The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, Vol. 05
History
The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, Vol. 05
United States -- Foreign relations -- 1775-1783; United States -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783 -- Sources
"We learn, even that the States-General have already taken resolutions
conformable to this opinion. The affair of the attack of the convoy,
commanded by the Count de Byland, does not less engage the attention
of the government of the Republic. The States of the Province of
Holland and of West Friesland have already formed upon this subject
the instruction, which they have directed their deputies to carry to
the Assembly of their High Mightinesses; it tends, in substance, to
represent to the Court of London, 'that their High Mightinesses are by
no means satisfied with the answer of Lord Stormont, given the 16th of
March, to the just representations of their High Mightinesses
concerning the violence done to their convoy, inasmuch as this answer
only serves to cast upon them, by strained arguments, the blame of
that which happened, and to represent, against all truth, their
officer as having been the aggressor. That their High Mightinesses, as
well to justify themselves in the eyes of all Europe, as to convince,
if it is possible, Great Britain, have thought it their duty to
represent further, that naval stores not being merchandises of
contraband according to the express letter of the treaties, their
visitation and detention, made by order, especially under the flag of
their High Mightinesses, is a direct attack of their flag, as well as
of their independence and sovereignty. That, as to the allegation of
the treaty of 1674, made by Lord Stormont, concerning the visit of
merchandises suspected, the contrary of what he advances appears in a
manner the most evident, by the simple reading of the treaty. That the
nature of a convoy rendering all visits unnecessary, the articles
fifth and sixth of this treaty confine themselves manifestly to single
ships, from which, nevertheless, they cannot in this require more than
the exhibition of their sea letters, and with regard to vessels
detained for an enemy's port, that of their passports; that thus the
conduct of Commodore Fielding, approved by his Majesty, implies an
open violation of this treaty; by consequence, neither the orders of
their High Mightinesses, nor the act of their officer charged with
their execution, having done any injury to the treaties, nor any
hostilities having been committed on their part, but Commodore
Fielding having employed, for the execution of his orders, the force
of arms against the convoy of the Republic, there does not exist the
least cause of complaint on the part of his Majesty; but on the part
of their High Mightinesses, they have had the most just reason of
complaint, and that they ought to insist still (as their High
Mightinesses do insist, in the manner the most serious,) upon a
satisfaction and a suitable reparation, as well as upon the release,
without further form of process, of the merchant ships and their
cargoes sailing under the convoy of the Republic, detained by force
and violence contrary to the tenor of treaties, and condemned by the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account