of Dr. Dorislaus, and the failure of its overtures looking to the union of the two peoples. A large proportion of the commodities imported into England, even by English merchants, was conveyed in the vessels of Holland, and this included the tobacco of Virginia.[1] The explanation of this fact was to be found in the greater cheapness of transportation in Dutch bottoms.[2] The Dutch Government protested with much earnestness against the ordinance of 1650, and the Act of 1651, but in vain, and these causes of irritation finally precipitated a war between the two countries. Before it began, Virginia had surrendered to the Commissioners of Parliament, one of the terms of submission granting to her people the full right of free trade.
To what extent was this right enjoyed by the Colony during the supremacy of the Protector?[3] That the right was claimed from the beginning is shown by the incident of Walter Chiles in 1652. Chiles had loaded his vessel on the Eastern Shore with a cargo of tobacco, which he intended to transport to Brazil. While lying in the waters of Accomac, the vessel was seized by Richard Husband, a shipmaster, on the ground that its owner had not obtained the license to trade with a foreign country which had been prescribed by the terms of the ordinance. Chiles at once presented a petition to the local court, alleging that the seizure of his property was wholly illegal, because, under the articles of submission, the right to an absolute free trade had been conferred on the people of the Colony. This reason was admitted by the judges
- ↑ Anderson’s History of Commerce, vol. II, p. 415.
- ↑ Public Good without Private Interest, p. 14.
- ↑ It would appear from the note to Virginia and Maryland, pp. 46, 47, Force’s Historical Tracts, vol. II, that the grant of free trade was confirmed by Parliament. The last but not the first part of article seven of the terms of surrender was denied. See p. 47.
