from customs be granted to the people of a colony in importing their commodities into the mother country, but also that they should be allowed the privilege of conveying these commodities to the markets, whether of their own or a foreign nationality, where they would secure the highest prices. It is not necessary to enter into any discussion as to how far England, in return for the expense of founding Virginia and sustaining and protecting it in its infancy, had an equitable claim to a monopoly of its products. As was seen in the dispute between James and the Company in 1621, with respect to the shipment of tobacco to Holland without payment of the English duties, it was boldly affirmed that the planters had an inherent and immemorial right to transport their crops whithersoever they preferred. Not even citizens of the mother country, however, had possessed this right unconditionally. As far back as the age of Richard the Second, a law had been passed which provided, that no goods should be exported from or imported into England except in vessels that acknowledged allegiance to the English King.[1] The object of this law was to increase the English mercantile marine, and a long course of legislation followed having the same purpose in view. In time, the principle embodied in this legislation was the ground for the absolute denial to the colonists of the right, which they insisted upon in 1621, of transporting their commodities to such markets as were most consonant with their interests. This right they did not necessarily have because they were Englishmen, since their first obligation when shipping their products may have been to the mother country, in consequence of the assistance and protection afforded them. The mother country, on the other hand, was an independent state, holding political and
- ↑ 5 Richard II, Stat. I, ch. 3.
