Settlement in Darlen. i %. 



there's no ground for this Allegation, will ap- 

 pear to thole that perufe the faid Treatys, viz^. 

 that of May 25. 1667, and that of July 1670. 

 vvherin there's not the leaft mention of exclude 

 ing either Party from enlarging their Domini- 

 ons in Americ^iy upon Waftes, or by confent of 

 the Natives, in fuch places as have never yet 

 been poflefl: by Spain or Great Britain. So that 

 all that can be infer^d from thofe Treatys is, 

 that they were a mutual Security for the peace- 

 able pofTeflion of what each Crown enjoy 'd ia 

 that Country, and no more; which is fufficient- 

 ly confirmed by the Patent granted to Dr. CoXy 

 and the fettling and removing of the Er^gUfb in 

 Campechy Bay, &e. without Controul, as be- 

 fore mentioned. 



Having thus made it evident that the Spmi-- 

 ^r^/ have no manner of Title or Right to Da-- 

 rieny it is natural in the next place to fhew 

 that they themfelvesare guilty of the Breach of 

 Treaty by proceeding in this Affair as they 

 have done. 



By the third Article of the Treaty between 

 the Crowns of Great Britain and Spain y con- 

 cluded 2Lt Madrid Mayii. 1667. it is provided, 

 T^Jat if any Injury /ball he dorte by either of the 

 [did f\J^^Si or by the l^eople or Sfdjecfs of either of 

 them, to the People or Subje^s of the other^ a-- 

 \ainji the Articles of that Alliance ^ or ag&inft 

 common Right, there fljall not therefore be given 

 Letters of Reprifal, Marque or Countermarque^ 

 by any of the Confederates^ until fuch time as 



C 2 Jufiiu 



