X. 1664. CHAP. themselves superior privileges. The East India Company pleaded loss in goods and ships taken by the Dutch since 1656, to the amount of 148,000l., and 87,000l. more by the destruction of factories: the Turkey Company pleaded loss of 110,500l.: the unincorporated traders to Africa complained of losses to the immense amount of 330,000l.: Portugal merchants of the seizure of a ship, worth 16,000l.: and 23,000l., which was demanded as compensation for the fruitless mission of two ships to secure possession of the island of Poleron, long since agreed to be given up, but still retained by the Dutch, swelled the aggregate of damages to the sum of 714,500l. The Royal African Company made no specific statement of pecuniary loss, but complained of insults and obstructions on the coast of Africa; and that the Dutch "have lately taken into their hands, "and do now possess, the fort of Cabo Corço, “which doth rightfully belong to the English.” * Upon these representations the two Houses of Parliament concurred in voting, "That the wrongs, "dishonours, and indignities done to his Majesty, 66 by the subjects of the United Provinces, by in"vading of his rights in India, Africa, and else"where, and the damages, affronts, and injuries "done by them to our merchants, are the greatest "obstruction of our foreign trade;" and praying the King to "take some speedy and effectual "means for the redress thereof, and for the pre"vention of the like in future." In reply, the Lords' Journals, April 22. 1664. + Ibid. pro X. King expressed approbation of their zeal, and CHAP. mised inquiry into their complaints; and that his minister at the Hague should be instructed to demand speedy reparation, and prevention of the like in future.* The Dutch were previously aware that complaints would be laid before the English Parliament; and, if we may believe the testimony of Downing, expressed alarm at the possible consequences of the inquiry, and the current rumours of impending war. Shortly afterwards Downing wrote that they were buoyed up by false persuasions that the complaints of the merchants are not backed by the King, the ministers, or by persons of judgment and influence in England‡; and that strong resolutions by the English Parliament can alone cure them of this delusion. § De Witt, as Downing informs us, was "mightily nettled" by the Parliamentary resolutions, but gratified by the temperate tone of the King's reply. The stock of the Dutch East India Company, which had fallen in price at the former announcement, rose again at the latter; and De Witt told Downing, "that since his Majesty had so tenderly expressed himself, that for his part he would, upon "that account, condescend so much the more to give him satisfaction." ¶ Nor did these words 66 66 * Lords' Journals, April 29. 1644. Letter CXXXIX., Vol. III. p. 299. 1664. CHAP. 1664. seem insincere. * The King of France had also offered to become a mediator between England and the Dutch; and probably was, at this time, sincerely anxious to preserve peace. Though he could not in 1662 prevent a treaty between those nations, yet the mutual dislike which he had wished to foster had recently thriven beyond his hopes, and he did not wish that it should blaze forth into actual war. By his treaty with the States, in April 1662, he had bound himself, in the event of the Dutch going to war with any other nation (such nation being the aggressor), to break with it also within four months after the first requisition for assistance. || He was therefore D'Estrades, ii. 364–368. 474. Letter CXL., Vol. III. afraid of being involved in hostilities, and was anxious to prevent such aggression on the part of England as might enable Holland to claim the stipulated aid. Accordingly, he offered to mediate ; directed D'Estrades to represent forcibly to the States the risk attendant upon a war with England, and charged his ambassador, Cominges, with the same office at the court of London.* Such was the position of affairs in the summer of 1664. The ostensible unsettled grounds of dispute were trifling; the interests of both countries were opposed to wart, and a powerful mediator was prepared to second a peaceful adjustment. Accommodation, therefore, might have been easy, if private interests and private pique, and the malign influence of powerful individuals, concurring in direction with the popular feeling, had not conspired to counteract it. * D'Estrades, ii. 374, 375. 381, 382, 383. 404. 407. Mém. de Louis XIV., ii. 5, 6. + Pepys, ii. 183. D'Estrades, ii. 373. CHAP. X. 1663. CHAP. XI. 1664. INFLUENCE OF THE DUKE OF YORK. AFRICAN COMPANY.— XI. 1664. CHAP. THE Duke of York and Sir George Downing were those whose will, power, and opportunity rendered them the chief promoters of the Dutch war. Charles, although he disliked the party now ruling in Holland, because they had treated him uncourteously in his exile*, because they were opposed to the interests of his nephew, and had permitted the publication of caricatures reflecting with a biting truth upon his wastefulness and profligacy †, yet, as is admitted in the Life of James, "was "not much inclined to a war." The reproach of having promoted it belongs chiefly to the Duke of York. His motives were various. He disliked the Dutch, he loved war §, and he had private |