practicable for a weak power to employ in its dealings with a strong one, even to
the rupture of diplomatic relations. baine, p. joS.
MEANING OF TREATIES-TRUCE OF 1609.
. British Counter Case.
At the time of the truce in 1609 the Dutch maintained their right to found
settlements in any part of South America not actually occupied and possessed
by Spain, and never abandoned that position. It was maintained by them in all
the negotiations leading up to the Treaty of Munster, and received sanction once
again in the definite terms established by that Treaty. B. C.-C,S5-
1608. Instructions to Marquis de Spinola.
In granting them [Dutch] liberty to trade with Spain, as you may, on the
same terms enjoyed by the French and English, they will have to absolutely
renounce that of the East and West Indies, and pledge themselves to punish
those of their subjects who shall make bold to undertake that voyage.
B. C.-C, App., 31S.
1608. Report on Negotiations for Truce of 1609.
The Rapporteurs asked what should be resolved, and that being left to the
afore-written President, he replied that he thought a Resolution should now be
elseif (getClientWidth() > 430)
taken . . . concerning traffic, which, since it was becoming more lively, was
a point of greater importance ; . . . the Commissioners, being interrogated,
declare their opinion to be liiat these lands should have free traffic everywhere
in the realms and lands of the King of Spain and Archdukes and everywhere
where they had free trafific before the war, but not in the East Indies. Where-
upon the Rapporteurs replied that the Lords States intend that these lands shall
REMONSTRANCES AND MEANING OF TREATIES. 215
MEANING OF TREATIES-TRUCE OF 1609-(Continued).
have free traflic and trade not only in the reahiis and lands of the King of Spain
and Archdukes but also in the East Indies, and everywhere else where they at
present trade free and have traded and trafficked during the war as being fun's
Against that the Commissioners said that the most principal cause which hath
moved the King of Spain to this peace negotiation is beciiuse he desired to have
the East Indies free for himself, which the Lords States ought not to refuse.
1608. Instructions for Reply by States-General to demand by Spain.
The States have considered the second point of their paper, in which is
proposed the abaiuloniueut of navigation to the East and West Indies, con-
cerning which the negotiations are at present in abeyance, and that their Might,
inesses' determination, purpose, and intention is to avail themselves of the said
navigation, and to continue it by means of peace, truce or war — leaving the
same to their option without renouncing the same in any way. Same, p. jig.
1609. What passed between the Ambassadors at Antwerp as to the Truce.
[President Richardot] . . . told us that it was sufficient that the Truce
should be general in all parts, without distinction of places or persons. . . .
And with regard to commerce, that it should be limited and restricted, so far as
concerned the kingdoms and countries of the King of Spain, to Spain and the
countries which it holds in Italy. Since with regard to the localities, places,
ports, and harbours v/hich belong to him beyond the said countries and even in
the Indies, he by no means intended to allow the said trade there.
Satne, pp. jig-j20.
We replied that since the Truce was to be general and therefore in the In-
dies as well as elsewhere, it was quite reasonable to also make trade free and
general, without excepting any locahties, places and ports, that the said Lord
King holds in the Indies or elsewhere than in Spain and Italy. But they [Span-
iards] replied that your subjects [Dutch] have never traded in the places and
ports uhich they [Spaniards] have in the Indies, and that in negotiating
the Peace you [Dutch] had neither claimed to have done so.
Having adjourned in order to see what they had written, and to give them an
answer at the next meetng, we found that the draft was not worded in such a way as
your security required, and we made another which was rejected by them, then a
second which they would also not accept, since we made express mention of the
Indies ; they saying to us that the King of Spain was indeed willing to consent to
this commerce in the said places, but without expressing it ; . . . that it would be
less humiliation and vexation to him to suffer and overlook the commerce, hav-
ing granted it by general phrases and circumlocutions than by mention of the
word Indies. Same, p. J20.
At length, after various discussions upon this article carried on and continued
in two separate conferences, we resolved to draw up another document which
seemed to us to determine and elucidate pretty clearly this commerce of the In-
dies, although the word was not expressed in it, on condition that it should be
put into the general treaty in the place of the article concerning commerce.
Same, p, J2I,
216 REMONSTRANCES AND MEANING OF TREATIES.
MEANING OF TREATIES-TRUCE OF 1609-(,Continued).
Although the article relating to the Indies, as it is inserted in the Treaty
of which they have seen a copy is in their opinion so well and intelligibly expressed
that it can give rise to no ambiguity, ... the following article . . .
can only be understood to refer to the Indies, and for which reason they made
difificulties for a very long time about agreeing to it, and we obtained it only at
the moment of our departure. B. C.-C, App.,j2i.
1609. Extract from the Twelve Years' Truce, April 9, 1609.
II. Said Truce shall be ^00(1, valid, loyal, and inviolable and for the period of
III. Each party shall remain seised of and shall enjoy effectually the coun-
tries, towns, places, lands, and lordships which he holds and possesses at pres-
IV. The subjects and inhabitants of the countries of the Said King, Arch-
dukes, and States . . . may . . . fre([nent and stay in each others
territory, and there carry on their trade and commerce in all security, . . .
but this always the aforesaid King understands to be restricted and limited to
the realms, countries, lands, and lordships which he holds and possesses in
Europe and other places and seas where the subjects of Kings and Princes who
are his friends and allies allow the said traffic by mutual agreement — and with
regard to places, towns, ports, and havens which he holds outside the limits
above mentioned— that the said States and their subjects cannot carry on any
trade there without the express permission of the said King. Same, pp.j22-j2j.
1609. Secret Treaty demanded of Spain and granted.
Whereas by the fourth article of the Treaty of the Truce made this same day
[April 9, 1609], between His Majesty the Catholic King [of Spain] and the Most
Serene Archdukes of Austria on the one hand, and the Lords, the States General
of the United Provinces on the other, the commerce accorded to the said Lords
States and to their subjects has been restricted and limited to the kingdoms,
countries, lands, and lordships which the said Lord King has in Europe and else-
where, in which it is permissible for the subjects of the Kings and Princes who are
his friends and allies to carry on the said commerce at their pleasure ; and whereas
the said Lord King has moreover declared that he had no intention of
obstructing in any way the trade and commerce which the said Lords States
and their subjects may carry on hereafter in whatever country and place it may
be, either by sea or by land, with the potentates, peoples and private individuals
who may permit them to do so, . . . which however has not been couched
in writing in the said Treaty ; now therefore, . . . their lordships. . . .
in the name and as deputies of the said Lord King and Archdukes, . . . have
promised, and do promise, in the name of the said Lord King and his successors
during the time that the said truce shall last, that His Majesty >vill not ob-
struct in any way, either by sea or by land, the said Lords States or their sub-
jects in the trade wliich tliey may carry on liereafter in the countries of all
princes, potentates, and peoples who may permit them to do so, in whatever
place it may be, even beyond the limits determined above and anywhere else.
Same, pp. 32J-J24.
1609. Ambassadors of France and England.
We, the undersigned Ambassadors of His Most Christian Majesty and the King
of Great Britain hereby declare . . . that the deputies of the said Lords Arch-
REMONSTRANCES AND MEANING OF TREATIES. 217
MEANING OF TREATIES-TRUCE OF 1609-(Continued).
dukes have likewise consented and agreed that the said Lords States and
their subjects shall not be able to trade at the ports, localities and places held
by the Catholic King in tlie Indies, if he do not permit it; that it shall neither be
lawful for his subjects to trade at the ports, localities and places which the said
Lords States hold in the said Indies except by their permission.
MEANING OF TREATIES-TREATY OF MUNSTER, 1648.
1632. Reply of Provincial States to Articles submitted by States-General.
That the 4th article of the preceding trnce [of 1609] shall be maintained
with respect to the East Indies as it was practiced in the preceding truce ; and
witli regard to the matter of tlie West Indies, that they sliall be left in tlie con-
dition in which they at present are. B. C.-C, App.,j2§.
1633. Articles submitted by States-General to King of Spain, April i, 1633.
The affairs of the West Indies shall be left in such condition and situa-
tion of traffic and war as tliey at present are. Same, p. S2j.
1633. Reply by Spain to Articles submitted April i, 1633.
That all points and Articles included in the Treaty of tlie 0th April and in
the subsequent Convention of the 7th January, 1010, shall, save what may be
framed in these present negotiations, be considered as enacted afrcsli and in-
violably observed, both in and out of Europe, throughout the world.
Same, p. J2j.
1633. Prince Henry of Nassau.
Respecting the Articles relating to the Indies, we see no means of any modi-
fication . . . neither for money nor for any other promises ought we to
abandon the Company of the West Indies, as being one that has deserved so
well of the St.ate, and that can still do the interests of the King- of Spain so
much injury ; ... we think that on this we ought both to hear the opinion
of the aforesaid Company, and to act in accordance with what they, as having the
best knowledge of and being most interested in the matter, advise. Same, p. J26.
1645. West India Company to States-General.
Those of the Company adjudge that ... in case of general peace or
Truce, the Company should receive an assurance from the King of Spain that
it would be honestly kept and that they would remain maintained in their privileges,
free navigation, commerce, and exemptions.
That in such Peace or Truce may be included all Potentates, Nations, and
Peoples with which Your High Mightiness[es] or the West India Company in
your behalf, are within the aforesaid limits of the Charter in friendship and
That the Company shall be able to push their trade and traffic in all places
within the aforewritten limits of the Charter, where the King of Spain hath
no castles, jurisdiction or dominion.
That the subjects of Spain shall in no wise be permitted to navigate or trade
in any harbours or places where the West India Company in the name of your
High Mightinesses, has any castles, forts, and dominion or warehouses unless
vice versa there be granted to the aforesaid Company similar action in all districts
and places under the dominion of the said King of Spain. Same, pp. J26-J2y.
218 REMONSTRANCES AND MEANING OF TREATIES.
MEANING OF TREATIES-TREATY OF MUNSTER, 1648-(Contlnued).
1645. Instructions to Dutch Ambassadors appointed to Negotiate for Peace at
Each party shall remain seised of and shall effectually enjoy those countries,
towns, places, lands and lordships uhioh he at present holds and occupies,
without being disturbed or hindered therein in any manner whatsoever during the
said Truce, in which are understood to be included the boroughs, villages, ham-
lets and campaigns appurtenant thereunto.
The subjects and inhabitants of the countries of the said Lords the King and
States shall during this Truce maintain among themselves all good relations and
friendship ... It shall also be permissible for them to come and stay
in each other's territories and to carry on their trade and commerce there, in all
security, as well by sea and other waters as by land, although the aforesaid Lord
King intends this to be restricted and limited to the kingdoms, countries, lands,
and lordships which he holds and possesses in Europe and other places and
seas where the subjects of those kings and princes who are his friends and allies
carry on the aforesaid trade by mutual agreement, and with regard to those
places, towns, ports and harbours which he holds outside the aforesaid limits
that the above-mentioned Lords States and their subjects shall not be allowed to
carry on any trade there without express permission of the aforesaid Lord King.
B. C.-C, App.,327.
We, the Ambassadors of His Most Christian Majesty and the King of Great
Britain, and we, the deputies of my lords the States General of the United
Provinces of the Netherlands certify by these presents that being this day. the
last of the month of March, 1609, assembled in this city of Antwerp, ... a
great difference arose concerning the commerce of the Indies, which the
deputies of the said Lords Archdukes were however quite willing to allow in the
name of the said Lord King in the words and terms contained in the fourth and
fifth articles of the Truce, which they said were sufificient to express the said com-
merce, although no express mention was there made of the Indies from the use
of which they have abstained for certain reasons which are of no prejudice to
the said Lords of the States, but only concern the particular contentment of the
said Lord King, who intends to allow them to effectually enjoy them in all
liberty during the Truce. Same, p. J28.
We, the deputies of the said Lords States, were unwilling to accept, requiring
that the Indies should be expressed by name and the article so intelligibly worded
that there should be no ambiguity or pretext for causing any difficulty therein in
the future. ... we willingly allowed ourselves to be used, endeavouring to
persuade the deputies of the Archdukes to use the expression that was demanded
of them. . . . But they both remained so firm in their opinion that it
seemed that the said Treaty would be broken off from this cause. Finally we,
the deputies of the said Lords States, declared ourselves satisfied to accept the
said articles, provided that the said Lords, His Most Christian Majesty and the
King of Great Britain, previously solicited on behalf of the States, be willing to
act as guarantors of the observance of the Truce, with an assurance of their aid
in case of infraction and consent to pledge themselves specially for the observance
of the said commerce as promised and agreed by the said articles, as validly as
if the word Indies were therein expressed. Same, p. 329.
REMONSTRANCES AND MEANING OF TREATIES. 219
MEANING OF TREATIES-TREATY OF MUNSTER, 1648-(Continued).
1646. Proposal by Spanish Plenipotentiaries at Munster.
We in-opose to the said Plenipotentiaries of the said States a truce like that
which was agTced upon in the year 1605), following that copy and treaty. And
whereas, since the said truce, experience may have shown that it is desirable to
take away, add, or explain some of the points already treated, and others which it
may seem desirable to introduce anew ... it shall be permissible to both
parties to draw up in a separate note the points and heads they may consider
necessary. -^'- C.-C, App., jjo.
The fifth Article of the aforesaid seventy Articles [of the proposed Treaty of
Munster] shall be struck out and in its place there shall be inserted and split up
into two, that is to say, excluding the alternative, in this wise, to wit : —
That the navigation and trade to both the Indies respectively shall be main-
tained pursuant to and in conformity with the charters already given or yet to
be given . . . there shall be comprised under the aforesaid Treaty all
potentates, nations and peoples with whom their High Mightinesses or those of
the East and West India Companies on their behalf are within the limits of their
said charters in friendship and alliance ; and each party . . . shall continue
to possess and enjoy such lordships, towns, castles, fortresses, commerce and
lands in the East and West Indies, as also in Brazil ; and on the coasts of Asia,
Africa, and America, respectively, as the same respectively do hold and pos-
sess, amongst whicli are especially included the places taken from this State
and occupied by the Portuguese, or the places which they shall hereafter
without infraction of tlie present Treaty come to acquire and possess.
Same, p. 332.
With regard to the West India Company, the same shall he at liberty to
carry on its trade and traffic in all places within tlie limits of the Charter
granted to them, by their High Mightinesses, either in places belonging to neutral
princes and peoples, or even in places where the King- of Spain has castles,
fortresses, jurisdiction and dominion ; and the subjects and inhabitants of the
King of Spain shall be permitted to exercise similar liberty of trade and traffic
both in places belong[ing] to neutrals and in districts occupied by the said West
India Company. Same, p. 332.
In default of the above stipulation, both the subjects and inhabitants of
the above-mentioned king [of Spain] and the inhabitants of this State shall
refrain from sailing to and trafficking in the harbours occupied by either one
or the other party with forts, lodges or castles, and if any proposal is placed
before their High Mightinesses' Ambassadors extraordinary contrary to what is
hereabove expressed, they shall huve to give notice thereof to their High
Mightinesses. Same, p. 333.
1646. Dutch Report on Peace Negotiations at Munster.
On the afternoon of the same day [December 13, 1646] we visited the Am-
bassadors of Spain, and delivered to them the amendments and additions to be
made in the seventy Articles to be converted into a treaty of peace with six
fresh Articles ; . . . they were accepted by the aforesaid [Spanish] Ambas-
sadors with a declaration that they would discuss them at once and meet us
promptly with a reply. Same, pp. 333-334-
220 REMONSTRANCES AND MEANING OF TREATIES.
MEANING OF TREATIES-TREATY OF MUNSTER, 1648-(Continued'.
1646. Dutch Report on Peace Negotiations at Munster.
Art. 5. — Let this be entirely deleted and the following be inserted in its
Eacli party . , . shall remain in possession of and enjoy sucU lord-
ships, towns, castles, fortresses, commerce and lands in the East and West
Indies as also in Brazil and on all the coasts of Asia, Africa, and America re-
spectively as the above-mentioned Lords, the King: and States respectively hold
and possess, herein specially included the localities and places which the Portu-
guese have taken from this State and occupied ; including also the localities and
places which they, the Lords States, shall hereafter, without infraction of the
present Treaty come to acquire and possess. B. C.-C, App., 333-334.
With reg-ard to West India Company it will be permitted to extend its
business and trade in all places within the limits of the Charter granted it
by the said Lords States, both in the places of neutral princes and peoples, as
also especially in the places where the King of Spam has castles, fortresses,
jurisdiction and dominion ; and the subjects and inhabitants of the said Lord
King of Spain shall be permitted to exercise similar liberty of commerce and
trade both in places of neutrals and in countries possessed by the said West India
Company. Same, p. 333.
[December 14, 1646.] In the afternoon we were visited by Mr. Brun, the Am-
bassador of Spain, saying that they . . . had given us the option of a Peace
or Truce, and a Truce having been chosen by us they had given way as much as
possible in order to accede to all that we demanded . . . that in a truce it is
indeed usual to leave everything in the state in which it is, and for each party to
retain what he possesses, but that such is not done in any treaty of peace, and
that if we had spoken of a peace from the beginning, they would not have granted
everything so liberally . . . that they had not expected that after the lapse
of a year from the commencement of the negotiations and of about five months
from the agreement upon the aforesaid articles we should seek to place the King
in a worse position by a peace than by a truce. Same, p. 333.
The King could not agree to the trade in tlie West Indies; that was
quite an innovation, and unknown in the treaties of truce, and since the trade in
the Indies was not permitted any foreign nation by any treaty . . . therefore
our State could not enjoy what was refused the subjects of the King.
Same, p. 336.
[December 15, 1646.] . . . After nine o'clock in the evening Mr. de Brun
sent me under cover the written reply ... as follows : . . .
To the fifth. That the Lords States will be permitted to recover all that
the Portuguese shall have occupied of theirs in IJrazil, His Majesty retain-
ing his rights over all that lie had tliere at the beginning of the Portuguese
rcbell ion. Same, p. 33^.
[December 20, 1646.] Mr. Andrada,the Ambassador of Portugal, visited me
privately upon the subject alone of the following memorandum . . . con-
taining a resiuest to include Prtiigal in our peace, and to co-operate in be-
half of Prince Edward of Portugal, who was in peril of being condemned for
crime. Same, p. 339,
REMONSTRANCES AND MEANING OF TREATIES. 221
MEANING OF TREATIES-TREATY OF MUNSTER, 1648-(Continued).
1646. Dutch Report on Peace Negotiations at Munster.
We are informed that Your Excellencies are hastening to conclude a peace
with the Catholic King [of Spain]. . . . We request that in them [the ncgc-
tialions] may be included our Lord the most Serene King of Portugal . .
let our Portugal, like Spain, enjoy a cessation of hostilities and breathing space
through the benign effects of a truce of thirty years, otherwise there will be no
lasting, safe, or perpetual peace. Finally do you so earnestly demand the release
of the Most Serene Infante Eduard that you may receive it. B. C.-C, App., jjg.
[24 December, 1646.] Received a visit on the same day from the Archbishop
of Cambrai and Mr. de Brun, the Spanish Ambassadors, and conferred upon the
Articles. . . . Also decided after various discussions concerning the fifth and
sixth Articles regarding East and W^est India to make a fair copy of the Articles
agreed upon in order to have them signed by both parties. . . . During this
conference Mr. Brun said in the course of conversation : " After the Peace we
will gladly make alliance with you to share Brazil, and perhaps more. ..."
After seven o'clock in the evening Mr. Brun returned, saying . . . that they
could not grant . . . what had been proposed by them respecting East and
West India, consisting of the words " ivitliout being- al)le to extend themselves
further," which they wished to delete and to add to the words " ivhich the
States may hereafter occupy from the Portuguese in the East Indies."
And to add to the sixth Article " As also in every island and continent which
the said Lords the King and States respectively possess." That this is their final
opinion . . . Mr. de Brun finally said . . . that the retention in Article
5 of the words " the Spanish shall remain within their limits " of itself included
the clause " without extending themselves further," . . . and that we ought
to be satisfied that if they remained within their limits no obligation should be
placed upon them not to extend themselves further ; Mr. Brun also said that the
words which he desired to add to the sixth Article "as also in every island and
continent " are of themselves included in the declaration set dow^n in the fifth
Article: " Each party shall retain his lands, places, merchandize in Asia, Africa,
America, Brazil, etc." Sa>ne, pp. J3g-J40.
1647. Count De Monte Rei.
I suggest whether it would not be advisable for the sole purpose of accom-
plishing the conclusion of peace with Holland, to announce a special Embassy