FOOTNOTES:
[175] There is a passage in Mr. Burke’s famous speech on Conciliation with America, March 22, 1775, where he states her growth in the life of one man, Lord Bathurst, which reads now almost like a prophecy.
[176] The Ordinance is quoted in Macpherson, ii. p. 430.
[177] Details of the Navigation Act of 1651 (confirmed in 1660) will be found in Macpherson, ii. pp. 442-444.
[178] Martin Tromp, who fought this action, is often confounded with his even more famous son, Cornelis Van Tromp. In Dutch history he is always called Tromp. There would seem to have been five actions in the years 1652 and 1653. The first between Blake and Tromp, off Dover, May 29, 1652, when Blake was successful; the second in December, in which Blake was thoroughly beaten. After this occasion, Tromp placed the broom at his mainmast-head. The third on February 28, 1653, off Portland, when the Dutch were beaten, and lost three hundred merchantmen they had previously captured. The fourth on June 2, when the Dutch were again beaten. The fifth on August 10, an indecisive action, wherein Monk commanded the English instead of Blake, and Tromp was killed, leaving De Witt in command. The action between Ayscough and De Ruyter was fought on August 26, 1652.—See Sir E. Cust’s ‘Lives of the Admirals,’ etc., i. p. 370.
[179] Art. xiii. of this treaty requires the striking of the flag (Macpherson, ii. p. 453).
[180] Vide Macpherson, ii. pp. 442-444.
[181] Ricardo’s ‘Anatomy of Navigation Laws.’
[182] As all Cromwell’s Acts were ignored, the new laws were dated from the death of Charles I.; hence the Navigation Act of Charles II. is dated as passed in the twelfth of his regnal years, although really in the first of his actual reign.
[183] The principal enacting clauses of this Act are given in Macpherson, ii. pp. 484-486. Roger Coke, in his ‘Discourse on Trade,’ states that owing to the Acts of 1651 and 1660, the building of ships in England had become one-third dearer.
[184] A full account is given by Gérard Brandt of this celebrated action, quoted in Sir E. Cust’s ‘Lives of the Admirals,’ vol. ii. pp. 452-454.
[185] All the accounts of the respective losses of the two fleets vary; but it is clear, from the life of Sir W. Penn, that the English had quite enough of the battle (Cust, vol. ii. p. 384).
[186] There is no doubt that in this raid on the English coast the Dutch were successful in doing a great amount of damage to the English marine; but at the same time more credit is due than has been usually given to Sir Edward Spragge, who, on two successive days, with only a small force of five frigates and seventeen fire-ships, repulsed the Dutch fleet under Van Nes, though on the first he was compelled to fall back for a few hours under the guns of Tilbury Fort. Van Nes had been sent by De Ruyter to force his way up the Thames, and Spragge deserves to be recorded as the English admiral who stopped his further advance (Cust, vol. ii. p. 391). There is at Hampton Court an original painting by Vandevelde of the later action of August 1673, in which Spragge was drowned.
[187] It is remarkable that the free trade theories, which had their origin in France, should have been so long altogether neglected in the legislation of that great country; but the most republican governments there, as elsewhere, seem to have been the most jealous champions of the protectionist system.
[188] Vide notes on Smith’s ‘Wealth of Nations’ by J. R. McCulloch, 4th edition, p. 607; and E. Gibbon Wakefield’s ‘View of the Art of Colonisation,’ Lond. 1849.
[189] See remarks on what the Dutch had done to the apparent injury of the English colonies previous to the passing of the Navigation Acts (Macpherson, ii. p. 487).
[190] ‘New Discourse on Trade,’ by Josiah Child, 1665, Glasgow, ed. 1751.
[191] Vide ‘Political Arithmetick,’ 4th ed. p. 103.
[192] ‘Discourse on the Trade of England,’ vol. i. pp. 129, 363.
[193] Chambers’s ‘Estimate of the Strength of Great Britain,’ p. 68.
[194] A list of these vessels will be found in the Gazette, No. 2888.
[195] The French navy was, however, nearly destroyed in the great battle of La Hogue, fought by Admiral Russell on May 12, 1692.
[196] See ‘Life of Admiral Russell, Earl of Oxford,’ by Sir E. Cust, ii. p. 556.
[197] In 1701-1702 there were 3281 vessels measuring, or rather estimated at 261,222 tons, carrying 27,196 men, and 5660 guns, belonging respectively to the following ports:—
| Ships. | Tons. | Men. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| London | 560 | 84,882 | 10,065 |
| Bristol | 165 | 17,338 | 2,357 |
| Yarmouth | 143 | 9,914 | 668 |
| Exeter | 121 | 7,107 | 978 |
| Hull | 115 | 7,564 | 187 |
| Whitby | 110 | 8,292 | 571 |
| Liverpool | 102 | 8,619 | 1,101 |
| Scarborough | 102 | 6,860 | 506 |
No other ports of the kingdom possessed, at the time the return was made, one hundred vessels; but though Newcastle-on-Tyne owned then only thirty-nine vessels, they measured 11,170 tons, giving an average of two hundred and seventy-one tons to each. In reply to the circular from the Commissioners of Customs calling for this return, Hull accounted for her small number of seamen by stating that as it was winter (most of her vessels, no doubt, being employed in the Baltic and north of Europe trade, or in whaling) eighty vessels were laid up, and had consequently no crews on board. It is curious to note that no farther back than the commencement of the last century, such places as Yarmouth and Exeter owned more ships than Liverpool, which now owns a larger amount of tonnage than London; while there are now numerous ports in the kingdom of infinitely greater maritime importance than either Scarborough or Whitby, of which no mention whatever is made (Chambers’s Estimates, p. 68; ibid. pp. 89, 90).
[198] ‘History of the Debt’ (Appendix), London 1753.
[199] The African Company arose out of the slave dealing along the coasts of Africa, but was at first occupied in a legitimate trade in gold and ivory from Guinea (Macph. ii. pp. 72, 115, S.A. 1531-1553), Captain John Hawkins being the first Englishman to trade in negroes, 1562. In 1571 a treaty was made between the Portuguese (who claimed the coast of Guinea as their own), which allowed equal rights of trade to the English (Macph. ii. 153). The French would seem to have had a considerable trade with Senegal at a much earlier period (Macph. ii. 390). In 1637 the Dutch secured a direct commerce in negroes by taking from the Portuguese the castle of St. George del Mina, on the coast of Guinea; and, in 1642, by a special treaty, the Portuguese were permitted to hire English ships wherein to carry their negroes (Macph. ii. 420). At the peace, the result of Lord Rodney’s action, England restored to France, in 1783, what she had taken from her along the coast of Africa. The Royal African Company was first incorporated in 1631. It was constantly in trouble, chiefly with the Dutch, and was repeatedly renewed with fresh privileges. As late as 1800 it received from government an annual grant of 20,000l. (Macph. iv. 501).
[200] Vide Macpherson, ii. pp. 277-278.
[201] One of the last acts of the life of Peter the Great was to plan the survey, entrusted to Behring, a Dane, to determine whether Russia was or was not joined to America. The expedition started, July 1728, from Kamsachkatka, and Behring discovered the straits named after him, but did not himself see America (‘Mar. and Inl. Disc.’ ii. p. 345).
[202] A full account of the daring adventures of the buccaneers may be read in ‘Mar. and Inl. Discovery,’ vol. ii. pp. 298-315; and in Archenholtz, ‘Hist. des Filibustiers,’ 8vo. 1806.
[203] The attempt to grow mulberry-trees in England with the view of providing food for silkworms was not new. It had been suggested by James I. in 1608, indeed a patent had been granted for the same purpose to Walter Lord Aston in 1629 (see Macpherson, ii. pp. 250 and 358). But this scheme had failed, probably owing to the coldness or damp of the English climate; even in France, as is well known, mulberries are not found to grow sufficiently well north of the Loire. The ground secured for the mulberry plantation, in 1721, was Lord Wharton’s park, of about forty acres, at Chelsea. In Reed’s ‘Weekly Journal,’ Aug. 21, 1721, it is stated that “there is a great concourse of foreigners and others daily in Chelsea Park to see the Raw Silk undertaking, for which a patent was granted by his present Majesty.” One very ancient mulberry-tree still survives in the garden of Tudor House, No. 16 Cheyne Walk, and is perhaps the only survivor of the two thousand said to have been planted in the neighbourhood.
[204] See Reports to the Attorney-General, 1718-1720, and full details on this subject in Macpherson, vol. iii. pp. 77-114.