Company's Claims Mentioned in Declaration of War—Parliament Grants Company's Application for Confirmation of its Charter—Implacability of the Felt-makers—Fort Albany not a Success in the hands of the French—Denonville urges an Attack upon Fort Nelson—Lewis Despatches Tast with a Fleet to Canada—Iberville's Jealousy prevents its Sailing to the Bay—Governor Phipps Burns Fort Nelson—Further Agitation on the part of the French to Possess the West Main—Company Makes another attempt to Regain Fort Albany—Fort Nelson Surrendered to Iberville—Its Re-conquest by the Company.
Upon William the Third's accession to the throne, the Company renewed its claims to its property, and for reparation for the damages it had suffered at the hands of the French in time of peace.
"As to the article of the Company's losses, it will appear," it said, "by a true and exact estimate, that the French took from the Company, in full peace between 1682 and 1688, seven ships with their cargoes, and six forts and factories, from which they carried away great stores of goods laid up for trading with the Indians. The whole amounts to £38,332 15s."
To such effect was this memorial presented to the King that William caused the hostile proceedings of Lewis in the Company's territory to be inserted in one of the articles of his Declaration of War, in these words:—
"But that the French King should invade our Caribbee Islands and possess himself of our territories of the Province of New York and Hudson's Bay, in hostile manner, seizing our forts, burning our subjects' houses and enriching his people with the spoil of our goods and merchandises, detaining some of our subjects under the hardships of imprisonment, causing others to be inhumanly killed, and driving the rest to sea in a small vessel without food or necessaries to support them, are actions not even becoming an enemy; and yet he was so far from declaring himself so, that at that very time he was negotiating here in England, by his Ministers, a treaty of neutrality and good correspondence in America."
Much has been made by later writers, hostile to the Company, of a circumstance which soon afterwards took place.
The Company's charter confirmed.
Owing to the state of public feeling in England towards the Stewarts at the time of the Revolution, the Company, keenly alive to the fact of the exiled king's having been so recently its Governor, sought at the beginning of William's reign to strengthen its position by an Act of Parliament for the charter granted by Charles II. Why, have asked its enemies, if the Company had the utmost confidence in its charter did it resort to the Lords and Commons to have it confirmed? And why was this confirmation limited to but seven years? I have already answered the first question; as to the second, the Company itself asked for no longer period. The proceeding was no secret; it was done openly. Parliament made but one stipulation, and that at the instance of the Felt-makers' Company; that the adventurers "should be obliged to make at least two sales of 'coat beaver' annually, and not exceeding four. These should be proportioned in lotts of about £100 sterling each, and not exceeding £200. In the intervals of public sales the Company should be debarred from selling beaver by private Contract, or at any price than was sett up at the last Publick sale."
The Company asked for a confirmation of its charter by Parliament as a prudent course in uncertain times; and also in order to more firmly establish its claim to reparation for damages. The nation's representatives saw no reason why they should not issue a confirmation; there being none, save the Felt-makers, to oppose it.
The Company increases its capital.