Chapter 30

233In stormy weather as many as 300 or 400 sail of Hollanders took refuge in St George’s Channel at a time.State Papers, Dom., xlv. 23 (1609).234Cunningham,The Growth of English Industry and Commerce, i. 424.235Gardiner,Hist. England, i. 103.236Declaratie van de visscherijen in Holland Zeeland en Vlaanderen. Fruin,Tien Jaren uit den Tachtigjarigen Oorlog, 1588-1598, p. 186.237Descrittione Di M. Lodovico Gvicciardini Patritio Florentino, Di Tvtti i Paesi Bassi, Altrimenti Detti Germania Inferiore, Antwerp, 1567, p. 21. The value of the cod caught was placed at £150,000 sterling per annum.238Hadrianus Junius,Batavia, p. 203. The work was written between 1565 and 1569, and published in 1588.239Hitchcock,A Pollitique Platt. The author says that when he was at the wars in 1553, more than 400 busses were set forth from twelve towns in the Low Countries. Dee,General and Rare Memorials.240Faulconnier,Description Historique de Dunkerque, i. 47, 53, 121.241Van Meteren,Historie der Nederlandscher ende haerder Naburen Oorlogen(1614), fol. 466. This author says the maritime power of the States was shown in the same year, when between 800 and 900 ships departed for the Baltic within the space of two or three days’ tides.242John Keymer’sObservation made upon the Dutch Fishing about the year 1601. Demonstrating that there is more Wealth raised out of Herrings and other Fish in his Majesties Seas, by the neighbouring Nations in one Year, then the King of Spain hath from the Indies in Four.London, Printed from the original Manuscript, for Sir Edward Ford, in the year 1664. Keymer states that he found in Holland more than 20,000 sail of ships and “hoyes,” more than was possessed by England, France, Spain, and other eight countries in Europe. The same figure is given by Sir Thomas Overbury, who visited the Netherlands in 1609 (Observations in his Travels, upon the State of the Seventeen Provinces, 1626).243Observations touching Trade and Commerce with the Hollander, and Other Nations; presented to King James, wherein is proved that our Sea and Land Commodities serve to enrich and strengthen other Countries against our own.Raleigh’sCollected Works, viii. 351. Oldys, in his Life of Raleigh, which was published in 1736, says there was some reason to doubt whether Sir Walter Raleigh was the author of this treatise: it was first printed in 1653, first associated with Raleigh’s name by being bound up with his “Remains” in 1656, and first definitely said to be Raleigh’s by Roger Coke in hisDetection of Court and State; and he gives reasons for the opinion that it was written by John Keymer and not by Raleigh (Collected Works, i. 441). But, as Raleigh’s latest biographer states, Raleigh still has the credit of it (Stebbing,Sir Walter Raleigh, 267). I have, however, found the original signed manuscript copy among the State Papers for 1620 (State Papers, Dom., cxviii. 114, December 1620), and an unsigned and slightly altered copy among those for 1623 (State Papers, Dom., clvii. 45). The original is endorsed,Keymers booke of observac͠ons for your moste excellent Matietouchinge trade and traffique beyond yeSeas and in England wherein he certaynly findeth ytyour sea and land Commodities doe searve to inrich and strengthen other Cuntries agnst your Kingdome; wchwere yeurgent causes why he endeavoured himselfe to take extraordynarie paynes for yeredresse: soe it maie stande wthyour Matiesgood Likinge. 1620. It is subscribed, “Your Matiesmost loyall and true harted Subject, John Keymer,” and it is the same treatise as is published in Raleigh’sWorks, with a few trifling verbal differences, while the concluding sentence is omitted in the printed form—viz., “To conclude, England is a great and famous body and would be farr greater, richer and stronger, if the ten fingers were rightly imployed.” Further proof exists that Keymer was the author of this much-discussed treatise. Its object was to show how the trade and revenue might be greatly increased, and the author begged the king to have a commission appointed to examine witnesses as to his proposals. This commission was appointed two years later, as appears from the following entry in the Grant Book in 1622: “20 Dec. Com̃ to Charles, pr. of Wales, John Bp. of Linc., Ld Keeper of yeg. seale, Lewis Duke of Lennox, Geo. Marquis Buck., &c. to hear the propositions which shall be made by John Keymer and to consider whether they will tend to the good of yeKing, and commonwealth as is pretended” (State Papers, Dom., Jas. I. (Grants), vol. 141, p. 352). There does not appear to be any further mention of the matter. This John Keymer is supposed to be the same as a person of that name who was licensed by Raleigh about 1584 to sell wines at Cambridge. Among the MSS. at Hatfield are letters from him, dated in 1598, to Cecil and the Earl of Essex, in which he speaks of his services, of “his travels and labours to find out the practises used beyond the seas to their advantage and our great danger and how to prevent the same,” and of his works, one of which he said showed how to increase the Queen’s treasure above £100,000 a year. He also corresponded with Carleton in 1619. In his address to the king, prefixed to the treatise of 1620, he mentions that “about fourteen or fifteen years past” he had presented him with “a book of such extraordinary importance for the honour and profit” of his Majesty and posterity, which was doubtless the earlier tract referred to above, and would fix its date about 1605 or 1606. He was also engaged on the fishery question about 1612 (doubtless in connection with the proposed society), because Tobias Gentleman, whose work was published in the spring of 1614, tells us that he was visited “some two yeares past” by “Maister John Keymar,” who was collecting information about the fisheries, with the view of placing it before the Council (Englands Way to Win Wealth, 3).Fig. 5.—Facsimile of Keymer’s Signature to his ‘Book of Observations.’The copy of Keymer’s tract, which is among the State Papers of 1623, is unsigned, and is simply calendared as “Tract addressed to the King, consisting of observations made by the writer in his travels on the coasts,” &c.; but the person who calendared the paper has written on it, in pencil, “q. By Sir Walter Cope (ob.1614). See 1612, a letter or discourse to the King, to which this was attached,” and has added the name “Walter Cope” at the end. The paper referred to (State Papers, Dom., vol. 71, No. 89) has written on it in the old hand, “Sr Walter Cope to K.,” and “Anno Domini 1612. A present for the Kinges most excellent Maiestie.” It is only mentioned here because the draft of it, which is the next paper in the volume (No. 90) and has several corrections on the first page, bears the following note in one of the corners, “Nota Mr Chancellor and Malynes wife (?) the ... of Maye, Ralegh.” The meaning is obscure, but perhaps it may be surmised from the contents that Malynes, who was at that time concerned with the fishery society proposals, had submitted it to Sir Walter Raleigh, and that ultimately it was presented to the king by Sir Walter Cope, who was on intimate terms with him.244Englands Way to Win Wealth, and to employ Ships and Mariners; or, A plaine description what great profite it will bring vnto the Commonwealth of England, by the Erecting, Building, and aduenturing of Busses, to Sea, a Fishing: With a true Relation of the inestimable Wealth that is yearly taken out of his Majesty’s Seas by the Hollanders, &c., by Tobias Gentleman, Fisherman and Mariner, London, 1614.245State Papers, Dom., Jas. I., xlvii. 114.246Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing; Gentleman,op. cit.; Buchanan,Rerum Scot. Hist., lib. i. c. xlix; Leslie,De Origine Moribus et Rebus Gestis Scotorum, 39;Register Privy Council of Scotland, ii. 656;MSS. Advoc. Lib., 31. 2. 16.247State Papers, Dom., xxxii. 31. Other accounts are as follows. In 1609 the Earl of Salisbury wrote (erroneously) that while fifty or sixty years before only one or two hundred foreign vessels came to fish on the east coast, they then numbered two or three thousand sail (Winwood,Memorials, iii. 50). Sir William Monson in the same year placed the number of Hollander busses at 3000 and the number of men at over 30,000 (State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 112, 114). Sir Nicholas Hales also estimated the number of men at 30,000 (Ibid., xlv. 23; cclxxiv. 67). In the following year the Dutch ambassadors admitted that 20,000 men were employed in the great herring fishery, as well as other 40,000 in connection with it on shore (Ibid., lxvii. 111). A little later, in 1616, the Secretary to the Duke of Lennox told the Dutch ambassador that in the previous June, 1500 or 1600 Hollander busses were at Shetland (Add. MSS. Brit. Mus., 17,677, J, fol. 160). In 1618 the number fishing on the east coast of Scotland sometimes exceeded 2000 sail (MSS. Advoc. Lib., 31. 2. 16). Malynes in 1622 placed the number of busses from Holland and Zealand at 2000 (Consuetudo vel Lex Mercatoria, 89). Two years later a Spanish agent described them as consisting of 2400 vessels, guarded by 40 men-of-war, and scattered over an area of 200 leagues (State Papers, Dom., dxxi. 30). In 1629 Secretary Coke, who derived the information from a Scottish source, said the Hollander busses sometimes amounted to 3000 sail; three years later he put the number in connection with the fishery off Yarmouth at “above a thousand”; at this time the French vessels numbered 40 (Ibid., Chas. I., clii. 63; ccxxix. 79). Beaujon (op. cit., p. 64) expresses the opinion that 2000 busses were the maximum number.248To Pomerania, Poland, “Spruceland,” Denmark, Liefland, Russia, Sweden, Germany, Brabant, Flanders, France, “Lukeland,” England, Greece, Egypt, Venice, Leghorn, and all over the Mediterranean, and even as far as Brazil.249State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 112.250To the King’s most excellent Majesty: A Declaration of the fishing of Herring, Cod, and Ling, and how much the favour or disfavour of Your Royal Majesty concerneth the Hollanders.Ibid., xxxii. 30; cclxxix. 67.251Misselden,The Circle of Commerce, or the Balance of Trade, 1623, p. 121. It may be said that the aggregate quantity of herrings now taken in the North Sea, and mostly by Scottish and English fishermen, equals about 3,500,000 barrels in a year.252Manship,History of Great Yarmouth, 119, 121.253Gentleman,op. cit., 7, 32.254Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing.255Manship,op. cit., 97, 120. The work was written between 1612 and 1619.256Gentleman,op. cit., 36; Swinden,History of Great Yarmouth, 465;State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 112, 114.257Meynert Semeyns,Een corte beschryvinge over de Haring-visscherye in Hollandt.258Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing; Monson,Naval Tracts, in Churchill’sCollection, iii. 467; H. Robinson,Briefe Considerations concerning the Advancement of Trade, p. 50;England’s Great Interest by encouraging the setting up of the Royal Fishery, &c., &c.259A Demonstration of the Hollanders increase in Shipping and our Decay herein.State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 112.260The Trades Increase.Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing, &c. Observations touching Trade, &c., Raleigh’sWorks, viii. 374.State Papers, Dom., xlviii. 114.261A Discourse of the Invention of Ships. Works, viii. 325.262In one of the most elaborate and detailed of the proposals for the building of busses, the daily allowance of beer for each man was to be a gallon, as in the king’s ships: the buss was to go to sea with 56 herring barrels full of beer. E. S.—Britaines Bvsse, or a Computation as well of the Charge of a Bvsse or Herring fishing ship as also of the Gain and Profit thereby.London, 1615.263Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing. The industrious Hollander was held up as an example to the English. “If any be so weak,” said one writer, “to think this mechanical fisher trade not feasible to the English people, to him I may say with Solomon, Go to the Pismire! Look upon the Dutch! Thou Sluggard! learn of them! They do it daily in the sight of all men at our own doors, upon our own coasts.” “Shall we,” said another, “neglect so great blessings? O slothful England, and careless Countrymen! Look but on these fellows, that we call the plump Hollanders; behold their diligence in fishing and our own careless negligence.”264State Papers, Dom., James I., lxxi. 89. Malynes, who, as already suggested in the note on page 128, may have been the author of Cope’s tract, said exactly the same thing in 1622—that there had been a continual agitation for over thirty years to make busses and fisher-boats.The Maintenance of Free Trade, 42.265J. Bowssar to Sir Julius Cæsar, 14th October 1607,Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 373.266A Project for to restore unto the King’s Majestie his Dueties of Fishing by re-establishing ye Auncient Manner of fishing for herringe, Coad, and Ling, for maintenaunce of Navigation and Marryners with greatt increase of Traffique, 22nd April 1609,Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 371.State Papers, Dom., xlviii. 95.267Treaty of Antwerp, 30 March/9 April 1609.268A rubric in the copy at the Record Office says, “By Proclamation first, most convenient to all the world.”269State Papers, Dom., xlviii. 94. It is written on parchment and imperfect, and endorsed, “Mr Rainsford’s Answeares.”270See p. 64.271To the King’s Most excellent Majestie: A Declaration of the Fishing of Herring, Codd, and Ling, and how greatly the favour or disfavour of Your Royal Majesty concerneth the Hollanders.State Papers, Dom., xxxii. 32. A Declaration how much the Favour or Disfavour of Your Royal Majestie doth concern the Prosperity or Adversitie of the Hollanders: and what inconvenience may ensue, and how to praevent the same to the honour and safety of your Majesty and the tranquillitie of the Netherlanders.Ibid., xlv. 23.272A Demonstration of the Hollanders Increase in Shipping and our Decay herein.Ibid., xlvii. 112. Particulars of the Lawes observed by other Nations touching fishing, and the Advantages that would accrue from establishing an English Fishing fleet.Ibid., 114.273Records of the Convention of the Royal Burghs of Scotland, ii. 203, July 2, 1605.274State Papers, Dom., xxxii. 31.275State Papers, Dom., xlv. 22. The petition was signed by fishermen of Yarmouth, Dover, Hastings, Rye, Hythe, and Folkestone. It is said in the petition that they had previously craved both the king and the Council for redress, without avail.276The author ofBritaines Busshad heard, but did not believe, stories of the “very foul and insolent dealing of their bussmen with our poor weak fishermen upon our coasts.” Tobias Gentleman, who admired the Dutch for their industry, said they scorned us only “for being so negligent of our profit, and careless of our fishing; and they do daily flout us that be the poor fishermen of England, to our faces at sea, calling to us and saying, ‘Ya English, ya zall, or oud scoue dragien,’ which in English is this: ‘You English, we will make you glad for to wear our old shoes.’”Englands Way to Win Wealth, p. 44.277Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 375. A copy of the letter of the Lords of the Council, in the handwriting of Sir Julius Cæsar, is as follows: After our very hearty recommendations. Whereas his Majesty hath of late been moved vpon many consyderations arising from the complayntes of his subiects, to take some course of restraynt of many inconveniences depending vpon the excesse of libertie, wchis taken by the subiectes of forraigne princes and states to fish vppon his coast; By which, not onlie his owne ffishermen receive wrong in their fishing, but the verie Coast-Townes themselves are much decayed for lack of meanes to sett their people on work. To wchend hee had resolved to set forth a proclamation to th’effect of that wchis hereinclosed:Fforasmuch as vppon perusall of some Treaties from King Henry 7thstyme till this daye betweene the Crowne of England and the house of Burgundy, we fynde certeyne clauses, by which there maye arise some question how farre any such Prohibition maye concurre with the practice of the same for so much as shall concerne the subiects of that Estate; Of wchparticulars it is necessary that some deliberation were taken, beefore his Matieproceeded to a generall execution of the same: We have thought good to requyre yow ioyntly and severally to peruse all those Treaties, and to consyder of them, and all other thinges, by wchthe lawfullnes or vnlawfulnes maye appeare of this proceeding; Which being don wee shall expect some report from you for his Matiesbetter satisfaction.Wherein wee doubt not but yow will proceede wthall convenient expedition. And so will bid yow hartelie farewell.Ffrome the Court at Whitehallfirst of Ffebruarie, 1606.Mr Secretary Herbert.Mr Chancellor of the ExchequerSr. Daniel Dun.Sr. Thomas Crompton.Sr. Christopher Perkins.YorVerie loving friendes,Subscribed by the1. L. Chancellor.2. L. Treasour.3. L. Admirall.4. The Earle of Worcester.5. The Earle of Salisbury.6. The Earle of Marr.7. The L. Stanhop.This copy is dated 1st February 1606, and the copy of the report of the Committee is also dated 1606, which would imply that the matter had been before the Privy Council in that year. It appears, however, from other evidence that Sir Julius Cæsar made a mistake in dating the copies.278Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 377. In Sir Julius Cæsar’s handwriting, and endorsed, “A copy of a letter from Mr Secretary Herbert, myself, and others to the Ldsof the King’s P. Councell, touching the prohibition of strangers fishing on the coasts of England,” &c. This important paper reads as follow: Our humble duties dewe to yrgood LLps. We have according to yrcommandement, considered of the liberty wchis taken by the Subiectes of forreine Princes and States to fish vppon the kings Matiescoasts by wchnot onely the English fishermen receive wrong in their fishing but the very coast townes themselves are much decayed for want of meanes to set their people on work; and we have considered likewise of the proclamation for the restraint of those many inconveniences depending vppon the excesse of such strangers fishing: We haue also pervsed the treaties frõ Henry the 7th time till this day betweene the Crowne of England and the House of Burgundy, and we have considered of them, and of all other thinges by wch(as wee conceave) the lawfulness or vnlawfulness may appeare of this proceeding. And are of opinion, that the KsMatymay wthoutbreach of any treatyie nowe in force, or of the lawe, vppon the reasons specified in the proclamation sent vnto vs, restreine all strangers frõ fishing vppon his coasts wthoutlicense, in such moderation and after such convenient notice given thereof by publik proclamation, as his Matyshall think fit.And so we most humbly take our leaves. 14 febr. 1606.YorLdshipshumbly at commandment,J. Herbert. Jul. Cæsar. Daniel Dun. Christoph. Parkins. Tho. Crompton.From the erasures and corrections (see Fig. 6) there seems little doubt that the paper is the original draft.279Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 379. In Cæsar’s handwriting.280SeeAppendix F.281Perhaps an oblique reference toMare Liberum.282State Papers, Dom., xlv. 24.Proc. Coll., No. 11.283Salisbury to Cornwallis, 8th June 1609. Winwood’sMemorials of Affairs of State in the Reigns of Q. Elizabeth and K. James I., iii. 49.284Muller,Mare Clausum,Bijdrage tot de Geschiedenis der Rivaliteit van Engeland en Nederland in de Zeventiende Eeuw, p. 52. Bosgoed,Bib. Pisc., 347. Resolutiën ... van Vergaderinge van de Heeren Staten van Hollandt ende West-Vrieslandt, 2/12 June 1609. “Ter Generaliteyt’s lands recht voorstaan ter saake van het Engelsch placaat op het visschen op de kusten en zeeën van Groot Brittannien en Yrland.”285“Ende oic Sijne authoriteyt eñ macht die hy in die See heeft voir de werelt manifest te maecken.”286Sir George Carew to Salisbury, 20th June 1609. Acknowledges his lordship’s letter, “according the request made by the ffr. Ambrfor one year’s Respite longer for the ffishers of this nation,” and expressing his pleasure that other considerations of state so fell out as to give his Majesty cause to grant them that favour, “for it is like to increase the amity of the two crowns.”287Caron to the States-General, 13/23 July 1609.Brit. Mus. Add. MSS., 17, 677.288Winwood to Salisbury, 6th September 1609.Memorials, iii. 64.289The assize-herring was thus described by Skene, inDe Verborum Significatione, annexed to the laws of Scotland, printed in 1597. “Assisa Halecum. The assise herring signifies ane certain measure and quantity of herring, quilk perteinis to the king as ane part of his custumes and annexed propriety,Jac.6, p. 15, c. 237, for it is manifest that Hee shuld have of everie Boat that passis to the drave, and slayis herring, ane thousand herring of ilk tak that halds, viz. of Lambmes tak, of the Winter tak, and the Lentrone tak”—that is, of the summer, winter, and spring fishings. The assize-herrings appear to have been originally a contribution to the king’s kitchen. In 1526 James V. granted assize-herrings to Stuart of Ardgowane (Origines Parochiales Scotiæ, ii. 83). In 1593, in an Act of the Parliament of Scotland, entitled “Annexatioun of the Propertie of the Croun that wes nocht annext of befoir,” the assize-herrings were included (Jac. VI., 1593, c. 32.Acta, iv. 28), and an Act of 1597, entitled “Assysis hering may nocht be disponit,” ordained that no infeftment or alienation in few ferm or otherwise, and all rentals and dispositions whatsoever, past or to come, were to be null and void, because they pertained to the king as part of his customs and annexed property (Acta, iv. 131). Later the assize-herring was commuted into a money payment. An Act of Charles I. in 1641 (cap. 117), entitled “Act anent the Excise of Herring,” on the ground that the collection of the herrings was “very hard and difficult,” commuted the thousand herrings in the Firth of Lothian into a money payment of £6 Scots. In the eighteenth century, when it had been for the most part granted to individuals, or farmed, it took the form of a tax ranging from £4 Scots to £10 Scots per boat or per net, and was felt as a grievous burden. In the Firth of Forth each boat that was “size-worthy” (viz., that caught 3000 herrings during the whole season) had to pay ten shillings as “size-duty.” On the west coast it amounted to £10 Scots, or sixteen shillings and eightpence sterling, whether herrings were caught or not. With regard to the gross value of the tax, those of the great Dunbar fishings were leased in 1614 for five years for £1000 Scots, and a yearly rent of 2000 merks (Reg. Privy Council Scot., x. 282). In 1613 the value of the “duty of the tack of the assize-herrings,” amounting to fourteen lasts, which the Earl of Argyle rendered for Lochfyne, was estimated to be about £36 or £38 sterling (Melrose Papers, i. 124). In 1598 the assize-herring from the “east seas” was estimated to amount to 1120 dry “killing” (cod), which shows it was sometimes paid in other fish; in 1656-57 it was equal to £130 sterling (Chalmers,Caledonia, ii. 497); in 1629 Captain Mason claimed no less than £12,489, 7s. sterling as the value, with interest, of the assize-herrings of the Hebrides and North Isles granted to him by James for the years 1610-11, and not paid (State Papers, Dom., cliv. 13).290Arguments for Collecting the Assyze herring from all Strangers fishing in the North Seas of Scotland, and Answers to some objections proponet be Sir Noel Caron.State Papers, Dom., xxxii. 31.291Winwood,Memorials, iii. 105, 135, 146, 162. Muller,op. cit., 56.292State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 111. “2. For that it is by the Lawe of nacions, no prince can Challenge further into the Sea then he can Com̃and wtha Cannon except Gulfes wthintheir Land from one point to an other. 3. For that the boundlesse and rowlinge Seas are as Com̃on to all people as the ayre wchno prince can prohibite.” The paper is endorsed “Reasons vsed by the Hollanders for the Continuance of Fishing Contrarie to the proclamation made in May 1609 forbidding of strangers to fish,” and there is a note, apparently in Cæsar’s writing, saying, “This note was sent by Emanuell Demetrius who was present att the discourse.” It is misdated “Aug. 1609.” The endorsements appear to have been made after 1612, because at the end it is said, “It was answered by thelateLord Treasr. Salisburie att a hearing,” &c. A list is given of those present at the conference—viz., the Earls of Salisbury, Northampton, Nottingham, Suffolk, Shrewsbury, and Worcester, Mr Secretary Herbert and Sir Julius Cæsar, the “Standers by” being Sir T. Edmondes, Sir Daniel Dunn, Sir Christopher Perkins, Sir William Wade, and Mr Levinus Emanuell Demetrius,—probably the Levinus Muncke of the Dutch and other records. It is to be noted that the argument as to the limitation of the territorial sea by the range of guns was not contained in the instructions to the Dutch, as printed by Aitzema (Saken van Staet en Oorlogh, ii. 406) and Vreede (Vrijheid van Haringvaart, 6; compare Muller,Mare Clausum, 58, 91), and is not referred to by them in their Journal, where, however, they say they put forward “other reasons” than those they recite (Muller,Mare Clausum, 59). Van Meteren, whose work was published in 1614 (Historie der Nederlandscher ende haerder Naburen Oorlogen, &c., fol. 650), reports, however, that there was a great dispute as to how far a country’s limit might extend into the open sea, and the brief note of Levinus seems to be the only record of it. (“Sy seyden mede, dat het een groote dispute ware, hoeverre elcx Laudts Custen ofte Limiten inde groote wijde Zee Oceane mochte strecken.”) The document is of interest not only from the clear enunciation of the doctrine at so early a period, but because there are grounds for thinking that the idea may have originated in the fertile brain of Grotius. Competent Dutch authorities believe that Grotius either himself drew up the instructions dealing with the fishery question or was consulted in their preparation; and the fact that the argument is not contained in the official instructions scarcely weakens the supposition. It was of so drastic and novel a character to be urged against the pretensions of King James that the Dutch, anxious to conciliate him, may have followed a practice not uncommon in diplomacy, and kept it in the background only to be made use of if a suitable occasion arose. It is, moreover, known that Grotius had a close personal relationship with Elias van Oldenbarnevelt, the envoy to whom the fishery negotiations were specially entrusted.293Vreede,Vrijheid van Haringvaart en Visscherij.Nota, in den Jare 1610, door de Nederlandsche Gezanten aan de Engelsche Regering ingediend (Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, Derde Deel.Arnhem, 1842). Muller,op. cit., 57;State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 111;Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 362. Vreede thinks it probable that the instructions were drawn up by Grotius; Muller believes that he was at all events consulted on the matter.294State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 111. Vreede,op. cit.Muller,op. cit. Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 362. “Answers for prohibiting of strangers fishing upon the English coastes without the King’s license, 5th May 1610”—in the writing of Sir Julius Cæsar.295“Niet door sollicitatiën van eenige courtisanen ofte hovelingen.”296The Lords of the Council to Winwood,Memorials, iii. 166.297State Papers, Dom., xlviii. 92.298Sir Walter Cope to the king,State Papers, Dom., lxxi. 89. See note, p. 128.299The Maintenance of Free Trade, 42 (1622). He mentions the reasons given by the powerful companies for their action, but it was caused by their fears for their monopolies.300State Papers, Dom., lxxvii. 79. The Earl of Northampton to Sir Thomas Lake, 4th July 1613.Ibid., lxxiv. 23. The queen, who was fond of the banquet and the masque, was often in financial straits. Chamberlain wrote to Winwood in 1609 that she had been melancholy about her jointure, and that £3000 a-year had been added to it out of the customs, with a gift of £20,000 to pay her debts.Memorials, iii. 117.301Gentleman,Englands Way to Win Wealth, &c.; E. S.,Britaines Buss; The Trades Increase.302In 1609 Sir Nicholas Hales told the king that he had been informed “the Hollanders were petitioners to the Queen to grant them a term of years in the seas for the fishing of herring, cod, and ling.”State Papers, Dom., xlv. 23.303Wotton to Sec. Winwood, Hague, 20th March 1614.304Archbishop Abbot and Lord Chancellor Ellesmere to Thomas Wilson, 24th August 1614.State Papers, Dom., lxxvii. 80. It is endorsed, “The letter to me, 24th Aug. 1614, sending for me from Harford and for the transcribing an abstract of all things out of my papers which might concern his Majesty’s jurisdiction on the sea, which I did and delivered it to Mr Attorney-General, Sir Francis Bacon, by the commandment of the Lord Chancellor and the Archbishop of Canterbury.”305Caron to States-General, 27 Aug./6 Sept. 1614.Brit. Mus. Add. MSS., 17, 677, H.306Muller,op. cit., 91, 92.30726th September 1614.308Records of the Convention of the Royal Burghs of Scotland, ii. 455. Anstruther Easter, one of the Fife villages, asked that the costs (£400 Scots) should be reimbursed to them for obtaining the decree against Mason “for exacting of thame certane excyse hering and fishes at the fishing in Orknay and Zetland.”309State Papers and Correspondence of Thomas, Earl of Melros, i. 130.310Reg. Privy Council Scot., x. 231.Rec. Convent. Roy. Burghs Scot., ii. 540.311The Lords of the Council to the king, 17th May 1614.Melrose Papers, i. 130. “It wes fundin,” wrote the Lords, “by vniforme voices and consent, without ony kynd of contradictioun, that the assise dewytie aucht onlie to be payit for the hering brought freshe and greene to land, and that the hering whilkis ar maid, saltit, and barrellit vpoun the sea, and maid reddye for the transporte, hes nevir bene in vse to pay ony dewytie.”312Loc. cit.The “patent” was the treaty of 1594.See p. 81. It may be mentioned that Mason, in his petition to Charles I. (see p. 153note), stated that in 1611 he collected “some part” of the assize-herrings, but that upon the marriage of the Princess Elizabeth (February 1613) “the States ambassador made suit to the king for the remission of the said assize-herrings due by their nation, which was granted.” We have discovered no other evidence of this. Loose statements were often made on the subject by English writers and certain foreign authors, as Rapin (Hist, d’Anglet., vii. 58), and Wagenaar (Vaderl. Hist., ix. 318) following him, that the Dutch agreed to pay an annual sum for liberty to fish on the British coasts. The error was elaborated by others, as by Lediard in his great work (Naval History of England, i. 420), who says: “In the year 1608 (sic) King James published a proclamation prohibiting all foreign nations to fish on the coast of Great Britain. This prohibition, though general, was designed against the Dutch; and it occasioned the Treaty the year following whereby they engaged to pay an annual sum for leave to fish—an evident acknowledgment of the English Dominion of the Seas.”

233In stormy weather as many as 300 or 400 sail of Hollanders took refuge in St George’s Channel at a time.State Papers, Dom., xlv. 23 (1609).

234Cunningham,The Growth of English Industry and Commerce, i. 424.

235Gardiner,Hist. England, i. 103.

236Declaratie van de visscherijen in Holland Zeeland en Vlaanderen. Fruin,Tien Jaren uit den Tachtigjarigen Oorlog, 1588-1598, p. 186.

237Descrittione Di M. Lodovico Gvicciardini Patritio Florentino, Di Tvtti i Paesi Bassi, Altrimenti Detti Germania Inferiore, Antwerp, 1567, p. 21. The value of the cod caught was placed at £150,000 sterling per annum.

238Hadrianus Junius,Batavia, p. 203. The work was written between 1565 and 1569, and published in 1588.

239Hitchcock,A Pollitique Platt. The author says that when he was at the wars in 1553, more than 400 busses were set forth from twelve towns in the Low Countries. Dee,General and Rare Memorials.

240Faulconnier,Description Historique de Dunkerque, i. 47, 53, 121.

241Van Meteren,Historie der Nederlandscher ende haerder Naburen Oorlogen(1614), fol. 466. This author says the maritime power of the States was shown in the same year, when between 800 and 900 ships departed for the Baltic within the space of two or three days’ tides.

242John Keymer’sObservation made upon the Dutch Fishing about the year 1601. Demonstrating that there is more Wealth raised out of Herrings and other Fish in his Majesties Seas, by the neighbouring Nations in one Year, then the King of Spain hath from the Indies in Four.London, Printed from the original Manuscript, for Sir Edward Ford, in the year 1664. Keymer states that he found in Holland more than 20,000 sail of ships and “hoyes,” more than was possessed by England, France, Spain, and other eight countries in Europe. The same figure is given by Sir Thomas Overbury, who visited the Netherlands in 1609 (Observations in his Travels, upon the State of the Seventeen Provinces, 1626).

243Observations touching Trade and Commerce with the Hollander, and Other Nations; presented to King James, wherein is proved that our Sea and Land Commodities serve to enrich and strengthen other Countries against our own.Raleigh’sCollected Works, viii. 351. Oldys, in his Life of Raleigh, which was published in 1736, says there was some reason to doubt whether Sir Walter Raleigh was the author of this treatise: it was first printed in 1653, first associated with Raleigh’s name by being bound up with his “Remains” in 1656, and first definitely said to be Raleigh’s by Roger Coke in hisDetection of Court and State; and he gives reasons for the opinion that it was written by John Keymer and not by Raleigh (Collected Works, i. 441). But, as Raleigh’s latest biographer states, Raleigh still has the credit of it (Stebbing,Sir Walter Raleigh, 267). I have, however, found the original signed manuscript copy among the State Papers for 1620 (State Papers, Dom., cxviii. 114, December 1620), and an unsigned and slightly altered copy among those for 1623 (State Papers, Dom., clvii. 45). The original is endorsed,Keymers booke of observac͠ons for your moste excellent Matietouchinge trade and traffique beyond yeSeas and in England wherein he certaynly findeth ytyour sea and land Commodities doe searve to inrich and strengthen other Cuntries agnst your Kingdome; wchwere yeurgent causes why he endeavoured himselfe to take extraordynarie paynes for yeredresse: soe it maie stande wthyour Matiesgood Likinge. 1620. It is subscribed, “Your Matiesmost loyall and true harted Subject, John Keymer,” and it is the same treatise as is published in Raleigh’sWorks, with a few trifling verbal differences, while the concluding sentence is omitted in the printed form—viz., “To conclude, England is a great and famous body and would be farr greater, richer and stronger, if the ten fingers were rightly imployed.” Further proof exists that Keymer was the author of this much-discussed treatise. Its object was to show how the trade and revenue might be greatly increased, and the author begged the king to have a commission appointed to examine witnesses as to his proposals. This commission was appointed two years later, as appears from the following entry in the Grant Book in 1622: “20 Dec. Com̃ to Charles, pr. of Wales, John Bp. of Linc., Ld Keeper of yeg. seale, Lewis Duke of Lennox, Geo. Marquis Buck., &c. to hear the propositions which shall be made by John Keymer and to consider whether they will tend to the good of yeKing, and commonwealth as is pretended” (State Papers, Dom., Jas. I. (Grants), vol. 141, p. 352). There does not appear to be any further mention of the matter. This John Keymer is supposed to be the same as a person of that name who was licensed by Raleigh about 1584 to sell wines at Cambridge. Among the MSS. at Hatfield are letters from him, dated in 1598, to Cecil and the Earl of Essex, in which he speaks of his services, of “his travels and labours to find out the practises used beyond the seas to their advantage and our great danger and how to prevent the same,” and of his works, one of which he said showed how to increase the Queen’s treasure above £100,000 a year. He also corresponded with Carleton in 1619. In his address to the king, prefixed to the treatise of 1620, he mentions that “about fourteen or fifteen years past” he had presented him with “a book of such extraordinary importance for the honour and profit” of his Majesty and posterity, which was doubtless the earlier tract referred to above, and would fix its date about 1605 or 1606. He was also engaged on the fishery question about 1612 (doubtless in connection with the proposed society), because Tobias Gentleman, whose work was published in the spring of 1614, tells us that he was visited “some two yeares past” by “Maister John Keymar,” who was collecting information about the fisheries, with the view of placing it before the Council (Englands Way to Win Wealth, 3).Fig. 5.—Facsimile of Keymer’s Signature to his ‘Book of Observations.’The copy of Keymer’s tract, which is among the State Papers of 1623, is unsigned, and is simply calendared as “Tract addressed to the King, consisting of observations made by the writer in his travels on the coasts,” &c.; but the person who calendared the paper has written on it, in pencil, “q. By Sir Walter Cope (ob.1614). See 1612, a letter or discourse to the King, to which this was attached,” and has added the name “Walter Cope” at the end. The paper referred to (State Papers, Dom., vol. 71, No. 89) has written on it in the old hand, “Sr Walter Cope to K.,” and “Anno Domini 1612. A present for the Kinges most excellent Maiestie.” It is only mentioned here because the draft of it, which is the next paper in the volume (No. 90) and has several corrections on the first page, bears the following note in one of the corners, “Nota Mr Chancellor and Malynes wife (?) the ... of Maye, Ralegh.” The meaning is obscure, but perhaps it may be surmised from the contents that Malynes, who was at that time concerned with the fishery society proposals, had submitted it to Sir Walter Raleigh, and that ultimately it was presented to the king by Sir Walter Cope, who was on intimate terms with him.

243

Observations touching Trade and Commerce with the Hollander, and Other Nations; presented to King James, wherein is proved that our Sea and Land Commodities serve to enrich and strengthen other Countries against our own.Raleigh’sCollected Works, viii. 351. Oldys, in his Life of Raleigh, which was published in 1736, says there was some reason to doubt whether Sir Walter Raleigh was the author of this treatise: it was first printed in 1653, first associated with Raleigh’s name by being bound up with his “Remains” in 1656, and first definitely said to be Raleigh’s by Roger Coke in hisDetection of Court and State; and he gives reasons for the opinion that it was written by John Keymer and not by Raleigh (Collected Works, i. 441). But, as Raleigh’s latest biographer states, Raleigh still has the credit of it (Stebbing,Sir Walter Raleigh, 267). I have, however, found the original signed manuscript copy among the State Papers for 1620 (State Papers, Dom., cxviii. 114, December 1620), and an unsigned and slightly altered copy among those for 1623 (State Papers, Dom., clvii. 45). The original is endorsed,Keymers booke of observac͠ons for your moste excellent Matietouchinge trade and traffique beyond yeSeas and in England wherein he certaynly findeth ytyour sea and land Commodities doe searve to inrich and strengthen other Cuntries agnst your Kingdome; wchwere yeurgent causes why he endeavoured himselfe to take extraordynarie paynes for yeredresse: soe it maie stande wthyour Matiesgood Likinge. 1620. It is subscribed, “Your Matiesmost loyall and true harted Subject, John Keymer,” and it is the same treatise as is published in Raleigh’sWorks, with a few trifling verbal differences, while the concluding sentence is omitted in the printed form—viz., “To conclude, England is a great and famous body and would be farr greater, richer and stronger, if the ten fingers were rightly imployed.” Further proof exists that Keymer was the author of this much-discussed treatise. Its object was to show how the trade and revenue might be greatly increased, and the author begged the king to have a commission appointed to examine witnesses as to his proposals. This commission was appointed two years later, as appears from the following entry in the Grant Book in 1622: “20 Dec. Com̃ to Charles, pr. of Wales, John Bp. of Linc., Ld Keeper of yeg. seale, Lewis Duke of Lennox, Geo. Marquis Buck., &c. to hear the propositions which shall be made by John Keymer and to consider whether they will tend to the good of yeKing, and commonwealth as is pretended” (State Papers, Dom., Jas. I. (Grants), vol. 141, p. 352). There does not appear to be any further mention of the matter. This John Keymer is supposed to be the same as a person of that name who was licensed by Raleigh about 1584 to sell wines at Cambridge. Among the MSS. at Hatfield are letters from him, dated in 1598, to Cecil and the Earl of Essex, in which he speaks of his services, of “his travels and labours to find out the practises used beyond the seas to their advantage and our great danger and how to prevent the same,” and of his works, one of which he said showed how to increase the Queen’s treasure above £100,000 a year. He also corresponded with Carleton in 1619. In his address to the king, prefixed to the treatise of 1620, he mentions that “about fourteen or fifteen years past” he had presented him with “a book of such extraordinary importance for the honour and profit” of his Majesty and posterity, which was doubtless the earlier tract referred to above, and would fix its date about 1605 or 1606. He was also engaged on the fishery question about 1612 (doubtless in connection with the proposed society), because Tobias Gentleman, whose work was published in the spring of 1614, tells us that he was visited “some two yeares past” by “Maister John Keymar,” who was collecting information about the fisheries, with the view of placing it before the Council (Englands Way to Win Wealth, 3).

Fig. 5.—Facsimile of Keymer’s Signature to his ‘Book of Observations.’

The copy of Keymer’s tract, which is among the State Papers of 1623, is unsigned, and is simply calendared as “Tract addressed to the King, consisting of observations made by the writer in his travels on the coasts,” &c.; but the person who calendared the paper has written on it, in pencil, “q. By Sir Walter Cope (ob.1614). See 1612, a letter or discourse to the King, to which this was attached,” and has added the name “Walter Cope” at the end. The paper referred to (State Papers, Dom., vol. 71, No. 89) has written on it in the old hand, “Sr Walter Cope to K.,” and “Anno Domini 1612. A present for the Kinges most excellent Maiestie.” It is only mentioned here because the draft of it, which is the next paper in the volume (No. 90) and has several corrections on the first page, bears the following note in one of the corners, “Nota Mr Chancellor and Malynes wife (?) the ... of Maye, Ralegh.” The meaning is obscure, but perhaps it may be surmised from the contents that Malynes, who was at that time concerned with the fishery society proposals, had submitted it to Sir Walter Raleigh, and that ultimately it was presented to the king by Sir Walter Cope, who was on intimate terms with him.

244Englands Way to Win Wealth, and to employ Ships and Mariners; or, A plaine description what great profite it will bring vnto the Commonwealth of England, by the Erecting, Building, and aduenturing of Busses, to Sea, a Fishing: With a true Relation of the inestimable Wealth that is yearly taken out of his Majesty’s Seas by the Hollanders, &c., by Tobias Gentleman, Fisherman and Mariner, London, 1614.

245State Papers, Dom., Jas. I., xlvii. 114.

246Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing; Gentleman,op. cit.; Buchanan,Rerum Scot. Hist., lib. i. c. xlix; Leslie,De Origine Moribus et Rebus Gestis Scotorum, 39;Register Privy Council of Scotland, ii. 656;MSS. Advoc. Lib., 31. 2. 16.

247State Papers, Dom., xxxii. 31. Other accounts are as follows. In 1609 the Earl of Salisbury wrote (erroneously) that while fifty or sixty years before only one or two hundred foreign vessels came to fish on the east coast, they then numbered two or three thousand sail (Winwood,Memorials, iii. 50). Sir William Monson in the same year placed the number of Hollander busses at 3000 and the number of men at over 30,000 (State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 112, 114). Sir Nicholas Hales also estimated the number of men at 30,000 (Ibid., xlv. 23; cclxxiv. 67). In the following year the Dutch ambassadors admitted that 20,000 men were employed in the great herring fishery, as well as other 40,000 in connection with it on shore (Ibid., lxvii. 111). A little later, in 1616, the Secretary to the Duke of Lennox told the Dutch ambassador that in the previous June, 1500 or 1600 Hollander busses were at Shetland (Add. MSS. Brit. Mus., 17,677, J, fol. 160). In 1618 the number fishing on the east coast of Scotland sometimes exceeded 2000 sail (MSS. Advoc. Lib., 31. 2. 16). Malynes in 1622 placed the number of busses from Holland and Zealand at 2000 (Consuetudo vel Lex Mercatoria, 89). Two years later a Spanish agent described them as consisting of 2400 vessels, guarded by 40 men-of-war, and scattered over an area of 200 leagues (State Papers, Dom., dxxi. 30). In 1629 Secretary Coke, who derived the information from a Scottish source, said the Hollander busses sometimes amounted to 3000 sail; three years later he put the number in connection with the fishery off Yarmouth at “above a thousand”; at this time the French vessels numbered 40 (Ibid., Chas. I., clii. 63; ccxxix. 79). Beaujon (op. cit., p. 64) expresses the opinion that 2000 busses were the maximum number.

248To Pomerania, Poland, “Spruceland,” Denmark, Liefland, Russia, Sweden, Germany, Brabant, Flanders, France, “Lukeland,” England, Greece, Egypt, Venice, Leghorn, and all over the Mediterranean, and even as far as Brazil.

249State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 112.

250To the King’s most excellent Majesty: A Declaration of the fishing of Herring, Cod, and Ling, and how much the favour or disfavour of Your Royal Majesty concerneth the Hollanders.Ibid., xxxii. 30; cclxxix. 67.

251Misselden,The Circle of Commerce, or the Balance of Trade, 1623, p. 121. It may be said that the aggregate quantity of herrings now taken in the North Sea, and mostly by Scottish and English fishermen, equals about 3,500,000 barrels in a year.

252Manship,History of Great Yarmouth, 119, 121.

253Gentleman,op. cit., 7, 32.

254Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing.

255Manship,op. cit., 97, 120. The work was written between 1612 and 1619.

256Gentleman,op. cit., 36; Swinden,History of Great Yarmouth, 465;State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 112, 114.

257Meynert Semeyns,Een corte beschryvinge over de Haring-visscherye in Hollandt.

258Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing; Monson,Naval Tracts, in Churchill’sCollection, iii. 467; H. Robinson,Briefe Considerations concerning the Advancement of Trade, p. 50;England’s Great Interest by encouraging the setting up of the Royal Fishery, &c., &c.

259A Demonstration of the Hollanders increase in Shipping and our Decay herein.State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 112.

260The Trades Increase.Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing, &c. Observations touching Trade, &c., Raleigh’sWorks, viii. 374.State Papers, Dom., xlviii. 114.

261A Discourse of the Invention of Ships. Works, viii. 325.

262In one of the most elaborate and detailed of the proposals for the building of busses, the daily allowance of beer for each man was to be a gallon, as in the king’s ships: the buss was to go to sea with 56 herring barrels full of beer. E. S.—Britaines Bvsse, or a Computation as well of the Charge of a Bvsse or Herring fishing ship as also of the Gain and Profit thereby.London, 1615.

263Keymer,Observations on Dutch Fishing. The industrious Hollander was held up as an example to the English. “If any be so weak,” said one writer, “to think this mechanical fisher trade not feasible to the English people, to him I may say with Solomon, Go to the Pismire! Look upon the Dutch! Thou Sluggard! learn of them! They do it daily in the sight of all men at our own doors, upon our own coasts.” “Shall we,” said another, “neglect so great blessings? O slothful England, and careless Countrymen! Look but on these fellows, that we call the plump Hollanders; behold their diligence in fishing and our own careless negligence.”

264State Papers, Dom., James I., lxxi. 89. Malynes, who, as already suggested in the note on page 128, may have been the author of Cope’s tract, said exactly the same thing in 1622—that there had been a continual agitation for over thirty years to make busses and fisher-boats.The Maintenance of Free Trade, 42.

265J. Bowssar to Sir Julius Cæsar, 14th October 1607,Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 373.

266A Project for to restore unto the King’s Majestie his Dueties of Fishing by re-establishing ye Auncient Manner of fishing for herringe, Coad, and Ling, for maintenaunce of Navigation and Marryners with greatt increase of Traffique, 22nd April 1609,Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 371.State Papers, Dom., xlviii. 95.

267Treaty of Antwerp, 30 March/9 April 1609.

268A rubric in the copy at the Record Office says, “By Proclamation first, most convenient to all the world.”

269State Papers, Dom., xlviii. 94. It is written on parchment and imperfect, and endorsed, “Mr Rainsford’s Answeares.”

270See p. 64.

271To the King’s Most excellent Majestie: A Declaration of the Fishing of Herring, Codd, and Ling, and how greatly the favour or disfavour of Your Royal Majesty concerneth the Hollanders.State Papers, Dom., xxxii. 32. A Declaration how much the Favour or Disfavour of Your Royal Majestie doth concern the Prosperity or Adversitie of the Hollanders: and what inconvenience may ensue, and how to praevent the same to the honour and safety of your Majesty and the tranquillitie of the Netherlanders.Ibid., xlv. 23.

272A Demonstration of the Hollanders Increase in Shipping and our Decay herein.Ibid., xlvii. 112. Particulars of the Lawes observed by other Nations touching fishing, and the Advantages that would accrue from establishing an English Fishing fleet.Ibid., 114.

273Records of the Convention of the Royal Burghs of Scotland, ii. 203, July 2, 1605.

274State Papers, Dom., xxxii. 31.

275State Papers, Dom., xlv. 22. The petition was signed by fishermen of Yarmouth, Dover, Hastings, Rye, Hythe, and Folkestone. It is said in the petition that they had previously craved both the king and the Council for redress, without avail.

276The author ofBritaines Busshad heard, but did not believe, stories of the “very foul and insolent dealing of their bussmen with our poor weak fishermen upon our coasts.” Tobias Gentleman, who admired the Dutch for their industry, said they scorned us only “for being so negligent of our profit, and careless of our fishing; and they do daily flout us that be the poor fishermen of England, to our faces at sea, calling to us and saying, ‘Ya English, ya zall, or oud scoue dragien,’ which in English is this: ‘You English, we will make you glad for to wear our old shoes.’”Englands Way to Win Wealth, p. 44.

277Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 375. A copy of the letter of the Lords of the Council, in the handwriting of Sir Julius Cæsar, is as follows: After our very hearty recommendations. Whereas his Majesty hath of late been moved vpon many consyderations arising from the complayntes of his subiects, to take some course of restraynt of many inconveniences depending vpon the excesse of libertie, wchis taken by the subiectes of forraigne princes and states to fish vppon his coast; By which, not onlie his owne ffishermen receive wrong in their fishing, but the verie Coast-Townes themselves are much decayed for lack of meanes to sett their people on work. To wchend hee had resolved to set forth a proclamation to th’effect of that wchis hereinclosed:Fforasmuch as vppon perusall of some Treaties from King Henry 7thstyme till this daye betweene the Crowne of England and the house of Burgundy, we fynde certeyne clauses, by which there maye arise some question how farre any such Prohibition maye concurre with the practice of the same for so much as shall concerne the subiects of that Estate; Of wchparticulars it is necessary that some deliberation were taken, beefore his Matieproceeded to a generall execution of the same: We have thought good to requyre yow ioyntly and severally to peruse all those Treaties, and to consyder of them, and all other thinges, by wchthe lawfullnes or vnlawfulnes maye appeare of this proceeding; Which being don wee shall expect some report from you for his Matiesbetter satisfaction.Wherein wee doubt not but yow will proceede wthall convenient expedition. And so will bid yow hartelie farewell.Ffrome the Court at Whitehallfirst of Ffebruarie, 1606.Mr Secretary Herbert.Mr Chancellor of the ExchequerSr. Daniel Dun.Sr. Thomas Crompton.Sr. Christopher Perkins.YorVerie loving friendes,Subscribed by the1. L. Chancellor.2. L. Treasour.3. L. Admirall.4. The Earle of Worcester.5. The Earle of Salisbury.6. The Earle of Marr.7. The L. Stanhop.This copy is dated 1st February 1606, and the copy of the report of the Committee is also dated 1606, which would imply that the matter had been before the Privy Council in that year. It appears, however, from other evidence that Sir Julius Cæsar made a mistake in dating the copies.

Fforasmuch as vppon perusall of some Treaties from King Henry 7thstyme till this daye betweene the Crowne of England and the house of Burgundy, we fynde certeyne clauses, by which there maye arise some question how farre any such Prohibition maye concurre with the practice of the same for so much as shall concerne the subiects of that Estate; Of wchparticulars it is necessary that some deliberation were taken, beefore his Matieproceeded to a generall execution of the same: We have thought good to requyre yow ioyntly and severally to peruse all those Treaties, and to consyder of them, and all other thinges, by wchthe lawfullnes or vnlawfulnes maye appeare of this proceeding; Which being don wee shall expect some report from you for his Matiesbetter satisfaction.

Wherein wee doubt not but yow will proceede wthall convenient expedition. And so will bid yow hartelie farewell.

This copy is dated 1st February 1606, and the copy of the report of the Committee is also dated 1606, which would imply that the matter had been before the Privy Council in that year. It appears, however, from other evidence that Sir Julius Cæsar made a mistake in dating the copies.

278Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 377. In Sir Julius Cæsar’s handwriting, and endorsed, “A copy of a letter from Mr Secretary Herbert, myself, and others to the Ldsof the King’s P. Councell, touching the prohibition of strangers fishing on the coasts of England,” &c. This important paper reads as follow: Our humble duties dewe to yrgood LLps. We have according to yrcommandement, considered of the liberty wchis taken by the Subiectes of forreine Princes and States to fish vppon the kings Matiescoasts by wchnot onely the English fishermen receive wrong in their fishing but the very coast townes themselves are much decayed for want of meanes to set their people on work; and we have considered likewise of the proclamation for the restraint of those many inconveniences depending vppon the excesse of such strangers fishing: We haue also pervsed the treaties frõ Henry the 7th time till this day betweene the Crowne of England and the House of Burgundy, and we have considered of them, and of all other thinges by wch(as wee conceave) the lawfulness or vnlawfulness may appeare of this proceeding. And are of opinion, that the KsMatymay wthoutbreach of any treatyie nowe in force, or of the lawe, vppon the reasons specified in the proclamation sent vnto vs, restreine all strangers frõ fishing vppon his coasts wthoutlicense, in such moderation and after such convenient notice given thereof by publik proclamation, as his Matyshall think fit.And so we most humbly take our leaves. 14 febr. 1606.YorLdshipshumbly at commandment,J. Herbert. Jul. Cæsar. Daniel Dun. Christoph. Parkins. Tho. Crompton.From the erasures and corrections (see Fig. 6) there seems little doubt that the paper is the original draft.

And so we most humbly take our leaves. 14 febr. 1606.

YorLdshipshumbly at commandment,

J. Herbert. Jul. Cæsar. Daniel Dun. Christoph. Parkins. Tho. Crompton.

From the erasures and corrections (see Fig. 6) there seems little doubt that the paper is the original draft.

279Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 379. In Cæsar’s handwriting.

280SeeAppendix F.

281Perhaps an oblique reference toMare Liberum.

282State Papers, Dom., xlv. 24.Proc. Coll., No. 11.

283Salisbury to Cornwallis, 8th June 1609. Winwood’sMemorials of Affairs of State in the Reigns of Q. Elizabeth and K. James I., iii. 49.

284Muller,Mare Clausum,Bijdrage tot de Geschiedenis der Rivaliteit van Engeland en Nederland in de Zeventiende Eeuw, p. 52. Bosgoed,Bib. Pisc., 347. Resolutiën ... van Vergaderinge van de Heeren Staten van Hollandt ende West-Vrieslandt, 2/12 June 1609. “Ter Generaliteyt’s lands recht voorstaan ter saake van het Engelsch placaat op het visschen op de kusten en zeeën van Groot Brittannien en Yrland.”

285“Ende oic Sijne authoriteyt eñ macht die hy in die See heeft voir de werelt manifest te maecken.”

286Sir George Carew to Salisbury, 20th June 1609. Acknowledges his lordship’s letter, “according the request made by the ffr. Ambrfor one year’s Respite longer for the ffishers of this nation,” and expressing his pleasure that other considerations of state so fell out as to give his Majesty cause to grant them that favour, “for it is like to increase the amity of the two crowns.”

287Caron to the States-General, 13/23 July 1609.Brit. Mus. Add. MSS., 17, 677.

288Winwood to Salisbury, 6th September 1609.Memorials, iii. 64.

289The assize-herring was thus described by Skene, inDe Verborum Significatione, annexed to the laws of Scotland, printed in 1597. “Assisa Halecum. The assise herring signifies ane certain measure and quantity of herring, quilk perteinis to the king as ane part of his custumes and annexed propriety,Jac.6, p. 15, c. 237, for it is manifest that Hee shuld have of everie Boat that passis to the drave, and slayis herring, ane thousand herring of ilk tak that halds, viz. of Lambmes tak, of the Winter tak, and the Lentrone tak”—that is, of the summer, winter, and spring fishings. The assize-herrings appear to have been originally a contribution to the king’s kitchen. In 1526 James V. granted assize-herrings to Stuart of Ardgowane (Origines Parochiales Scotiæ, ii. 83). In 1593, in an Act of the Parliament of Scotland, entitled “Annexatioun of the Propertie of the Croun that wes nocht annext of befoir,” the assize-herrings were included (Jac. VI., 1593, c. 32.Acta, iv. 28), and an Act of 1597, entitled “Assysis hering may nocht be disponit,” ordained that no infeftment or alienation in few ferm or otherwise, and all rentals and dispositions whatsoever, past or to come, were to be null and void, because they pertained to the king as part of his customs and annexed property (Acta, iv. 131). Later the assize-herring was commuted into a money payment. An Act of Charles I. in 1641 (cap. 117), entitled “Act anent the Excise of Herring,” on the ground that the collection of the herrings was “very hard and difficult,” commuted the thousand herrings in the Firth of Lothian into a money payment of £6 Scots. In the eighteenth century, when it had been for the most part granted to individuals, or farmed, it took the form of a tax ranging from £4 Scots to £10 Scots per boat or per net, and was felt as a grievous burden. In the Firth of Forth each boat that was “size-worthy” (viz., that caught 3000 herrings during the whole season) had to pay ten shillings as “size-duty.” On the west coast it amounted to £10 Scots, or sixteen shillings and eightpence sterling, whether herrings were caught or not. With regard to the gross value of the tax, those of the great Dunbar fishings were leased in 1614 for five years for £1000 Scots, and a yearly rent of 2000 merks (Reg. Privy Council Scot., x. 282). In 1613 the value of the “duty of the tack of the assize-herrings,” amounting to fourteen lasts, which the Earl of Argyle rendered for Lochfyne, was estimated to be about £36 or £38 sterling (Melrose Papers, i. 124). In 1598 the assize-herring from the “east seas” was estimated to amount to 1120 dry “killing” (cod), which shows it was sometimes paid in other fish; in 1656-57 it was equal to £130 sterling (Chalmers,Caledonia, ii. 497); in 1629 Captain Mason claimed no less than £12,489, 7s. sterling as the value, with interest, of the assize-herrings of the Hebrides and North Isles granted to him by James for the years 1610-11, and not paid (State Papers, Dom., cliv. 13).

290Arguments for Collecting the Assyze herring from all Strangers fishing in the North Seas of Scotland, and Answers to some objections proponet be Sir Noel Caron.State Papers, Dom., xxxii. 31.

291Winwood,Memorials, iii. 105, 135, 146, 162. Muller,op. cit., 56.

292State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 111. “2. For that it is by the Lawe of nacions, no prince can Challenge further into the Sea then he can Com̃and wtha Cannon except Gulfes wthintheir Land from one point to an other. 3. For that the boundlesse and rowlinge Seas are as Com̃on to all people as the ayre wchno prince can prohibite.” The paper is endorsed “Reasons vsed by the Hollanders for the Continuance of Fishing Contrarie to the proclamation made in May 1609 forbidding of strangers to fish,” and there is a note, apparently in Cæsar’s writing, saying, “This note was sent by Emanuell Demetrius who was present att the discourse.” It is misdated “Aug. 1609.” The endorsements appear to have been made after 1612, because at the end it is said, “It was answered by thelateLord Treasr. Salisburie att a hearing,” &c. A list is given of those present at the conference—viz., the Earls of Salisbury, Northampton, Nottingham, Suffolk, Shrewsbury, and Worcester, Mr Secretary Herbert and Sir Julius Cæsar, the “Standers by” being Sir T. Edmondes, Sir Daniel Dunn, Sir Christopher Perkins, Sir William Wade, and Mr Levinus Emanuell Demetrius,—probably the Levinus Muncke of the Dutch and other records. It is to be noted that the argument as to the limitation of the territorial sea by the range of guns was not contained in the instructions to the Dutch, as printed by Aitzema (Saken van Staet en Oorlogh, ii. 406) and Vreede (Vrijheid van Haringvaart, 6; compare Muller,Mare Clausum, 58, 91), and is not referred to by them in their Journal, where, however, they say they put forward “other reasons” than those they recite (Muller,Mare Clausum, 59). Van Meteren, whose work was published in 1614 (Historie der Nederlandscher ende haerder Naburen Oorlogen, &c., fol. 650), reports, however, that there was a great dispute as to how far a country’s limit might extend into the open sea, and the brief note of Levinus seems to be the only record of it. (“Sy seyden mede, dat het een groote dispute ware, hoeverre elcx Laudts Custen ofte Limiten inde groote wijde Zee Oceane mochte strecken.”) The document is of interest not only from the clear enunciation of the doctrine at so early a period, but because there are grounds for thinking that the idea may have originated in the fertile brain of Grotius. Competent Dutch authorities believe that Grotius either himself drew up the instructions dealing with the fishery question or was consulted in their preparation; and the fact that the argument is not contained in the official instructions scarcely weakens the supposition. It was of so drastic and novel a character to be urged against the pretensions of King James that the Dutch, anxious to conciliate him, may have followed a practice not uncommon in diplomacy, and kept it in the background only to be made use of if a suitable occasion arose. It is, moreover, known that Grotius had a close personal relationship with Elias van Oldenbarnevelt, the envoy to whom the fishery negotiations were specially entrusted.

293Vreede,Vrijheid van Haringvaart en Visscherij.Nota, in den Jare 1610, door de Nederlandsche Gezanten aan de Engelsche Regering ingediend (Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, Derde Deel.Arnhem, 1842). Muller,op. cit., 57;State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 111;Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 362. Vreede thinks it probable that the instructions were drawn up by Grotius; Muller believes that he was at all events consulted on the matter.

294State Papers, Dom., xlvii. 111. Vreede,op. cit.Muller,op. cit. Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MSS., 142, fol. 362. “Answers for prohibiting of strangers fishing upon the English coastes without the King’s license, 5th May 1610”—in the writing of Sir Julius Cæsar.

295“Niet door sollicitatiën van eenige courtisanen ofte hovelingen.”

296The Lords of the Council to Winwood,Memorials, iii. 166.

297State Papers, Dom., xlviii. 92.

298Sir Walter Cope to the king,State Papers, Dom., lxxi. 89. See note, p. 128.

299The Maintenance of Free Trade, 42 (1622). He mentions the reasons given by the powerful companies for their action, but it was caused by their fears for their monopolies.

300State Papers, Dom., lxxvii. 79. The Earl of Northampton to Sir Thomas Lake, 4th July 1613.Ibid., lxxiv. 23. The queen, who was fond of the banquet and the masque, was often in financial straits. Chamberlain wrote to Winwood in 1609 that she had been melancholy about her jointure, and that £3000 a-year had been added to it out of the customs, with a gift of £20,000 to pay her debts.Memorials, iii. 117.

301Gentleman,Englands Way to Win Wealth, &c.; E. S.,Britaines Buss; The Trades Increase.

302In 1609 Sir Nicholas Hales told the king that he had been informed “the Hollanders were petitioners to the Queen to grant them a term of years in the seas for the fishing of herring, cod, and ling.”State Papers, Dom., xlv. 23.

303Wotton to Sec. Winwood, Hague, 20th March 1614.

304Archbishop Abbot and Lord Chancellor Ellesmere to Thomas Wilson, 24th August 1614.State Papers, Dom., lxxvii. 80. It is endorsed, “The letter to me, 24th Aug. 1614, sending for me from Harford and for the transcribing an abstract of all things out of my papers which might concern his Majesty’s jurisdiction on the sea, which I did and delivered it to Mr Attorney-General, Sir Francis Bacon, by the commandment of the Lord Chancellor and the Archbishop of Canterbury.”

305Caron to States-General, 27 Aug./6 Sept. 1614.Brit. Mus. Add. MSS., 17, 677, H.

306Muller,op. cit., 91, 92.

30726th September 1614.

308Records of the Convention of the Royal Burghs of Scotland, ii. 455. Anstruther Easter, one of the Fife villages, asked that the costs (£400 Scots) should be reimbursed to them for obtaining the decree against Mason “for exacting of thame certane excyse hering and fishes at the fishing in Orknay and Zetland.”

309State Papers and Correspondence of Thomas, Earl of Melros, i. 130.

310Reg. Privy Council Scot., x. 231.Rec. Convent. Roy. Burghs Scot., ii. 540.

311The Lords of the Council to the king, 17th May 1614.Melrose Papers, i. 130. “It wes fundin,” wrote the Lords, “by vniforme voices and consent, without ony kynd of contradictioun, that the assise dewytie aucht onlie to be payit for the hering brought freshe and greene to land, and that the hering whilkis ar maid, saltit, and barrellit vpoun the sea, and maid reddye for the transporte, hes nevir bene in vse to pay ony dewytie.”

312Loc. cit.The “patent” was the treaty of 1594.See p. 81. It may be mentioned that Mason, in his petition to Charles I. (see p. 153note), stated that in 1611 he collected “some part” of the assize-herrings, but that upon the marriage of the Princess Elizabeth (February 1613) “the States ambassador made suit to the king for the remission of the said assize-herrings due by their nation, which was granted.” We have discovered no other evidence of this. Loose statements were often made on the subject by English writers and certain foreign authors, as Rapin (Hist, d’Anglet., vii. 58), and Wagenaar (Vaderl. Hist., ix. 318) following him, that the Dutch agreed to pay an annual sum for liberty to fish on the British coasts. The error was elaborated by others, as by Lediard in his great work (Naval History of England, i. 420), who says: “In the year 1608 (sic) King James published a proclamation prohibiting all foreign nations to fish on the coast of Great Britain. This prohibition, though general, was designed against the Dutch; and it occasioned the Treaty the year following whereby they engaged to pay an annual sum for leave to fish—an evident acknowledgment of the English Dominion of the Seas.”

Back to Index Next