The sea-rovers of Elizabeth had developed into something very like "gentleman-buccaneers." They ranged the oceans, preying upon the Spanish and Portuguese ships wherever they were to be found, and returned in joyousness, bringing home their booty. The maritime eagerness of the people was whetted by these prizes, and it is said that even the Queen herself was not averse to accepting from her good subjects, Drake and Hawkins, a share of the proceeds of their prowess. The reign of the Jack of James I. had scarce begun when a neighbouring maritime rival arose to assume formidable proportions. Nurtured in the hardy school of their fishing fleets, and practised in distant voyages by traffic with their possessions in the East Indies, the Dutch merchantmen not only copied the English methods of preying abroad on the ships of other nations, but also began to employ themselves actively in carrying the water-borne business of their own merchants, and next, which was an intrusion much more objectionable, to enter into competition with the English ships in carrying the merchandise for the other nations of Europe. Thus the passage of the Dutch fleets along the coasts of Europe greatly increased. As soon as the Spanish war was over, Sir William Monson, the Admiral of the Narrow Seas, demanded that the ships of all other nations should, as of old, lower their flags in the presence of his own, "a courtesy which could not," he announced, "be challenged by right, but now that the war was ended, His Majesty James I. demanded the full recognition of such rights and duties as belonged to his predecessors."[48]
These old rights the Admiral and his officers accordingly proceeded to enforce.
The spirit of the British sailors under the King's new two-crossed Jack was still the same as under the English Jack, and one is reminded of the old pride in the flag by an instance which is narrated as having occurred under James I. One of the ministers of Henry IV. of France had embarked at Calais to cross to England in a French ship wearing the French flag at the main. The commander of the English despatch boat, which had been sent to escort him, on meeting him in the channel, ordered the French ship to lower her flag. "The Duke of Sully, considering that his quality freed him from such an affront, boldly refused, but this refusal was followed by his receiving three cannon shots which pierced his ships. Might forced him to yield what right forbade, and for all the complaints he made he could get no better reply from the English captain than this: 'That just as his duty obliged him to honour the ambassador's rank, so it also obliged him to exact the honour due to the flag of his master as Sovereign of the Seas.'"[49]
The "rufflings" increased in frequency, and the contest went merrily on, as the Dutch, increasing in enterprise and volume of shipping, chafed still more under the domination of the English admirals. In this restlessness they were encouraged by the differences which were raging between King Charles I. and his Parliament. The latter thwarted the King's efforts at sea and refused to contribute to the levy of "ship-money," declaring it to be an "insufferable tax"; while he, without their concurrence, was attempting to strengthen the navy, which he had created to assert the King of England's right to the sovereignty of the seas and for the protection of his shores, by the maintenance of the old Alfred policy. The King's sailors felt keenly the increasing insolence of the passing Dutch ships, as wrote one old salt:
"What affront can be greater, or what can make a man valianter, than a dishonour done to prince and country, especially by a people that was wont to know no more than how to catch, pickle, and feed fish."[50]
Notwithstanding the Parliament's objections, an English navy was at one time collected of sufficient strength that, when the Dutch and French fleets joined together in 1635 with the avowed intention of contesting the command of the sea, its simply sailing out to meet them overawed their forces, as reports Monson:
"It is to be observed that the greatest threateners are the least fighters; and so it fared with them; for they no sooner heard of our readiness to find them, but they plucked in their horns and quitted our coast, never more repairing to it."
The King's opponents averred that the quarrels with the Dutch over the honour due to the flag were fomented only for the purpose of forming an excuse for extorting more money by the objectionable ship-money, whose proceeds, they alleged, were expended for very different purposes than the maintenance of the navy. So the people resisted, while the King persisted. Later on, during the Civil War, English ships, manned by Royalist supporters of the King, were engaged in fighting against English ships manned by supporters of the Parliament, and each party was preying upon the merchant adherents of the other. Meantime, the Dutch maritime power continued to grow. The struggle between the Parliament and the King resulted in the defeat and execution of Charles, and the weakening of the fleet by these dissensions brought on the humiliation of the English flag during the first Dutch war.
Under Cromwell, in 1648, the St. George cross had been restored.
The Council of State took heart, and showed by their actions that once more the homage due the national flag was held by them in as great esteem as it had been by the King and his party in the royal days. The orders to their naval commanders were explicit: