MISCELLANEOUS. 1171 



Charles succeeded to a naval force far too weak to cope with the 

 fleets of his enemies; and after his breach with the Commons, resorted 

 to the fatal levies of "ship-money" to augment it, and for a distinct 

 object, namely, that of breaking up the Dutch fisheries on the British 

 coast. The dispute was of long standing. Complaints against the 

 aggressions of the industrious Hollanders had been made to Elizabeth, 

 and to her successor. It was said, indeed, in the time of the latter, 

 that the Dutch not only engrossed the fisheries, but the entire mari- 

 time business of the country; and James compelled them to pay an 

 annual tribute for the liberty of catching herring on the coasts of his 

 kingdom. New disagreements arose, when they were warned off by 

 royal proclamation. The Dutch were exasperated. Hugo Grotius 

 appeared in their defence; and in his Mare Liberum contended for the 

 freedom of the seas. Selden, in his Mare Clausum, is supposed by 

 British writers to have refuted his arguments, and to have shown by 

 records the first occupancy of the fishing grounds by the English, and 

 their dominion over the four seas which surround the British isles, to 

 the utter exclusion of both Dutch and French; as well as the fact 

 that the Kings of England, even without the authority of Parliament, 

 had levied large sums to maintain the sovereignty of the seas. 



The Dutch, denying these conclusions, and insisting that the 

 dominion claimed by the English extended no further than the friths, 

 bays, and shores, still continued their employment in the interdicted 

 waters. The English required an acknowledgment of their title, and 

 a tribute. Negotiations to adjust the difficulties between the two 

 nations failed. Meantime, Charles, by his exactions of "ship- 

 money," annually increased his navy.* At last he was able to fit 

 out a fleet of sixty sail, and the greatest ever equipped in England. 

 This formidable armament, created for the special purpose of driving 

 the Dutch herring fishers from the four "narrow seas, as they were 

 called, was sent immediately to perform that service; and in the suc- 

 cess of the enterprise, the Dutch consented to pay a sum equal to 

 about one hundred and fifty thousand dollars. 



Such, I think, are the conclusions to be derived fairly from the 

 statements of Hume, and other writers of English history. Dr. 

 Johnson, refusing to allow any influence to the religious antipathies 

 that were awakened in the course of the controversy between the 

 monarch and his people, sums up the case far more forcibly, and evi- 

 dently considers that Charles owed his ruin to his zeal in maintaining 

 the monopoly of the seas. In his "Introduction to the Political 

 State of Great Britain," written in 1756, he says: "The Dutch, 

 grown wealthy and strong, claimed the right of fishing in the British 

 seas; this claim the King, who saw the increasing power of the States 

 of Holland, resolved to contest. But, for this end it was necessary to 

 build a fleet, and a fleet could not be built without expense: he was 

 advised to levy ship-money, which gave occasion to the civil war, of 

 which the events are too well known." Thus it appears that the 

 exercise of the prerogative to exclude his subjects from the fishing 

 grounds of his dominions in one hemisphere was among thejirst; and 



* It was said by the merchants of England in 1627, that "within three years they had 

 lost all their shipping; that the ^fishermen were taken almost in their very harbors, and that 

 they would not attempt the building of new ships, because, as soon as they were ready, 

 the King [Charles the First] seized them for his own use, against the will of the own- 

 ers," &c. 



