Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Great Conversion

  • Chapter
At Spes non Fracta

  • 33 Accesses

Abstract

The departure for England of the partners of Hope & Co. in the latter part of October 1794, and of the managers, Pierre César Labouchère and Alexander Baring, on the night of 18th January 1795, heralded a temporary suspension of the Company’s activities on behalf of the Empress of Russia. The invasion by French troops did not come as a surprise to the Company, which some time beforehand had taken steps to ensure that, as far as possible, its assets and property were placed beyond the reach of the French or of any new, revolutionary government in the Republic. Among the consequences of this action was that, for the first time, Hope & Co. were unable to make payments of interest on loans. In response to questions from bondholders, Paulus Taay, Hope’s confidential clerk, who remained behind to look after day-to-day matters in the Republic, was obliged to announce that there was as yet no information regarding the payment of interest on the Russian bonds. However, an advertisement placed by the partners informed the holders that the interest vouchers which matured on 1st February and 1st May were redeemable at the house of Martin Dorner in Hamburg, and that subsequent instalments would also be paid via that house.1 For the Dutch investors, this was a roundabout procedure involving extra expense, but at least it safeguarded the payments by making it impossible for the invaders or the revolutionary government, which by then had taken office, to seize the monies remitted from Russia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

Chapter Six Page 155

  1. Letter of 2nd May 1795 from Maria Hoogland, Den Helder, to Paulus Taay, Amsterdam. Letter of 28th May 1795 from Paulus Taay, Amsterdam, to Maria Hoogland, Den Helder.

    Google Scholar 

Page 156

  1. Infra, Appendix D-v.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Breakdown of the loan to Oginski, furnished by P. de Haan Pietersz. to R. Voûte: The ‘oeconomy’ of Wilnenska, in the wojewodztwo of Wilno Pol. f. 3,300,000 Rakow and Isabelin in the wojewodztwo of Minsk Pol. f. 3,000,000 Chozow, Wigowice, Puzeli, Oborek and Bielew in the Osmiana district At an estimated 18 Polish guilders to one ducat, Pol. f. 8,300,000 was equivalent to cf 2, 421,000. In Lithuania the courts of law valued estates at twenty times the estimated annual yield. Letter of 11th April 1796 from Willink’s agent in Grodno to J.A.Willink, Warsaw.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jan Abraham Willink was the son of Willem Willink, of the house of Willem and Jan Willink in Amsterdam. V.Winter, Aandeel, n, 268, 491. Concerning Repnin: Amburger, Geschichte Behördenorganisation, 392.

    Google Scholar 

Page 157

  1. Letter of 9th January 1796 from J.A.Willink, Warsaw, to P. de Haan Pietersz., Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letter of 11th April 1796 from Willink’s agent in Grodno to J.A.Willink, Warsaw. Oginski had bought the ‘oeconomy’ of Wilno from the princes Charles and Hieronymus Radziwill on 14th January 1790 for 3,400,000 Polish guilders. It had been given to the vendors in heriditary ownership by the sejm, in settlement of half their claim against the Republic, which totalled 4,000,000 Polish guilders. After mortgaging the ‘oeconomy,’ Oginski sold all the estates of which it consisted, with the exception of one, Garne, which was valued at 250,000 Polish guilders; in June 1795 this was awarded to Mme.Derkassowa in settlement of her claim of 150,000 Polish guilders against Oginski.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Of the estates in Minsk, Rakow was confiscated by the empress and given to General Soltikov, while between January and March Oginski sold to various persons Isabelin for 250,000 Polish guilders, Chozow for 120,000, and Wigowice and Bielew for 77,000. Puzeli and Oborek had been confiscated and were administered by the Treasury.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Letter of 24th March 1796 from J.A.Willink, Warsaw, to P. de Haan Pietersz., Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

Page 158

  1. De Haan instructed Willink to dismiss his agent in Grodno on the grounds that he was too expensive, but Willink persisted in his view that negotiations in St.Petersburg could only bear fruit if a document from the Supreme Court in Lithuania, which proved the validity of De Haan’s claims, could be produced. As late as 30th July 1796, by which time Voûte was already on his way to Russia, Willink sent memoranda on these lines to Repnin and to the empress. He probably did so in an attempt to obtain at least part of the bonus which was threatening to elude him. Letter of 6th May 1796 from J.A.Willink, Warsaw, to P. de Haan Pietersz., Amsterdam. ‘Emprunt d’Oginski,’ May (?) 1796.

    Google Scholar 

  2. G.A. Amsterdam, Not. Arch., 15145-139. Voûte had earlier been empowered by Hope & Co. to act in the matter of the Polish loan of 1786.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Infra, Appendix D-v. Details of the various loans also appeared in the procuratorial deed dated 13th May 1796.

    Google Scholar 

Page 159

  1. G.A. The Hague, Not. Arch., 3893-48.

    Google Scholar 

  2. ‘Emprunt d’Oginski,’ May (?) 1796. ‘Mémoire pour Monsieur Robert Voûte,’ undated. (Both are in De Haan’s handwriting). Remarks (undated) made by R.Voûte to P. de Haan Pietersz. with reference to J.A.Willink’s letter of 24th March 1796.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lord, ‘Third Partition of Poland,’ 494, 498.

    Google Scholar 

Page 160

  1. 24th July 1796. Memorandum to Kalichev, Berlin, in Voûte’s handwriting, V.A. The first loan, which ran for 10 years, dated from 1st February 1788.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Story of the life of Robert Voûte by J.H.Veldhuyzen, V.A.Robert Voûte had also received an extremely warm welcome from Bagge during his first journey to Russia. Letters of 16th and 18th October 1794 from Bagge & Van Eyssel, St.Peterburg, to R.Voûte, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

Page 161

  1. Story by J.H.Veldhuyzen, V.A. The Russian envoy in Copenhagen prevented Pierre Voûte from travelling on to Hamburg. It is not clear whether he did so on his own initiative, or whether he acted on instructions. Letter of 6th September 1796 from Robert Voûte, St.Petersburg, to Hope & Co., London, V.A. Letter of 6th September 1796 from Robert Voûte, St.Petersburg, to P.F.Voûte, Amsterdam, V.A.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Story by J.H.Veldhuyzen, V.A. According to the author, Maria Feodorovna played an active role in the settlement of the Polish debts. She is said to have informed Voûte in a letter in July 1797 that Vasilyev had reported to the czar on the discussions and that the czar, as an expression of his satisfaction, had commanded that the’ souvenir’ (gift?) from Voûte be accepted. The empress consulted Voûte regarding the newly established-more accurately, the newly equipped-School of Commerce in Moscow, with which Count Sievers had also been concerned. The aim was said to be to modify the curriculum to bring it more into line with practice; such a change fitted in well with Voûte’s views as he had expressed these in Moscow back in 1793. Voûte’s friendship with Maria Feodorovna continued until his death. Blum, Sievers, IV, 472, 475, 477. Amburger, Geschichte Behördenorganisation, 163.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 15th/26th January 1797. Convention between the Czar of Russia and the King of Prussia, to which the German emperor became a party. V. A. d’Angeberg, Recueil des Traités et Actes diplomatiques concernant la Pologne (Paris, 1862), 403.

    Google Scholar 

Page 162

  1. The sum of the king’s debts was fixed at 34,000,000 Polish guilders in 1793. To this had meanwhile been added 3–4 years’ interest at 5 % per annum.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 30th June 1797. Acte de Cession between Alexei Vasilyev, Imperial Treasurer, and Robert Voûte, authorized agent of the creditors of the former Republic of Poland and a number of private individuals residing in the former Republic.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Letter of 8th November 1801 from R.Voûte, The Hague, to H.Hope, London. Concerning the positions of Bezborodko and Vasilyev: Amburger, Geschichte Behördenorganisation, 128, 210. Others also resented the influence which Robert Voûte was able to exert by reason of the support of the empress. On 12th November 1797, Count Rostopshin wrote to Vorontsov in London concerning ‘Woot, premier commis de Hope. Il est très protégé par l’Impératrice.’ Golovkine, Le règne de Paul Ier, 158, note I. In 1802, members of the Committee for Foreign Loans in St.Petersburg gave Bergien, a merchant in that city, to understand that at the time there had been great opposition to Voûte’s activities, and that he had been able to continue these only ‘par la Douairière,’ i.e. with the support of Maria Feodorovna. Czar Paul was by then dead. Letter of 18th February 1802 from J.C.Bergien, St.Petersburg, to R.Voûte, The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

Page 163

  1. Two orders for payment dated 30th March 1792, for 7,500 and 7,000 ducats respectively, at 5 % interest, issued against the king’s ‘oeconomies’ in Lithuania and accepted by Marcin Bedeni in his capacity of authorized agent for Prince Stanislaw Poniatowski, leaseholder of these ‘oeconomies,’ together with interest due since 1st August 1794. A draft dated 30th May 1792 issued by King Stanislaw in favour of Jean Meisner, in the sum of 23,000 ducats, together with overdue interest since 30th May 1793. An acknowledgement of indebtedness by King Stanislaw to C.A.Hasselgreen dated 30th November 1794 in the sum of 81, 329 ducats, payable over a period of 4 years and bearing 5 % interest. No interest had been paid. An acknowledgement of indebtedness by King Stanislaw to Theodoor Gülcher dated 26th September 1793 in the sum of 4,200 ducats et 6 % interest, payable by the Chambre des Finances; no interest had been paid. Four drafts dated 10th September 1793 issued by the Republic of Poland in favour of Jean Meisner and signed by R. de Glogowa, Grand Treasurer of Poland, and J.Okeczki and D.Kamieniecki, both commissioners of the Treasury, together amounting to 873,096.16 Polish guilders. Meisner owed 21,000 ducats to De Smeth and 5,000 ducats to Hasselgreen; other claims against him amounted to some 175,000 ducats. The transfer of these debts and also those embodied in the second Acte de Cession (infra, 165-166) enabled Meisner to settle with his creditors.

    Google Scholar 

Page 164

  1. Letter of 30th August 1797 from Hope & Co. London, to H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  2. A.A. Lobanov-Rostovski, Russia and Europe, 1789–1815 (Duke University Press, 1947) 16–17.

    Google Scholar 

Page 165

  1. Special instructions issued to Baron d’Asch, Privy Councillor, and Divov, a member of the Chancellery, both of whom were empowered by the czar to verify and liquidate the debts incurred by the Polish king and the former Republic of Poland. S.a., V.A.

    Google Scholar 

Page 166

  1. The loan to the Dowager Princess Jablonowska, amounting to cf 400,000 at 5 % interest, was negotiated in January 1792. Interest had been paid up to 1st January 1794. Repayment, at cf 40,000 annually, should have commenced in January 1795. The security provided for the loan comprised the estates of Siemiatycesk in the Drohi district of the wojewodztwo of Podlachie (which became Prussian territory following the partitions of Poland), and Kockesens in the wojewodztwo of Lublinsk, which passed to Austria under the partition. The securities provided for the other loans by Polish magnates are listed in Appendix D-VI.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 29th October 1797. Acte de Cession between Alexei Vasilyev, Imperial Treasurer, and Robert Voûte, relating to the debts of a number of Polish gentlemen. With the two actes, the czar accepted responsibility for debts totalling cf 15,907, 585.19.0 Meisner’s claim of 66,666f ducats or 1,200,000 Polish guilders against Marquis François Wielopolski had been transferred to Voûte by the creditor. Interest on this debt had been paid up to 31 st December 1797. The six bonds relating to Prince Dominique Radziwill bore interest at 7%. The principal totalled cf 523,953.17, and the arrears of interest from 27th April 1793 to 31 st December 1797 amounted to cf 171,463.17. After the signing of the convention on 29th October, Voûte continued to correspond at length with the Sobanski brothers, who had always paid the interest on their loan but had fallen into arrears owing to difficulties in remitting two instalments of principal. Through Voûte they requested, and obtained, permission from Vasilyev to continue to pay principal and interest to De Haan, who would remit the sums to De Smeth. As there were no facilities whatsoever for monetary transactions between Obodowka, where the brothers lived, and St.Petersburg (in fact, Amsterdam was nearer), they were given the option of making payments to the Court Bankers in Russia by means of drafts on Odessa, Riga or Moscow. In August 1798 the Sobanskis complained to Voûte that the local authorities were threatening to sell their property under an execution on the grounds that they had been dilatory in providing details of the income derived from the property. Voûte raised the matter with Vasilyev and succeeded in having the action of the local authorities brought to an end. Letters of 18th November 1797, 1st and 3rd February and 29th September 1798 from R.Voûte, St.Petersburg, to the Sobanski brothers, Obodowka; and of 10th December 1797, 16th January, 2nd February, 12th April, 5th May and 22nd August 1798 from the Sobanski brothers, Obodowka, to R. Voûte, St.Petersburg.

    Google Scholar 

Page 167

  1. 2nd November 1797. Eleven articles, in Robert Voûte’s handwriting, concerning the method of ‘reconstituting’ Russia’s foreign loans. Subscriptions to the 18th loan floated by Hope & Co. ultimately totalled cf 2,500,000.

    Google Scholar 

  2. The converted Polish loans all bore interest at 5 %. Of the converted Russian loans, 15 million guildersworth bore interest at 4½%, and 6 million guildersworth at 4 %. The rate of interest on the cf 3,000,000 loan from De Wolf in Antwerp was also 4½%.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Weeveringh, Geschiedenis Staatsschulden, 11, 848, quotes the following average market prices for bonds during the second half of 1797: Russian 5 % bonds: 93; Russia 1788, 4½%, with 1, 2 and 3 coupons: 94; Russia 1792, 4½%: 86. Thus the mean for the three types of loan was still just below 90.

    Google Scholar 

Page 168

  1. ‘Consideration relating to the commission granted to Hope for regulating Russia’s former debts,’ 1803. The matter of rewards to third parties is dealt with on page 179.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 15th January 1798: Ukase issued by Czar Paul 1 concerning Russia’s foreign debts. The sums involved in the ‘arrangements’ totalled cf 15,892, 414.1.0, which included Hope’s commission of cf 3,892, 414.1.0. To the latter must be added cf 330,000 in respect of repurchased bonds and cf 11,388, 19.0 in cash, bringing the total of the commission to cf 4,233, 803.0.0-the sum to which Voûte had earlier referred in his memorandum to Vasilyev. Letter of 15th May 1798 from Hope & Co. Amsterdam, to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Amburger, Geschichte Behördenorganisation, 452.

    Google Scholar 

Page 170

  1. Letter of 30th August 1797 from Hope & Co., London, to H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam. Letter of 22nd June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to R.Voûte, St.Petersburg. Two members of the new government, Van Langen and Vreede, did not, however, regard it as beneath their dignity to visit Amsterdam to investigate the possibilities for a trade agreement with Russia, ‘which, it had been suggested to the Government, could be realized through the influence of the citizen Voûte of Petersburg (who was held in high esteem by the Court), or alternatively to secure for our trade any commercial advantages, but this proved impossible to obtain …’ Memorandum from Van Langen, Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken, 11, 613.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 18th February 1798: Order from Czar Paul 1 to Chancellor Bezborodko and Treasurer Vasilyev concerning the payment of interest on Hope’s commission.

    Google Scholar 

  3. The commission now became cf 4,233,803 plus 6½% interest thereon (cf 275, 197) plus 6½% on this sum (cf 17,887.7.0), making cf 4,526,887.7 in all. Letter of 15th May 1798 to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 1.

    Google Scholar 

Page 172

  1. Count Golovkin, in his memoirs, described the conversion as ‘un désastreux projet’ (Golovkine, Le règne de Paul Ier, 157). In Le fils de la grande Cathérine, Paul Ier, Waliszewski refers to ‘Woot, un agent de la maison Hoop, théoricien chimérique ou filibustier adroit’ (p. 258). Waliszewski, however, appears not to have seen through the nature of the conversion. On the one hand he refers to the conversion of the old Russian debts (p. 255), while on the other (p. 257) he states that Paul 1 negotiated a new loan of cf 88,300,000 in Amsterdam in January 1797 (this should be 1798). As a result, the picture which he seeks to give of Russia’s finances under Paul 1 is completely distorted. According to the merchant Bergien, Vasilyev’s hostility towards the Company stemmed from dissatisfaction with the size of the gift presented to him and his wife. Letter of 18th February 1802 from J.C.Bergien, St.Petersburg, to R.Voûte, The Hague. Bearing in mind Voûte’s previous experiences at the Russian Court, the cause is more likely to have lain in intrigue and corruption on the part of others-for example, Rall.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Story by J.H.Veldhuyzen, V.A.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Waliszewski, Le fils de la grande Cathérine, 258 (1 pood was equivalent to 16.3 kilograms). Golovkine, Le règne de Paul Ier, 158. Waliszewski states that the entire plan was abandoned; but here he is mistaken, for a part of it was implemented (vide page 177). According to Golovkine, Voûte was the spiritual father of a plan to establish an aid bank, the function of which would be to protect the nobility against usurious practices. This it could do by giving loans on security of estates, and the interest and principal payments could be effected in interest-bearing bank paper issued by the aid bank. Waliszewski states that Bezborodko copied Voûte’s ideas. Blum, Sievers, III, 121, describes Prince Alexei Kurakin as the auctor intellectualis of the project, and states that the bank was actually established on 18th December 1797. It is said to have commenced operations on 1st March 1798 and to have issued bank paper to a value of 500 million roubles in the space of a few months. An unwarranted issue of bank paper such as this, however, is so contrary to Voûte’s ideas in this field that we are moved to cast doubt upon his role as the initiator of the proposal for the bank. His correspondence at that time contains no reference whatever to the matter.

    Google Scholar 

Page 173

  1. Letter of 15th May 1798 to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letter of 15th May 1798 to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 1. Letter of 13th April 1797 from J.J.Voûte, Jr., Amsterdam, to Hope & Co., London. 14th May 1798: Printed announcement by the Dorner heirs that payments, suspended on 3rd May under the moratorium, were to be resumed.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Letter of 8th May 1798 from H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, to Hope & Co., London.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Letter of 25th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 28. Story by J.H.Veldhuyzen, V.A.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 11th May 1798: List of houses which accepted responsibility for the credit of the house of Martin Dorner. Johannes Schubach, B(anco) M(arks) 150,000; J.P.Averhoff, BM. 100,000; J.Parish, BM. 100,000; Sieveking, BM. 50,000; Pierre Voûte, ‘für Voûte Velho Rall & Co.,’ BM. 300,000. The example set by these five houses was quickly followed by others: Joh.Gabe, BM. 50,000; M.J.Jenisch, BM. 50,000; Matthiessen & Sillem, ‘für einen Freund’ (namely Hope & Co.), BM. 150,000; B.Roosen, BM. 50,000. In a letter to Hope, John Parish claimed that the initiative for the subscription had emanated from him. Letter of 11th May 1798 from J.Parish, Hamburg, to Hope & Co., London.

    Google Scholar 

Page 174

  1. Letter of 12th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, A xxv, 61. Letters of 15th and 29th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to R.Voûte, St.Petersburg, A xxv, 20, 32. Insinger reported that gossips in Amsterdam were saying that Labouchère had gone to Hamburg purely in order to obtain preferential treatment of Hope’s claims. Letter of 5th June 1798 from H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, to P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Labouchère described Gabe, who had commenced his commercial career in Portugal, as a man like Insinger, except that he too easily allowed himself to be persuaded by those whom he trusted; this, however, did not detract from his solidity. Gabe could fill the role of liaison man between Baring, in London, and Amsterdam in the matter of the loans on the security of plantations on the island of St.Croix, which were referred to by the letters A and B, thus enabling interest on these loans to be paid in the Republic. As it was, Hope had entrusted the supervision of these loans to Insinger in Amsterdam. Letter of 19th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to R.Voûte, St.Petersburg, A xxv, 21. Lawaetz was rich and reliable, but he was more interested in acquiring a title than in recruiting new correspondents. Chapeaurouge owed his immense fortune to his connexions with the French Republic, and was now concerned to find a safe place for the money which he had earned in the face of such enormous risks. Letter of 19th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, A xxv, 66. Concerning the events surrounding Frau.Matthiessen: Letter of 19th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to R.Voûte, St.Petersburg, A xxv, 21. Concerning Pamela Fitzgerald and her husband: Dictionary of National Biography, xix (London, 1889), 110-111, 142-143. Insinger described Matthiessen & Sillem as ‘being somewhat too deeply involved in French affairs.’ Letter of 5th June 1798 from H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, to P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg.

    Google Scholar 

Page 175

  1. Letter of 19th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to R.Voûte, St.Petersburg, A xxv, 21. Sillem Jr.’s forename generally appears as Jerôme, but this is a later Frenchification.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letter of 19th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to R.Voûte, St.Petersburg, A xxv, 21.

    Google Scholar 

Page 176

  1. Letter of 12th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, A xxv, 61. Letters of 15th, 26th and 29th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to R.Voûte, St.Petersburg, A xxv, 20, 31, 32. Letter of 25th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 28. When Hope’s account with Dorner was closed on 31st December 1798, there remained a credit of cf 908.15 in favour of Hope. Thus matters had straightened themselves out completely. The Russian Court ultimately proved to owe a small sum to Dorner. Grootboek 1798: 15. Roosegaarde Bisschop, Opkomst Londensche geldmarkt, 104-105.

    Google Scholar 

  2. In England, where the Company was not active, it availed itself of the services of Harman & Co. and Sir Francis Baring & Co.

    Google Scholar 

Page 177

  1. Letter of 30th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to Matthiessen & Sillem, Hamburg, A xxv, 15. In his correspondence with Voûte Velho Rall & Co., Labouchère sketched Voûte as the man who had a great deal of influence with the emperor and who was completely au fait with Hope’s thinking. To Baron Von Nikolai, Czar Paul’s former tutor, Labouchère also sang Voûte’s praises, emphasizing his important role in the firm of Court Bankers and the fact that he, ‘homme d’affaires, sans prétentions, instruit, intègre et indépendant,’ exerted an influence on the Court in spite of the fact that he lacked the manner which characterized the ‘courtisan achevé.’ Letter of 5th June 1798 to Voûte Velho Rall & Co., St.Petersburg, VI, 24. Letter of 5th June 1798 to Baron de Nikolai, St.Petersburg, VI, 25.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letter of 29th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to R.Voûte, St.Petersburg, A xxv, 32. Letter of 30th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to Matthiessen & Sillem, A xxv, 11.

    Google Scholar 

Page 178

  1. Gabe’s correspondence from Hamburg regarding the St.Croix loans was also to be addressed to James Smith. The St.Croix loans A and B were to be referred to as ‘Account A’ in correspondence with Insinger, and Hope was to be known as ‘our friend.’ J.J.Voûte Jr. was instructed to remit the interest on 100 Russian bonds to A.I.v.d. Hoeven of Rotterdam, an uncle of Thomas Hope. Voûte was to retain the coupons pertaining to these bonds, but to send the relevant certificates to Matthiessen & Sillem. This procedure would make it impossible for the Batavian government to seize the bonds, while ensuring that V.d. Hoeven received his interest. Letters of 30th June 1798 to J.Gabe, Hamburg, A xxv, 80, and of 29th June 1798 to J.J.Voûte, Jr., Amsterdam, A xxv, 90.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letter of 29th June 1798 to H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, A xxv, 70. As Robert Voûte had been in 1795, Insinger was instructed to furnish Taay with advice and funds whenever he might require these.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Letter of 12th June 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Hamburg, to H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, A xxv, 61. Letter of 6th July 1798 from P.C.Labouchère, Bremen, to J.J.Voûte, Jr., Amsterdam, A xxv, 90. Letter of 25th September 1798 from P. Voûte, Amsterdam, to Hope & Co., London. Pierre de Smeth took his brother-in-law, Willem van de Poll, into partnership with effect from 1st January 1799, a step which, in Hope’s opinion, would afford De Smeth the long-desired ‘tranquillité de l’esprit’ and ‘loisir’-a need for rest which, as we have seen, was also present in the firm in 1788. In August 1799, Hope congratulated De Smeth on his safe return to Amsterdam after a long holiday. Letters of 5th October 1798 and 13th August 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to Pierre de Smeth, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Golovkine, Le règne de Paul Ier, 174. Waliszewski, Le fils de la grande Cathérine, 202. Character sketch of Paul 1 in Robert Voûte’s handwriting, V.A.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Story by J.H.Veldhuyzen, V.A. Letters of 7th December 1798 and 22nd January 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to R. and Th. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 51, 55. Letters of 17th February and 23rd March 1801 from R. Voûte, London, to J.C.Bergien, St.Petersburg. Following Pierre Voûte’s resignation, the title of the firm was changed to Velho Rall & Rogovikov. Robert Voûte’s difficulties with Vasilyev and Rall resulted in his becoming ill; the circumstances of his indisposition were thus similar to those which had felled him in 1794 and 1796.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Letter of 8th March 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to Matthiessen & Sillem, Hamburg, VI, 66.

    Google Scholar 

Page 179

  1. Letters of 30th May and 25th June 1798 from Hope & Co., London, to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 9, 28. Letter of 23rd November 1798 from Hope & Co., London, to David Berck, Amsterdam, VI, 47. Letters of 7th December 1798 and 22nd January 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 51, 55. Letter of 25th January 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to the Committee for Foreign Loans, St.Petersburg, VI, 63.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letters of 4th June and 26th July 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 75, 92. Letter of 14th June 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 76. Letter of 26th July 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to the Committee for Foreign Loans, St.Petersburg, VI, 96. On 25th June 1799, Vasilyev wrote to say that the principal debenture had been received from De Wolf. Hope thereupon received 4 % commission plus 6½% commission on the 4 %, i.e. cf 120,000 + cf 7,800. On 5th July 1798, the principal debenture was entered in the Register of Private Deeds kept by the Town Clerk of Amsterdam (folio 66v). It was exempted from stamp duty or ‘Kleinzegel’ by a decree of 23rd March 1798 issued by the National Assembly, which at that time was known as the Constituent Assembly. The bonds bore a 6-stuiver stamp.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Deed enacted before W.v. Homrigh, notary, on 10th December 1798.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Letters of 12th and 16th March, 14th June and 13th August 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 67, 72, 76, 100. Hope wished to give a ring costing between ten and fifteen thousand guilders. As the original plan provided for Von Stackelberg to stay on in Amsterdam, perhaps for between one and two years, the offer to assume responsibility for his domestic expenses involved a sum of 10-15,000 guilders, i.e. the same as the cost of the ring. However, the circumstances of war forced Von Stackelberg to leave Amsterdam in November 1799. Letter of 22nd November 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 136.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Letters of 7th December 1798, 12th March, 14th June and 13th August 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 51, 67, 76, 100. Letter of 13th August 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to D.Berck, Amsterdam, VI, 107. Letter of 26th August 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to R.Voûte, London, VI, 112. 6 Notary van Beem was dissatisfied with the seven thousand guildersworth of bonds intended for him. His reaction was extremely unpleasant for the partners, who wished to satisfy all concerned. Their desire will certainly have been allied to the delicate position in which the Company then found itself. The correspondence and copy files which we have examined contain no reference to a reward for Insinger, but this can scarcely have been less than the 100 bonds given to J.J.Voûte, Jr. According to later accounts, Vasiliev’s feud with Hope was exacerbated by the ‘gift’ which, in Vasilyev’s opinion, was too small (supra, 172, note 1).

    Google Scholar 

Page 180

  1. Letter of 5th October 1798 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 38. Letter of 5th October 1798 from Hope & Co., London, to Vasilyev, St.Petersburg, VI, 40. Letter of 23rd November 1798 from Hope & Co., London, to D.Berck, Amsterdam, VI, 47. Letter of 20th October 1798 from H.A.Insinger, Amsterdam, to Hope & Co., London. Weeveringh, Geschiedenis Staatsschulden, 11, 848, dealing with the three types of Russian loan which were individually quoted during the first six months of 1798, gives the following prices: 5 per cent, 92; 4½ per cent, 86; 4 per cent, 84. This author states that during the second half of 1798, when, following the conversion, only the 5 % type was quoted, the average price fell to 86, a decline of 6 %. Insinger refers to an even sharper fall.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letters of 22nd January and 26th March 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 55, 72. Letter of 25th January 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to the Committee for Foreign Loans, St.Petersburg, VI, 63. The interest totalled cf 2,492,462.10.0. During the Spring of 1799, the prices of the Russian bonds fluctuated madly. In a letter of 26th March to De Smeth, Hope & Co. referred to a fall to 70, which they attributed mainly to the failure of the Russian government to make a repayment of principal. The Swedish bonds, which were previously lower than the Russian, recovered to 96 following the announcement of a modest principal repayment.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Weeveringh, Geschiedenis Staatsschulden, 11, 848.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Letter of 5th November 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 123.

    Google Scholar 

Page 181

  1. Early in November 1799, Matthiessen & Sillem received gold to a value of 150,00c pounds sterling. The gold shipped by Harman travelled first to Copenhagen and thence to Hamburg. Harman probably played a part in the transfer of British subsidies to the Continent. Matthiessen & Sillem were instructed that in the event of their being unable to remit the full amount of the interest to De Smeth before 1st January 1800, they were to advise De Smeth that the money was indeed available. This would enable De Smeth to advertise this news and thus put the public’s mind at ease. Letter of 5th November 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to Matthiessen & Sillem, Hamburg, VI, 125. Harman furnished Matthiessen & Sillem with 133,000 pounds sterling in silver in December 1799; of this sum, 100,000 pounds belonged to the British government and was in Hamburg. It is conceivable that, following the signal failure of the Russo-Austrian campaigns, the British government had decided to dispose of the reserves of silver built up to finance subsidies. Harman despatched a further 50,000 pounds in silver in January 1800. Letters of 13th December 1799 and 24th January 1800 from Hope & Co., London, to Matthiessen & Sillem, Hamburg, VI, 149, 154.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letter of 22nd November 1798 from Hope & Co., London, to Matthiessen & Sillem, Hamburg, VI, 134. Other correspondence on this subject appears on pages 125, 131, 133, 140, 142, 144, 145, 147, 149, 151, 157 and 160. The interest totalled cf 3,828,750.0.0. Letter of 22nd November 1799 from Hope & Co., London, to P. de Smeth, Amsterdam, VI, 136.

    Google Scholar 

Page 182

  1. Early February 1801: Description by De Coninck of the events in Copenhagen, addressed to Hope & Co. Lobanov-Rostovski, Russia and Europe, 63-65.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Weeveringh gives mean quotations for Russian bonds of 81 during the first half of 1800, and 84 during the second half of the year.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 30th April 1801: Memorandum from Hope & Co., London, to Robert Voûte. Letter of 27th April 1801 from R.Voûte, London, to Hope & Co., London.

    Google Scholar 

  4. The account headed ‘Bonds chargeable to the negotiation for His Imperial Majesty the Czar of Russia, negotiated by ourselves’ contains an entry, dated 31st December 1799, in respect of 4,528 bonds at 80 % (grootboek 1799: 20). The commission to date totalled cf 4,526,887.7.0. On 31st December 1801, 346 bonds remained on this account. In the interim period a further 51 bonds had been purchased or accepted as payment. In a letter of 27th April 1801 to Hope & Co., Voûte stated that he had no claim to the funds which stood to his credit in the Republic. When he wrote this, he was on the point of leaving for the Republic.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Letters of 17th February, and 13th and 23rd March 1801 from R.Voûte, London, to J.C.Bergien, St. Petersburg.

    Google Scholar 

Page 183

  1. Letter of 24th March 1801 from J.C.Bergien, St.Petersburg, to R.Voûte, London.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Letter of 17th April 1801 from J.C.Bergien, St.Petersburg, to R.Voûte, London. The Company rightly anticipated that the rehabilitation would lead to a resumption of the earlier difficulties. Memorandum of 30th April 1801 from Hope & Co., London, to Robert Voûte.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Letter of 30th May 1801 from R.Voûte, Amsterdam, to J.C.Bergien, St.Petersburg.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Letter of 12th June 1801 from P.C.Labouchère, London, to R.Voûte, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

Page 184

  1. The transfer to the Portuguese Government of the proceeds of the diamond loan involved payments of cf 1,000,000 in each of the first eleven months of 1802, and cf 2,000,000 on 31st December of that year. A sum of cf 500,000, allocated from the proceeds of the sales of Russian bonds during 1800 and 1801, had been transferred to Insinger by way of advances on consignments of diamonds. Infra, 403.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Memorandum of 30th April 1801 from Hope & Co., London, to Robert Voûte. This still refers to a sum of 463,000 pounds sterling which stood to the credit of the Russian Court.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lord Hawkesbury became Foreign Secretary in February 1801. He will thus not have been aware of the Russian subsidy credit. Dictionary of National Biography, xxix (1892), 311-312.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Marten Gerbertus Buist

Authors
  1. Marten Gerbertus Buist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1974 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Buist, M.G. (1974). The Great Conversion. In: At Spes non Fracta. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-8858-6_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-8858-6_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-011-8201-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-011-8858-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation