

interfering with them in any way.[567]

This proposition, at first sight apparently favourable to the States,

was rejected by Van Beveren. Although it got rid of the difficulty for

the time, the question was sure to be raised at a later period when the

naval and military operations were concluded; its acceptance would,

moreover, be equivalent to a tacit acknowledgment that the king had the

right to exclude them from the fishery. The ambassador was afraid of a

precedent which bargained as a _quid pro quo_ for what was claimed as a

right; and the negotiations went no further.

But Charles, although unwilling to risk the success of the treaty with

France, from which great things were expected, by openly insisting

upon the acceptance of his licenses by the Dutch fishermen, was

reluctant to abandon his policy. From the readiness with which the

fishermen had taken the licenses after they “understood” them (as

Northumberland reported), he was apparently led to believe that they

really desired his protection, and that the only obstacle in his way

was the opposition of the States’ Government. He therefore decided that

instead of trying--or at least before trying--to enforce the licenses

by means of the fleet in the ensuing summer, the attempt might be made

secretly to induce the fishermen to accept them in Holland before they

left for the fishing. Boswell, the English ambassador at The Hague,

was instructed to try what could be done in this way, and so anxious

was Charles for such acknowledgment of his sovereignty of the sea as

acceptance of the licenses implied, that the ambassador was authorised

to reinforce his persuasion by bribing those who were most influential

among the fishermen. The fishermen, according to Boswell, were not

averse to the proposal, but they very naturally wished to know, first

of all, how the licenses of the King of England would protect them

from the Dunkirk privateers. If the Government at Brussels would

acknowledge the validity of the licenses, or if the Cardinal Infant

agreed to back them with passports of his own, the offer, they said,

would be worth considering; but they could scarcely depend on the

protection of the English fleet alone. As a sign that they were in

earnest, they offered to place £2000 at Boswell’s disposal if he could

get the matter settled in this way. This sum, with the king’s approval,

was forwarded to the English representative at Brussels, to be used in

gaining over the Spanish authorities.[568] The Dutch fishermen were a

practical race of men. They cared little for abstract questions about

the sovereignty of the sea. But they suffered much from the Dunkirk

privateers, and the burden of maintaining convoys was a heavy one.

Any reasonable scheme which promised to free them from the attacks of

their relentless enemy at small cost was bound to be attractive. That

the proposal was seriously considered was also shown by a spontaneous

application made to the Secretary of the English Admiralty on behalf

of the fishermen of Schiedam. The agent in London, Mr Brames, who

supplied them with lampreys for bait, wrote to Nicholas for a copy

of the license granted in the previous year, with a statement of the

rates charged. If the fishermen were pleased with the license and

the price, they would, he said, come themselves for them. Charles

instructed Nicholas to give the information wanted, but only “as from

himself.”[569]

An unexpected obstacle intervened to prevent the plan being carried

out. Gerbier, the British agent at Brussels, chiefly by bribing

the mistress of the Cardinal Infant, had secured a promise that

the passports would be granted; but the Spanish Admiral absolutely

refused to be bound by them. He declared he would not spare a single

herring-boat, even if the Cardinal went down on his knees to him.

He would pay attention to no passport that did not come direct from

Madrid.[570] Thereupon the Dutch fishermen refused to have anything to

do with the licenses which had been sent to Boswell “under the King’s

hand and signet.”[571]

Still, the peculiar resources of Charles were not exhausted. He might

yet, he thought, be able to distribute the licenses among the fishermen

when they came to fish off the British coast, without employing his

fleet for the purpose, or running the risk of war with the Republic.

The third ship-money fleet had assembled in the Downs in April and

May; it consisted of twenty-eight ships, of which nine were merchant

vessels, and the Earl of Northumberland was again appointed Admiral,

his instructions, dated 15th April, being identical with those of

the previous year.[572] The state of the negotiations with France,

and other causes, prevented the king from renewing his enterprise

against either the French for the honour of the flag or the Dutch in

connection with the fishery. The fleet, therefore, to the wonder and

discontentment of the officers, was kept for the most part lying at

anchor, ships being occasionally detached for special purposes.

On 3rd July, Windebank wrote to the Earl of Northumberland telling

him of the failure of the secret treaty with the Cardinal Infant, and

saying that it was the intention of the Hollanders, who had refused

the king’s licenses sent to Boswell, to fish in his Majesty’s seas as

heretofore, many of the busses having already left Holland under strong

convoys. By the king’s commands he sent him about 200 licenses, “and

withal his pleasure is,” said Windebank, “that you dispatch immediately

one of the merchant ships under your charge (being not willing to

employ any of his own until it appear what the success will be) toward

the north with these licenses, with order to make offer of them to

the fishers, and if they accept them to distribute them at the same

rates they were taken the last year. And if such as take them,” he

continued, “desire to be safe-conducted in their return, your Lordship

is to assure them his Majesty will take them into his protection, and

cause some of his fleet to accompany them homewards for their defence.”

But if the fishermen refused to take the licenses, then the Earl was

to notify the fact to the king, who would “take further resolution.”

Sir William Boswell, added the Secretary, had been informed of the

king’s intentions, and told to assure the fishermen willing to take

the licenses of his Majesty’s protection. The Cardinal Infant and

the Spanish Ministers had also been informed, and did not well relish

it.[573]

This despatch, sent by express messenger, appears to have somewhat

surprised the Earl. His clear intelligence must have told him that a

tortuous and fatuous proceeding of this kind could only end by making

the king ridiculous. He apparently wished Charles to reconsider the

matter, and asked for further directions. Ignoring part of Windebank’s

letter, he inquired how Captain Fielding, whom he intended to send,

should behave himself if the fishermen proved obstinate and refused the

licenses; and he pointed out that if they accepted them and the king

resolved they should be convoyed home, it would need a large number of

ships, as the busses returned in small fleets.[574] Windebank two days

later repeated the instruction that, if they refused, the fact was to

be immediately notified, when the king would take further resolution.

“The truth is,” he said, “his Majesty in this present conjuncture is

not willing to proceed so roundly with them as he hath done heretofore,

and therefore thinks fit to hold this way of inviting them fairly to

acknowledge his right without sending his whole fleet, which would be a

manifest engagement and obligation to him in honour to perfect the work

upon any conditions, and notwithstanding any opposition whatsoever,

and might be of dangerous consequence, and destructive to the present

condition of his affairs. And therefore he chooses rather to attempt it

with as little noise as may be, that if the business take not in this

way it may receive the less blow, and in case of their refusal he may

have time deliberately to consider what resolution to settle.”[575]

At this time Charles was very anxious to be on good terms with the

States. Van Beveren, the special Dutch ambassador, who was returning

home, was very cordially received by him on taking his leave on 16th

July. The king then insisted on the States entering the alliance, and

he expressed his pleasure at the courtesies which had been shown to

the Prince Elector. Besides the usual gifts on such occasions, Van

Beveren tells us he sent him a few days later a handsome diamond

ring.[576] But even if Charles had been moved by no special desire

to conciliate the Republic, the preparations which were being made

in Holland to guard the fishermen from molestation might have given

pause to the attempt to repeat the operations of the year before. The

Dutch Government were perfectly aware of Boswell’s intrigues about

the licenses, and they put little faith in the assurances received

through the Queen of Bohemia. They resolved to err on the safe side by

equipping a powerful fleet to protect the busses. In April and May,

Pennington reported to the Admiralty that Van Dorp (not yet cashiered)

was cruising between the Downs and Dunkirk with twenty sail of stout

men-of-war, and that he heard that six French warships were bound for

the north to aid in guarding the fishermen.[577]

Fielding departed on his mission in the _Unicorn_, one of the ships

furnished by London, and on the morning of 18th July he came among the

busses fishing off Buchan Ness, Aberdeenshire. They numbered between

six and seven hundred, and were convoyed by twenty-three men-of-war.

Fielding, according to his account, “found the busses very willing” to

take the licenses, and two did so. Then one of the Dutch warships came

up and lay by him, and the captain asked him to speak to his Admiral

before sending for the busses; “but it blew hard that day and the next,

so that no boat could pass.” On the 20th he spoke with the Admiral of

South Holland and the Commander of North Holland, and explained his

mission; but they would not then give their answer. On the following

day all the commanders of North and South Holland and of Zealand, with

three other captains, told him “that they durst not let his boat pass

among the busses to give out his Majesty’s licenses before they had

orders from their Masters.” This was their answer, but they declined to

give it in writing. The _Unicorn_ then made sail for England to report

the rebuff.[578]

The result of his manœuvre was mortifying to the king. Fielding,

sailor-like, did not conceal the outcome of his mission in diplomatic

reserve. The story soon spread throughout the fleet, and occasioned

both hilarity and indignation. When Fielding left, Pennington expressed

the opinion to his friend Nicholas that the attempt would fail and

would bring greater inconveniences in its train. On his return,

Northumberland said it would have been much better if the king had

absolutely forborne his request to the Dutch than have demanded it

in the manner he did. After the successful campaign of the year

before, Charles was now practically warned off his own seas, “as he

is pleased,” said Pennington, “to call them.”[579] It was a pitiful

position for the Sovereign of the Seas, with a great armada lying idle

at the Downs and his bombastic declarations still echoing in the ears

of Europe.

As soon as it was known at Court that the story had got out, Windebank

was commanded to take such measures as he could to contradict it. To

duplicity was added mendacity. Fielding in his report had described an

occurrence he witnessed on returning along the coast to Scarborough.

Thirteen Dunkirkers had attacked a Dutch man-of-war, and as the

_Unicorn_ came upon the scene the latter sank, and the English captain

unsuccessfully endeavoured to save the drowning men. Windebank seized

upon this incident. He wrote to Captain Fogg, who was in command of

the ships in the Downs in the absence of the Admiral, that the report

spread about that the Hollanders had refused his Majesty’s licenses to

fish in his seas was “utterly mistaken.” Fielding had not been sent

to offer licenses to the busses, but to tender the king’s protection.

His Majesty, hearing “that the Dunkirkers had prepared a great

strength to intercept them in their return from the fishing,” had sent

Fielding, “in love to them,” to give them notice of it, and to offer

them safe-conduct. “This,” said Windebank, “you are publicly to advow

whensoever there shall be occasion, and to cry down the other discourse

as scandalous and derogatory to his Majesty’s honour.”[580] Similar

directions were sent to the Earl of Northumberland.

At the beginning of August 1637, Charles, conscious of the ridicule

that would ensue if the third ship-money fleet lay at anchor all the

year, and yet having nothing for it to do, sent it to the west--“to

make one turn in an honourable procession, to continue the boundaries

of our master’s dominion in the sea,” as Roe, with gentle sarcasm,

described it. It got as far as the Land’s End, and returned to the

Downs on 5th September, having “scarce seen a ship stirring on the sea,

except the poor fishers that dwell upon the shore.”[581] Windebank

told Northumberland that the king was “very sensible” of the story

which was being told about the licenses, and that he had been specially

commanded to give the refutation of it in charge of the Earl, “and

that you should do it in the same way that I have directed him (Fogg),

namely, that his being sent to the busses was to give them notice

of the forces prepared by the Dunkirkers to intercept them in their

return, and to offer them his Majesty’s protection, but no licenses;

that of the licenses to be cried down and the other to be advowed

and reported through the whole fleet.” Fielding was to be admonished

to be more reserved in future “in such great services,” and in the

meantime to “make reparation by divulging this and suppressing the

former report.”[582] Captain Fogg readily agreed to suppress “the false

report,” as he called it; but what Northumberland’s answer was does not

appear. He seems to have received the king’s commands only on returning

to the Downs, and he left the _Triumph_ a few days thereafter. What he

thought is not doubtful: he was getting disgusted at his employment.

“No man,” he wrote to Roe, “was ever more desirous of a charge than I

am to be quit of mine, being in a condition where I see I can neither

do service nor gain credit.”[583]

There is clear evidence indeed that by this time the naval officers, as

well as the people generally, were becoming tired of the king’s great

pretensions and small performance. Even Pennington, a simple, loyal,

unimaginative man, always ready to obey orders, had begun to joke, as

we have seen, at the king’s seas, “as he is pleased to call them.”

Throughout the country discontent was deepening. The opposition to the

collection of ship-money was growing formidable, and the declaration

of the Judges in favour of the king’s right to levy it only postponed

the inevitable for a little.[584] In his letter to the Judges, Charles

based his case on the necessity of maintaining his sovereignty of the

sea. The honour and safety of the realm of England, he said, “was

and is now more neerely concerned then in late former tymes, as well

by divers councells and attempts to take from Us the dominion of the

seas (of which we are sole Lord, and rightfull owner and proprietour,

and the losse whereof would bee of greatest danger and perill to this

kingdome and other our Domynions) as many other waies.”[585]

[Illustration: Fig. 13.--_The “Sovereign of the Seas.”_ After

Vandevelde.]

The king’s dominion on the sea was rapidly waning. Fielding’s ignoble

mission was the last attempt that fate permitted Charles to make in

actively asserting it. The shadow of the coming revolution was already

upon him. The trial of Hampden for refusing to pay the ship-money

focussed the attention of England, and it was followed by complaints

of other grievances arising from the personal government of the king.

The popular tumult in Edinburgh in the summer about the new Liturgy

had as a sequence the National Covenant and insurrection. Charles

found another use for his fleet than the enforcement of his sovereignty

of the sea in the expedition to Scotland to subdue his rebellious

subjects; and the British seas, even the King’s Chambers, were soon

again the scenes of flagrant acts in violation of his authority. By a

strange irony it was at this time that the king’s “Great Ship,” the

famous _Sovereign of the Seas_, whose praises were sung by Thomas

Heywood, the dramatist, was launched at Woolwich. Its construction had

been under consideration for several years; it was begun in January

1636 and launched early in October 1637. Charles took a keen personal

interest in his great ship, and supervised its details. He selected a

scutcheon and motto to be engraved on each of its 102 brass guns--the

rose and crown, sceptre and trident, and anchor and cable, with the

inscription, _Carolus Edgari sceptrum stabilivit aquarum_--Charles

established the dominion of Edgar over the seas; and on the “beak-head”

sat the effigy of King Edgar, trampling on seven kings.[586] As its

name implied, it was meant to be a symbol as well as an instrument of

the king’s sovereignty of the seas; and it was symbolical of it in

a sense undreamt of by Charles. It was costly, highly decorated and

begilt, but useless until it was cut down and made serviceable under

the Commonwealth. He inserted it in the list of ships to serve in the

fleet that assembled in the Downs in 1638, but it was not ready to

join.

This fleet consisted of twenty-four king’s ships and seven merchant

vessels, and, owing to the illness of the Earl of Northumberland, it

was placed under the command of Sir John Pennington.[587] It did still

less than the fleet of the previous year. Two ships were sent to the

westwards on an alarm that “Turkish” pirates were in the Channel; it

convoyed two vessels laden with gunpowder into Dunkirk, notwithstanding

the blockade by the Dutch, and returned to the Downs; and two ships

were despatched to the north to intercept supplies of arms and

munitions of war from Rotterdam and Bremen to the Scots. There was not

even the “one turn in an honourable procession” to the westwards as in

the previous year, and the fleet rode idly at its anchorage.

The question of the “homage of the flag” had by this time also fallen

somewhat into the background. In the two preceding years it had been

enforced with much zeal. In 1636, when Northumberland’s fleet was

among the herring-busses, Captain Carteret, in the _Happy Entrance_,

forced a Spanish fleet of twenty-six sail to strike to him off Calais,

though they tried their best to avoid it. A Dunkirker was also made

to strike and “lie by the lee” off Nieuport by Captain Slingsby. But

the French still refused to lower their flag when on the other side

of the Narrow Sea. Sir Henry Mervin, on meeting two French men-of-war

off Gravelines with their colours in the main-top, fired some twenty

shots at them without causing them to strike. In the Mediterranean the

French retaliated. An English vessel on the coast of Barbary was forced

to lower its flag to French ships of war, and because the captain

refused to go on board them when requested, the ship was attacked and

captured. In the following year Captain Straddling of the _Dreadnought_

used drastic measures against some Hollander merchant-ships. Falling

in with four of them off the Lizard, homeward bound from Brazil, with

their flags abroad, he commanded them to strike. One refused till many

shots were fired, excusing himself afterwards by saying he thought the

English ships were Dunkirkers. Straddling took him into custody, and

lodged him in Plymouth fort “to answer his insolence and contempt of

his Majesty’s regality in these seas,” and he remained a prisoner there

for a fortnight before he was released by order of the Admiralty.[588]

But in 1638 there were few incidents of this kind, probably because of

the fleet lying at anchor so long, though it may be supposed that the

general condition of public affairs did not whet the zeal of the naval

officers.

It was not long before advantage was taken abroad of Charles’s troubles

in Scotland. In the early part of 1638 Pennington reported that there

were many Hollander, French, and Dunkirk ships at sea, and that they

were pillaging English vessels;[589] but the king was unable to protect

even the herring-busses of the Fishery Society that he had taken under

his peculiar care. The Dunkirkers, emboldened by immunity, took four

of them in 1639, and then daringly anchored in the Downs. The Dutch

men-of-war became bold, and then insolent. They began by protecting a

Calais vessel that had rifled an English ship, their Admiral refusing

to surrender her. Soon their fleets visited the English coasts in

menacing strength, and although they “performed their duty” in the

matter of the flag, they insisted on their right to stop and search

English vessels, even in the King’s Chambers. “The Hollanders’ ships,”

wrote Northumberland’s secretary to Pennington in June 1639, “begin

to be very bold in our seas, and lie about Portland with fifty sail,

examining and searching all English ships and others which pass

by them, so that in effect they command where the King challenges

sovereignty.” The English merchants, he said, made great complaint that

their trade was likely to be destroyed; they were “much perplexed, and

called to mind tonnage and poundage, for which his Majesty was pleased

to promise thirty sail of his ships to secure trade in the Narrow

Sea.”[590]

The truth was that English ships had been engaged in transporting

Spanish troops and bullion to Dunkirk, and that the Dutch were merely

exercising their rights as belligerents. Their action was nevertheless

a plain flouting of the high pretensions of the king, and it was

the more disagreeable because Charles had now again veered round to

the side of Spain. He was much moved at the “insolencies” of the

Hollanders, which “concerned his honour” and “put his sovereignty in

hazard”; and the Earl of Northumberland, who had been created Lord High

Admiral in the preceding year, also expressed himself as much afflicted

that such affronts were put on the nation in his time. It was, said

Windebank, a very high disorder that any of the king’s neighbours

should presume to lie with a fleet in his Majesty’s Channel, near his

ports, and where he justly claimed sovereignty, and arrest and search

English ships, taking out of them “such persons, being passengers, as

they please”; “especially”--and this no doubt was a potent reason of

the king’s displeasure--“since the merchants and others took occasion

by such pretences of interruption of their trade to make difficulty to

pay their ship-money, which his Majesty is resolved to maintain.” The

king therefore commanded Pennington to put a stop to these affronts and

to preserve the sovereignty of the narrow seas, so “that trade may be

free and open, as well to his Majesty’s subjects as to others in league

and amity with his Majesty, and that peace be kept and the merchants

secured according to his Majesty’s proclamations and declarations

published heretofore to that effect.”[591]

It was one thing to indite imperious commands in London as to the

necessity of maintaining the king’s sovereignty of the seas; it was

quite another thing to carry them out in the Channel in the presence of

a powerful Dutch fleet under the new Admiral, Maarten Harpentz Tromp.

Pennington, conscious of his impotency, tried at first to justify, or

at least to extenuate, the action of the Dutch men-of-war. They only

took out of the English ships the Spanish soldiers, he said, who were

being carried to Flanders; they were most civil and courteous while

doing so; in reality, it was the English captains who had committed the

greater insolency. At all events, before attempting any reparation, it

would be only prudent to have an overmastering force, lest greater loss

and dishonour should happen, because, he said, the Dutch were in great

strength, and it was reported that the French fleet was about to put

to sea. Pennington was nevertheless ordered to prevent the affronts

as best he could. He then said he would do his best; but he had only

four ships available, and he asked for express orders how far he should

proceed if he were resisted with overmastering strength.[592]

But the question of the right of search was for the moment relegated

to diplomatic channels, and before anything could be done, either by

peaceful agreement or by Pennington’s ships, another event put an end

to it, and dissipated the king’s dreams of the dominion of the seas.

The battle of the Downs was fought between the Dutch and the Spaniards

on 11th October 1639, in spite of Charles’s express prohibition, and

in spite of his helpless fleet. So glaring a violation of one of the

King’s Chambers within three years of the appearance of Selden’s

_Mare Clausum_--an injury which he was as unable to prevent as to

redress--proclaimed to Europe that he was no longer sovereign over the

sea that was incontestably his own.

At the end of August a large Spanish fleet, consisting of some thirty

great galleons and thirty-six transports with troops for Flanders, set

sail from Corunna. On 6th September it was attacked in the Channel

by a Dutch squadron of seventeen ships, and a running fight was kept

up, the Spaniards passing eastwards off the English coast. Tromp,

engaged in blockading Dunkirk, heard the cannonading, and on the 8th

he joined the Dutch squadron with fifteen sail, when a fierce battle

took place in the Straits of Dover.[593] The Spanish Admiral, Don

Antonio de Oquendo, having expended all his powder, took refuge with

his shattered galleons in the Downs on 9th September, whither Tromp

followed him. Great anxiety was felt in London, first of all lest the

powerful foreign fleets should refuse to strike to the small English

squadron under Sir John Pennington, and then lest they should begin

hostilities in the King’s Chamber. On the former point doubts were soon

set at rest. Tromp at once took in his flag in the presence of the

English ships, a “civility” with which Charles was pleased. So also

did the proud Spaniard, but only after preliminary refusal and demur;

and Pennington’s insistence that the standard of Spain should be

lowered was made a subject of complaint at Madrid.[594] Anxiety on the

second point was protracted, and it was not diminished by the reports

that were received that the French fleet was coming to reinforce

their allies the Dutch. Pennington, in the most emphatic manner, had

forbidden hostilities within the King’s Chambers, and he assigned the

northern part of the anchorage to the Spaniards and the southern part

to the Dutch. For several weeks the belligerent squadrons remained in

the Downs facing one another. The Spanish Admiral, a few days after his

arrival, succeeded under cover of night in despatching to Dunkirk some

of his smaller vessels laden with soldiers. Tromp and Oquendo appealed

to Charles through their respective ambassadors, “and then ensued an

auction, the strangest in the annals of diplomacy, in which Charles’s

protection was offered as a prize to the highest bidder.”[595] On the

one hand, he demanded £150,000 from Spain, and better treatment in the

business of the Palatinate, as the price of securing the safety of the

Spanish fleet.[596] On the other hand, he declared himself ready to

abandon the Spaniards to Tromp, if France would come under a binding

promise to place Charles Louis at the head of the army which had been

commanded by Bernard of Weimar--as a means, of course, to recover the

Palatinate.[597]

While waiting the highest bid from one or the other, the king’s

commands regarding the fleet were puzzling and contradictory.

Smith, Northumberland’s secretary, who carried on a confidential

correspondence with Pennington, wrote to him that the king, when the

difficult situation of the English fleet was explained to him and he

was asked for explicit instructions as to how the Admiral should act,

“would not give any express declaration.” “I earnestly pressed his

Lordship [the Earl of Northumberland] to prevail with his Majesty,”

he said, “that you might have some justifiable instructions how you

should demean yourself.... To all this he told me that he had often

pressed his Majesty to declare his resolution, but never could get

any.” Smith privately advised Pennington to make a show of assisting

the Spaniards if there was a fight, but not to run himself or the

king’s ships into danger where there was no hope of victory and “the

only expectation was hard blows and hazard.”[598]

Desperate efforts were hurriedly made to strengthen the English fleet.

Ten additional ships were being got ready, and Northumberland intended

to take command himself as soon as they reached the Downs, but of the

3000 men which the Admiralty were “labouring” to procure for them,

only 300 could be obtained; they did not join Pennington till some

days after the battle. Pennington had been ordered to press into his

service all English ships he could lay his hands on, and to employ them

“in any warlike manner against any that shall presume to affront his

Majesty, or derogate from his sovereignty in these parts.”[599] Ten

vessels were thus pressed; but it was impossible to find seamen to man

them properly, and by command of the king some of them were dispensed

with. In presence of the powerful States’ fleet, to say nothing of the

Spaniards, Pennington’s instructions to the masters of the merchantmen

must have sounded somewhat ironical. If either of the “great fleets,”

he said, should presume to attempt anything in the King’s Chambers

“contrary to the laws and customs of nations and to the dishonour of

our king and kingdom, you are to fall upon the assailants, and to do

your best to take, sink, or destroy them.” Moreover, if any ships of

the hostile fleets assembled, “or any others that may come,” should

put out a flag, they were to cause them to be taken in; if refused,

they were to do their best to sink the offending ship.[600] The “any

others” meant the French, who were expected daily in the Downs, and

whose arrival there was regarded with apprehension. The general opinion

was that they would refuse to strike when they came, and, in that

event, what would happen? “That,” said Smith, “will set us all in

combustion, for then we must _strike_ them, although peradventure to

our own prejudice. But this punctilio of honour,” added the secretary

to the Lord High Admiral, with prophetic instinct, “will one day cause

more blood to be drawn than ere it will bring profit or honour to our

king.”[601]

Meanwhile Tromp and his resolute men were getting impatient. Since they

had cooped up the hated Spaniard in the English roadstead, they had

been reinforced from Holland, so that the Dutch fleet was soon in the

overwhelming strength of a hundred sail. Tromp also knew that Charles

had arranged (for a substantial consideration) to supply the Spanish

Admiral with gunpowder, of which he stood in dire need, and that thirty

Dunkirk sloops had succeeded in joining Oquendo. Above all, he had in

his pocket the express orders, just issued by the States-General, “to

destroy the Spanish fleet, without paying any regard to the harbours,

roads, or bays of the kingdom where it might be found.”[602] He

promptly seized an opportunity to carry out his orders. Information

reached London on 8th and 9th October that the Dutch were preparing to

attack. Commands were at once sent to warn them to desist, and they

were informed that the king was going to fix a short period for the

departure of both fleets; and this message was conveyed to the Dutch

Admiral. On the evening of the 10th, the gunpowder for the Spanish

fleet came alongside, and the accidental discharge of a gun on one

of the Spanish ships killed a Dutch sailor. This was enough. Before

the fog lifted next morning Tromp’s fleet was under sail; the roar of

cannon announced that the attack had begun; and within a few hours the

Spanish galleons were driven ashore, burnt, sunk, or in flight for

Flanders, with Tromp in hot pursuit. The English Admiral acted on the

prudent advice which had been given to him by Smith. He made a show

of resenting the violation of the King’s Chambers by firing at the

Dutch. In Madrid it was afterwards said he had fired his guns into

the air, but Pennington himself tells us that (although he affected

to believe the Spaniards had begun the combat) he “chased and shot at

the Hollanders” until they were all beyond the South Foreland; but the

Hollanders took no notice of him. On the morning of the battle Tromp

sent a letter to Pennington which was more than tinged with irony.

Since the Spaniards, he said, had infringed the conditions fixed by

firing at him first, the English Admiral should assist him in fighting

them, “according to his Majesty’s orders.” At all events he--Tromp--was

resolved, by instructions from his masters, to fall upon his enemies,

and to defend themselves “against those that shall resist them.” The

Dutch would rather die as soldiers, he said, “with his Majesty’s leave

in clearing his Majesty’s Road,” than fail to carry out their orders;

and he hoped that this would be “acceptable to his Majesty, but if his

Majesty should take any distaste we hope he will graciously forgive us.”

After pursuing the remnant of the Spanish fleet to Dunkirk, the Dutch

Admiral returned triumphant to the Downs, and saluted the English

squadron by striking his flag and firing nineteen guns,--“as a token,”

says an ironical observer, “that his Majesty was Sovereign of these

his seas!”[603] Tromp indeed, in those years, was most punctiliously

respectful to this symbol of the king’s sovereignty. Even during the

height of the battle, when he was violating not merely the sovereignty

claimed by Charles but the well-understood Law of Nations, he kept his

flag down until he was a good way off from the Downs,--a circumstance

which Pennington reported with satisfaction. Had the Dutch Admiral

shown the same willingness to strike to the flag of the Commonwealth

when he encountered Blake thirteen years later, the war that followed

might, perhaps, have been averted, or at least postponed.

Charles was very naturally highly incensed at this open flouting

of his authority. It was an ugly blot on the lustre of his ancient

prerogative, and a painful proof of the contempt in which his

much-vaunted naval power was held by the Dutch Republic, and--what

perhaps he felt quite as much at the time--it robbed him of all chance

of blackmailing Spain. When that Power was asked to pay the great

sum above mentioned, the Cardinal Infant put the proposal aside,

considering that it was the king’s own interest to protect the Spanish

fleet; and when Tromp’s precipitation broke in on the negotiations,

it was decided to withhold any payment at all until it was seen how

Charles would resent the injury done to Spain.[604] At first he

resolved to punish the affront. Pennington was ordered to cause the

Dutch fleet, which had returned to the Downs, and was suspected of

meditating further “insolency” by falling upon the stranded galleons,

to immediately quit the road. The king, he was told, had made up his

mind not to allow them the liberty of his ports or roads “until he

shall have received satisfaction for the insolency already committed.”

If they refused to leave, Pennington, immediately the other ten ships

had reinforced him, was to drive them out with all his power and

strength, or answer the contrary at his uttermost peril. Before these

orders could be executed, Tromp voluntarily departed.[605] Copies of

the letter to Pennington were sent to Brussels and Madrid to show

the Spaniards that the king was full of resolution. They were told

he was very sensible of the affront and insolence of the Hollanders,

and “would make such demonstration of it, and demand and expect such

reparation as in honour he is obliged.” But he was quite unable to

carry out his good intention. It was in vain that he was urged from

Madrid to take strong measures against the Dutch; to seize their

property; even to invade Normandy as a punishment to their ally.[606]

He had no fleet and no money to enable him to cope with the Dutch

Republic, even if the condition of home affairs had permitted the

attempt. On the contrary, to such a level had he fallen by his stubborn

ineptitude that the English Minister at The Hague was ordered to avoid

even a remonstrance about Tromp’s high-handed action in the Downs. If

the States-General mentioned the matter to him, he was to say that he

had received no instructions, “and so to refuse any conference on that

particular.”[607]

The Dutch Government had expected that Charles would raise loud

complaints, and they decided to take a bold attitude. On the day that

they received news of Tromp’s victory the proposal was made to send

over an ambassador, and Aerssen Van Sommelsdijck, who was chosen for

the mission, reached London early in November. There was to be no

attempt made on this occasion to appease the king with soft phrases and

show of submission. Aerssen was to complain of the action which England

had for a long time taken in favouring the Spaniards. The violation

of the King’s Chamber was to be passed over, and the battle in the

Downs represented as having been merely a continuation of the first

fight in the Channel, which forced the Spaniards to take refuge in

the English roadstead. But the pains taken by the States-General were

hardly necessary. Charles in his perplexity did not know to which side

to lean. He received the Dutch ambassador in a very friendly way, and

began to speak again of an alliance with the Republic.[608] In another

direction he was flouted by the Dutch. On the 1st October, while the

belligerent fleets were at anchor in the Downs, his representative at

the conference at Hamburg proposed that if the Republic joined the

projected alliance with France, Charles would grant them liberty to

carry on their herring fishery in the narrow seas. At the very time

that Tromp was battering the Spanish galleons in the King’s Chamber,

the States-General were engaged in passing the resolution “that they

did not intend to ask for the right of fishing in the North Sea from

any one.”[609]

A year later, the Long Parliament began its sittings at Westminster,

and Charles was rapidly stripped of sovereign power within his own

kingdom. The Dutch, conscious that they and not the King of England

were the real masters of the sea, became overbearing in their conduct.

More than ever their fishermen indulged in the bad treatment of British

subjects, which this country was unable to prevent. But their triumph

was short-lived. A decade later they were smitten by the heavy hand

of Cromwell, who resumed the sovereignty of the sea. It is to the

period beginning about this time that the Dutch trace the decadence

which set in in their great fisheries as well as the decline of their

trade. It is, however, a satisfaction to think that the part played

by this country in causing the misfortunes of Holland--a country to

which civilisation is indebted for immense advances, both material

and intellectual--was comparatively small. From about the middle of

the seventeenth century to the peace of Utrecht, in 1713, the Dutch

Republic was involved in almost constant wars with its Continental

neighbours, and the herring-fishery and the trade in general suffered

severely, and never afterwards regained the prosperity they formerly

enjoyed.

The Sovereignty of the Sea An Historical Account of the Claims of England to the Dominion of the British Seas, and of the Evolution of the Territorial Waters · 第 8 / 22 章