[32] This Memorial was printed and circulated in Holland by the friends of the American cause. [33] Missing. MEMORIAL FOR HOLLAND. When the ancestors of the present inhabitants of the United States of America first settled in that country, they did it entirely at their own expense. The public of England never granted one shilling to aid in their establishment. Had any such grants existed, they must have been upon record. The state of England, therefore, could not justly claim the benefit of an acquisition which it never made. Upon this principle the first settlers conceived they had _a right to exchange and sell the produce of their labor to all nations without control_. This right they actually enjoyed unquestioned till the year 1652; then it was that the English, in violation of every principle of justice, usurped and established a monopoly of the American commerce, which they maintained till the rigor of their domination compelled the Americans to reclaim their ancient unalienable rights, by declaring themselves free and independent States. In consequence of this, all nations are restored to the participation of that commerce, from which the monopolising spirit of the English had unjustly excluded them. No nation is more interested in this event than the Dutch, because it was against them that the establishment of the monopoly was chiefly intended. The great object of commercial policy with the States of Holland was and is the _carrying trade_. In consequence of this, when the commerce of America was free, the Dutch vessels in the American ports outnumbered those of England. But in the year 1651, a quarrel arose between the States of Holland and the then republic of England. The English, jealous of their naval power, resolved to destroy their American commerce, which contributed so much to its support. To effect this, the Council of State projected and passed on the 1st of December, 1651, the navigation ordinance, by which the carriage of American produce was prohibited except in English bottoms. The Dutch foresaw the intention, and felt the effects of this measure. Their resentment of it added fuel to the war, that raged from that time to the year 1654 with so much fury. Their success, however, was not sufficient to re-establish what had been thus violently wrested from them. In negotiating the peace that concluded that war, De Witt labored with his usual abilities to obtain an abolition of the act, but all his efforts were ineffectual. Cromwell, who was not his inferior in acuteness, maintained the usurpation, and under Charles the Second it received the form and sanction of an act of Parliament. Thus in despite of all their efforts, this valuable branch of commerce was wrested from the Dutch, and monopolised by the English.