No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Early Dutch Prize Law: Some Thoughts on a case before the Court of Holland and the Grand Council of Mechelen (1477–1482)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 May 2009
Extract
Little is known about the law of prize applied in Holland and Zealand before a Court of Admiralty was established in 1488. Even as regards the functioning of this institution, the so-called ‘Admiralty of Vere’, our knowledge is scanty. Yet, the prize law of the Low Countries in the 15th and 16th centuries is not an unimportant subject for research. It is certain that precedents from this period had a considerable influence on Dutch practice after 1572, i.e., during the Republic's war against Spain. Even though the subject of prize law proper has been rather neglected in the otherwise well-studied ‘Golden Age’ of Dutch history, it is evident that the Dutch Republic, a first-rate maritime power, did much to shape important rules of International Law, such as the famous maxims that “blockades must be effective” and that “free ships make free goods”. Obviously, it would be interesting to uncover the historical roots of these much-debated principles of the International Law of maritime warfare. Moreover, an added zest is given to the study of Dutch prize law by its inevitable association with Grotius. His De Jure Praedae, in spite of its promising title, reveals less about Grotius' historical studies than De Jure Belli ac Pads in which a 1438 decision of the Court of Holland concerning the treatment of neutrals is twice quoted.
- Type
- Notes and Shorter Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1980
References
1. See the list of sources in Maritieme Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, I (Bussum 1976) pp. 351, M352.Google Scholar An extensive survey on Prize Law in the Netherlands until 1572 is contained in the as yet unpublished study of Wit, J.Th., Recht door zeeGoogle Scholar, written at the conclusion of his studies at the “Vrije Universiteit” of Amsterdam. I thank Mr. Wit for permission to consult his essay.
2. See, however, Bromley, J.S., “Les corsaires zélandais et la navigation scandinave pendant la guerre de succession d'Espagne”, in Le Navire et l'Economie Maritime du Nord de l'Europe du Moyen-Age au XVIIIe siècle (Paris 1960)Google Scholar and idem, “The North Sea in Wartime (1688–1713)”, Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden XCII, 1977.Google Scholar
3. Oudendijk, J.K., “Blockaded Seaports in the History of International Law”, Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis XLII, 1974.Google Scholar For an attempt to force the “free ships, free goods” clause on Algiers, see eadem, “The Dutch Republic and Algiers, 1662–1664”, in Course et Piraterie, Etudes présentées à la Commission Internationale d'Histoire Maritime à l'occasion de son XVe colloque international, 3 vols. (Paris 1975).Google Scholar
4. Lib. Ill, I, para. V, 4, n.; Lib. III, VI; cf., Hübner, M., De la saisie des batimens neutres, 2 vols. (The Hague 1759) I p. 26.Google Scholar
5. Wellens, R., Les Etats Généraux des Pays-Bas des origines à la fin du règne de Philippe le Beau (1464–1506) (Heule 1974) p. 153 et seq.Google Scholar
6. See, Maes, L.Th., in 500 Jaar Grote Raad 1473–1973, record of the exposition at Mechelen, 1973 pp. 16, 17.Google Scholar
7. Groot Placaatboek, 10 vols. (The Hague 1658–1797) II, col. 661.Google Scholar
8. de la Roncière, C., Histoire de la Marine française, II (Paris 1900) p. 379Google Scholar; Degryse, R., “De admiraals en de eigen marine van de Bourgondische hertogen 1384–1488”, Marine Academie van België, Mededelingen XVII, 1965 p. 176.Google Scholar
9. Andries, J.C., Inventaris en beschrijving van de processtukken (dossiers behorende tot de beroepen uit Holland berustende in het archief van de Grote Raad van Mechelen, II (Amsterdam 1964).Google Scholar This volume is part of the series published by the working-group ‘Grote Raad’ at Amsterdam, director J.Th. de Smidt. On this impressive attempt to furnish indexes to the records of the Grote Raad see, Chronologische Lijsten van de geëxtendeerde sententiën en procesbundels berustende in het archief van de Grote Raad van Mechelen, I (1465–1504), (1966)Google Scholar, Werken der Vereeniging tot uitgaaf der bronnen van het oud-vaderlandsche recht derde reeks nr. 21 p. XVI et seq. The files of the Grote Raad concerning Holland and Zealand have been microfilmed. These copies are kept at the Amsterdam Record Office. For a description of case with which we are concerned see, Andries, , op.cit., p. 108.Google Scholar For the participation of only the three North Holland towns in the fitting out of the Trygo (not, as Andries suggests, of Brouwershaven too) see, document 108 h.
10. Document 108b. This document, the decision of the Court of Holland, also in Algemeen Rijksarchief, The Hague, Sententiën van het Hof 1477–1480, fol, 281, 103. See also, Smit, H.J., Bronnen tot de geschiedenis van den handel met Engeland, Schotland en Ierland I, ii (The Hague 1928)Google Scholar Rijks Geschiedkundige Publicatiën Grote Serie 66 p. 1188 and n.
11. Document 108b: “den kapitain mitten ruyteren (i.e., men at arms) vanden selven scepe (the Trygo) inden herst lestleden leggende onder den kust van Engeland omme den voersegden vianden te wachten, soe soude de voersegde cappiteyn een weet gedaen geweest hebben te weeten dat hij wel toesaege hem soude een goede pot wijns thuys komen, uuyt welcke woorden dat nae genie en verstande ende begrijpe te verstaen soude wesen als dat hem zijne vianden goet in handen komen soude. Ende korts nae desen soe soude een geheeten Jan Baldry gecomen wesende zeylen mitten scepe daevan dat is questie waer uuyt die havenen van Lonnen (i.e., London) in Engeland geladen met der viande convoien, provianden ende andere goeden dienende in den lande van Vranckrijk ende twelck als wel te presumeren was den voersegden Franchoesen toebehoorde” … (italics added).
12. Ibid.: “Jan Baldry … bekennende tvoersegde scip Trygo zoe soude hij geweygert hebben henluyden in sijnen scepe te laeten ende soude mit steenen geworpen als viant wesende ende hunluyden afgeslagen hebben, seggende ende roupende: comet an, hoeren Flaminck, ic saldy killen” …
13. Document 108h; Smit, loc.cit.
14. This William Baldry was probably the defendant in proceedings before the Parliament of Paris in 1459. On this case, Dumas, A., “Deux procès de prises maritimes à l'epoque de la guerre de Cent Ans”, Revue générale de Droit International Public XVI, 1909 p. 38 et seq.Google Scholar
15. The jurisdiction of the Court of Holland seems to have rested on a special permission by which English merchants were allowed to initiate proceedings before the Court of Holland. Smit, , op.cit., p. 1140.Google Scholar In a similar trial (Andries, , op.cit., 109)Google Scholar the town of Gouda invoked the Grand Privilege of 1477 (vide supra n. 7) and argued that the case should first be tried before the town's own judicature. This was rejected by the Court. See, however, Degryse, , op.cit., n. 137Google Scholar for a case in which the town magistrates of Nieuwpoort (in Flanders) had indeed tried a similar complaint by English merchants.
16. A good impression of what is to be found in the Court's registers is given in de Blécourt, A.S. and Meijers, E.M., Memorialen van het Hof (den Raad) van Holland, Zeeland en West-Friesland, van den secretaris Jan Rosa (Haarlem 1929).Google Scholar Documents produced by the parties were not filed by the Court of Holland.
17. These also are far from being complete. See, de Schepper, H., “De Grote Raad van Mechelen, hoogste rechtscollege in de Nederlanden?”, Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden XCIII, 1978 p. 398.Google Scholar
18. Vide supra n. 10.
19. Document 108b: “Soe was gebuert dat die kappiteynen vanden scepe van oorloge toegemaect ende ter zee gereyt tegens den Koninck van Vranckrijk ende sijne geallegierden by den voersegden landen van Holland, Zeelland ende Vriesland tvoersegde Engelsche scip gesyen gehad soude hebben ende omme te weten wie tvoersegde scip wesen soude ende wat goederen ende coopmanscippen dattet an hebben mochte, soe souden zij tvoersegde scip gelouft ende angehaelt hebben ende souden die selve kappiteynen inder waerheyt bevonden hebben by zekere brieven van certificacien vander voersegde stad van Rowaen dattet voersegde scip soe mitten goeden ende koopmanscippen daerinne wesende toebehoerde den voersegden eyschers ende hoeren factoiren ende dienaeren ende mits desen soe hadden zy den voersegden eyschers oorlof gegeven omme mit hoeren scepe te zeylen daer hunluyden dat beliefde” (italics added).
20. Ibid.; behind these demands, of course, the threat of English reprisals always loomed large. See, Smit, , op. cit., p. 1141.Google Scholar
21. Document 108b: “soude mitten selven sijnen koopmanscippen ende goeden geseylt seyn tot Rouwaen die vianden waren vanden voersegden landen van Holland Zeelland ende Vriesland mits twelcke hij hem gedragen soude hebben als viant vande selve landen” …
22. Vide supra n. 11.
23. Cf., Dumas, A., Etude sur le jugement des prises maritimes en France jusqu'à la suppression de l'office d'Amiral (1627) (Paris 1908) p. 88 et seq.Google Scholar
24. Document 108h. r.
25. This was perhaps the reason why the four towns did not try to deny their responsibility. Gouda, in the case mentioned above (vide supra n. 15) tried to put all blame on the captain and crew.
26. It is the accepted opinion that Dutch courts did not pronounce reasoned decisions. See, W.G.Ph. Wedekind, Bijdrage tot de kennis van de ontwikkeling van de procesgang in civiele zaken voor het Hof van Holland in de eerste helft van de zestiende eeuw (Assen 1971) p. 130. Also, but putting more emphasis on the wording of the sentence, de Smidt, J.Th. and Huussen, A.H. Jr., “De Grote Raad van Mechelen als hoogste rechtscollege in de Nederlanden”, Holland II, 1970 p. 98.Google Scholar
27. The decision provides for a future valuation of the cargo by the Court.
28. Vide supra n. 19.
29. Kerling, N.J.M., Commercial relations of Holland and Zeeland with England from the late 13th century to the close of the Middle Ages (Leiden 1954) p. 46 et seq.Google Scholar
30. Arend, J.P., Algemeene Geschiedenis des Vaderlands, IV, I (Leiden 1877) p. 208.Google Scholar
31. Rymer, T., Foedera, V, I and II (The Hague 1741) iv p. 85Google Scholar: “subditi unius principum praedictorum … non adducent vel adduci facient per mare fraudulose, vel quocunque colore, aliqua bona seu mercandisas inimicorum alterius eorundem principum. Et, si secus egerint et per subditos alterius principis guerrae licite operam dantes super haec interrogati fuerint, tenebuntur facere veram, planam ac justam confessionem et declarationem, cui in ea parte pro tune stabitur, iidemque interrogantes ulterius scrutinium in ea parte non facient. Sed si postea eundem interrogatum falso respondisse constiterit, tunc idem interrogatus interroganti, quem per falsam responsionem defraudavit, tantum de suo erogare tenebitur quantum merces inimicorum per eum vectas, et ut praemittitur, celatas, valuisse constabit.”
32. Rymer, , op.cit., ii p. 151Google Scholar: “les marchans, maistres des nefs et mariners de la partie d'Angleterre ne admeneront, par fraude ou colour quelconques ascuns biens ou marchandises des estraungers ennemis des Brabanthonnois, Flamengs, de ceulx de Malines, ou des pays de mon dit Seigneur. Et, si ils en estoient demandés par aucuns de Brabant, Flandres, Malines ou des autres pays dessusdites, ils en feront juste confession, comme dit est, etc. “The same applies for Dutchmen if England is at war. This clause, quoted in the French text of 1468 was reproduced in 1478 (Rymer, , op.cit., iii p. 88).Google Scholar
33. It was binding on the successors of King Edward IV and Charles the Bold, as well as on their dominions (Rymer, , op.cit, ii p. 149).Google Scholar
34. This was laid down in Art. V of the ordinance of 1488, Groot Placaatboek, IV p. 1210.Google Scholar As Holland constantly refused to recognize the Admiralty jurisdiction, even the ordinance of 1488 did not end all doubts in this respect.
35. Stengers, J., “Composition, procédure et activité judiciaire du Grand Conseil de Marie de Bourgogne pendant les trois premières années de son existence (février 1477–février 1480)”, Bulletin de la Commission royale d'histoire CIX, 1944.Google Scholar
36. Document 109 I: “Ende voirt meer zoe wanneer yemandt van den geenen die up dese tijt uutleggende zijn upter zee of geweest hebben van weghen ende inden naem van onsen voirscreven landen ende steden van Hollant, Zeellant ende Vrieslant of andere die bij hem selven uutgevaeren sijn geweest, wederkeren uut der zee ende incomen in eenich van onse voirscreven havenen, dat ghij alsdan yegelic binnen uwen bedrive omme die meeste versekertheit van dien doet ende doet doen goede ernstighe visiteringhe ende ondersoeck in hoeren scepen ende indien aldair bevonden worden enige goeden of coopmanscepen toebehoerende den voirscreven ingeseten van Engelant ende oick anderen van onsen aliantien ende vruntscap ende die gheen vianden goeden en zijn, zoo willen wij ende gebieden u … dat ghij alle die goeden ende coopmanscepen tierstens ende sonder vertreck neemt ende stelt in onsen handen” … (italics added).
37. Cf., Verzijl, J.H.W., Het Prijsrecht tegenover neutralen in den Wereldoorlog van 1914 en volgende jaren (The Hague 1917) p. 232.Google Scholar
38. van Rompaey, J., ‘De procedure in beroep bij het Parlement van Mechelen’, in Consilium Magnum 1473–1973 (Brussels 1977) p. 379.Google Scholar As late as 1514, however, the fine had not yet been paid. Gonnet, C.J., Inventaris van het archief der stad Hoorn (Haarlem 1918) p. 479.Google Scholar
39. Andries, , op.cit., 114.Google Scholar
40. Document 114b sub xxiv: “dattet Fransche goeden geweest zijn, gemerct dat zij geene suffisante noch behoirelicke ostensie gedaen en hebben die men in rechte sculdich is volcomen gelooff te geven, dat de voirscreven goeden hunlieden toebehoeren ende dattet Engelsche goeden zijn, wair omme also die uuyt Vranckrijck gehaelt zijn, te presumeren is dattet Fransche goeden zijn”.
41. Ibid, sub xxv.
42. Vide supra n. 31 and 32.
43. Document 114b sub xxvii: “Item ymmer te minsten te veimoeden ende presumeren is dat zij enige Fransche goeden in gehadt hebben, welke Fransche goeden hoe luttel dat die geweest zijn, die hebben alle die andere vrije goeden nair die custume vanden waterrechte ende oick naer beschreven rechte ontvrijt.” Digests XXXIX, IV, xi was quoted. The same quotation also appears in De Jure belli ac pacis lib. III, VIGoogle Scholar, para. VI, n. and in Valin, R.J., Nouveau commentaire sur l'ordonnance de la marine du mois d'août 1681, II (La Rochelle 1766) p. 253.Google Scholar
44. Vide supra p. 3.
45. Document 108h. The case of the Mary Hampton petered out into a protracted debate on the amount of damages, the English protesting against the Court's first valuation of the ship and her cargo. The Grand Council gave judgment in this second case on 22 January 1482. See, Handt-vesten van Enchuysen (Enkhuizen 1667) p. 38 et seq.Google Scholar
In the case of Haarlem, and Leiden, (quoted supra n. 39)Google Scholar the decision of the Court is not recorded, nor do we know anything about the proceedings before the Grand Council.
46. Sandbergen, F.J.W., Nederlandsche en Nederlandsch-Indische scheepsnationaliteit (Leyden 1931) p. 17Google Scholar; de Meij, J.C.A.. De Watergeuzen en de Nederlanden 1568–1572 (Amsterdam 1972) p. 124.Google Scholar
47. Böhringer, K.H., Das Recht der Prise gegen Neutrale in der Praxis des Spätmittelalters dargestellt anhand Hansischer Urkunden, (Frankfurt 1970).Google Scholar
48. Verwijs, E., De oorlogen van hertog Albrecht van Beieren met de Friezen in de laatste jaren der XVe eeuw (Utrecht 1869)Google Scholar, Werken Historisch Genootschap nieuwe reeks 8 p. LXV.
49. The carriage of war material to the enemy of course always remained forbidden.
50. See, for example, the comical error in Jessup, P.C. and Deák, F., Neutrality, its history, economics and law (New York 1935) p. 35 n. 70.Google Scholar Interpreting the Algerine-Dutch treaty of 1622 by a comparison with other treaties of commerce they do not appreciate that the list of “contraband” given there has quite another meaning than the usual one. It is not a list of goods whose transport to an enemy destination renders neutral ships liable to capture, but an enumeration of war materials which the Algerine authorities admitted to Algiers free of duties!