Abstract
We find Holland in 1813 at the beginning of a new stage of her political existence. After the arrival of French troops in 1795 the former Republic of the United Netherlands had gradually lost its independence and the power which had been left to it after a rapid decline in the preceding decades. Going through various forms of government it had been drawn ever more completely into the area of French interests and influence. It was freed from the grasp of Napoleon’s domination only when his forces had been finally conquered by British persistency and the vastness of the Russian plains. —In 1806 Napoleon had made his brother Louis the King of Holland 1). As an ally of France the country suffered badly from the effects of his struggle with England. Its valuable colonial possessions fell into the hands of the British 2); and the commercial fleet was either captured or laid up. Since Trafalgar (1805) Great Britain had been the mistress of the ocean. Only a passive commerce, performed entirely by neutral foreign trade as sketched in the preceding chapter, maintained in the country a shadow of her past prosperity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
It is necessary to be aware of the difference between the Kingdom of Holland and the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The former was established in 1806 by Napoleon, for his third brother Louis, and covered almost the same territory as did the old Republic. The Kingdom of the Netherlands was established in 1815. William I of Orange was its first King. It also included Belgium, until 1830, and thus consisted of both the Northern and the Southern Netherlands. As a rule we use “the Netherlands” to signify both of them and “Holland” when only the North, or the territories of the old Republic, is meant. In both cases the adjective is “Dutch”.
Only two, the factory on the isle of Décima, Japan, and a castle and some establishments on the Gold Coast of Africa, remained in Dutch hands, whereas the settlement at Canton, although falling under the government of Java, also kept the Dutch flag afloat. Many years afterwards in the relations with the United States, this circumstance proved to be of a certain consequence. The Dutch then contended that even when they were perforce a part of France their flag had never disappeared from the earth (Chapter V A, p. 388 f.). laid up. Since Trafalgar (1805) Great Britain had been the mistress of the ocean. Only a passive commerce, performed entirely by neutral foreign trade as sketched in the preceding chapter, maintained in the country a shadow of her past prosperity.
Colenbrander, Vestiging van het Koninkrijk 1813–1815 (Amsterdam 1927), Chapter I.
G. J. Renier, Great Britain and the establishment of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, 1813–1815, (The Hague 1930) p. 6 f. It is curious to note that the conclusions of this objective and reliable treatise (p. 200, 339 f.) are greatly in contradiction to those published in the same year in the work of Rudolf Steinmetz, Englands Anteil an der Trennung der Niederlande, 1830, (Haag 1930), p. 38 f.
Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken VII 1813–1815 No. 12.
Renier, p. 200 f., 309.
Cf. Renier p. 317 f.; P. H. van der Kemp, De teruggave der Oost-Indische koloniën, 1814–1816 (’s-Gravenhage 1910);
W. H. Robson, New light on Lord Castlereagh’s diplomacy (Journal of modern history III, 1931, p. 198 f.).
She kept Ceylon, ceded already by the peace of Amiens, and Cochin on the continent of Asia — in exchange for Banca —, the Cape of Good Hope, and Demerara, Essequibo, and Berbice in South America.
Renier p. 129.
Decree in R. A. B. Z. 2: bur. I. S. No. 1.
On him: Fruin, Verspreide Geschriften V p. 239, 348. Colenbrander, Gijsbert Karel in zijn rijpen leeftijd, in Historie en Leven I, p. 79 f.
Cf. Groeneveld Meyer, De tariefwetgeving van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden (1816–1819), p. 89 f.
Brieven en Gedenkschriften, passim. For instance: I p. 280, Boston Dec. 16 1783, Van Hogendorp to his mother: “Mes études favorites:... le commerce considéré comme un objet de politique”.
Ibid. V p. 70, 71. During the four months of his ministry this design was practically realised. By the measures of April 6 1814, however, when Van Nagell was appointed to succeed him, a division for commerce was created which was almost independent of the general direction of the Department. In September next it was united with “Colonies” to a separate Department of Commerce and the Colonies, under Goldberg.
On his character compare Pirenne, Histoire de Belgique VI, p. 264 f. with Colen-brander, Vestiging van het Koninkrijk (1813–1815) p. 107 f. Colenbrander emphasizes the noteworthy fact that in a period in which the majority of the nation was filled with reactionary ideals it was especially the King who managed to push them forward in the long run, along with the real development of the times.
Groeneveld Meyer p. 40 f. Compare also Z. W. Sneller, Economische en Sociale denkbeeiden in Nederland in den aanvang der negentiende eeuw, 1814–1830, (Haarlem 1922).
Appointed December 31 1813.
Appointed April 6 1814. Van Hogendorp became Vice-President of the Council of State.
Colenbrander, Willem I p. 225.
April 20 1819, Everett to Adams (D. o. S. Desp. Neth.).
Appointed December 6 1813.
C. K. Webster (in The Cambridge History of British Foreign Policy, I p. 462) describes him as follows: “The stiff est of Tories, and not too subtle or quickminded he was a conscientious and consistent subordinate, who could be trusted to carry out his chief’s ideas”.
Renier p. 128.
Cf. Renier p. 189, quoting from a letter of the Czar’s sister, March 1814. 8) Renier p. 142 (footnote).
On the way from Scheveningen to The Hague the Prince was seated next to the driver of the cart; Clancarty was in one of the backseats (J. C. Vermaas, Geschiedenis van Scheveningen, 1926, I p. 320).
In the procession of the Prince’s entry into Amsterdam, where he was proclaimed Sovereign of the Netherlands, Clancarty rode in the same coach with him (H. Bosscha, Geschiedenis der Staatsomwenteling in Nederland in het jaar 1813, Amsterdam 1817, II p. 31;)
(see also G. W. Chad, A Narrative of the Late Revolution in Holland, London 1814, p. 148).
Renier p. 144.
Dec. 26 1813 (R. A. B. Z. U. S. 1: bur. No. 19c): “Il m’a fait l’honneur de passer chez moi une heure et demie et nous nous sommes séparés extrêmement contens, en sorte, qu’il n’y a plus aucun doute, que nous vivrons dans la plus parfaite intelligence et dans une confidence sans bornes”.
Lagemans I p. 16 No. 3. See below Chapter XVII, p. 330.
Its preamble gives as the reason for this act not the desirability of an abolishment of the traffic but the Sovereign’s wish to meet the desires of the British government: “ne voulant négliger aucune occasion de donner à S. A. R. le Prince Régent du Royaume de la Grande Bretagne des preuves de Nos sentiments amicaux et de Notre empressement à seconder autant que possible ses vues”.
See Posthumus’ introduction to his publication of Documenten betreffende de buitenlandsche handelspolitiek van Nederland in de 19e Eeuw, I p. X. In II p. X he marks the year 1818 as the beginning of the decline of British preponderance.
Instructions to Ten Cate, chargé d’affaires for the United States, Dec. 6 1815, and others (R. A. B. Z. Invent. No. 1743 “Instructiën”). It is interesting to compare the sentence above quoted with the instructions in 1796 to theDutch minister to America, when France had obtained the lead in Holland: „Hij zal in het bijzonder goede correspondentie houden met den Minister van de Republicq van Vrankrijk, ten einde gezamentlijk bij alle voorkomende geleegenheden het belang der beide Republicqen te bevorderen” (R. A. Legation Archives America, Port. “R. G. van Polanen”; art. 22).
Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken VIII 1815–1825, I No. 722, 723; also 710 etc.
In 1819, April 20 (D. o. S. Desp. Neth. vol. 6), the American chargé d’affaires Everett is still highly impressed by the “quasi-independence” of Holland, and sneers: “It would seem that the great dignitaries of this country do not consider it inconsistent with a proper independence of character to take money of Great-Britain”, hinting at Fagel (Cf. Van den Brink p. 25).
Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken VIII (1815–1825) I Nos. 722, 723. Renier (p. 159) gives only slight attention to this commercial interest of England in the economic system of the Netherlands. Groeneveld Meyer (p. 124) mentions a request of the British merchants at Antwerp, transmitted May 8, 1817, by Clancarty to the Dutch government, in which a total abolition of the transit duties was asked.
Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken VII (1813–1815) No. 185.
Brussels, Jan. 21 1821, Everett to Adams (D. o. S. Desp. Neth. vol. 6c). The same views, with an accentuated anti-British inclination, are exposed in Everett’s book “Europe” (Boston 1822), p. 240 and 366. See the author’s article in Tijdschrift voor Geschiedeni , 49, p. 166 f.
Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken VIII (1815–1825) I p. 347, 356, 383, 384, 408.
Dec. 8 1815, Eustis to Monroe (D. o. S. Desp. Neth.).
April 20 1819, Everett to Adams (D. o. S. Desp. Neth.). 2) Terlinden, La politique économique de Guillaume I, p. 18. s) „De oude tijden komen wederom”, Nov. 17 1813.
A good general exposition of the staple trade: T. P. van der Kooy, Hollands stapelmarkt en haar verval, to which we refer for the following paragraphs also.
In Rotterdam the author of the „Gedenkboek van de Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken, 1803–1918,” (p. 139) notices a strong sentiment against dangerous novelties („gevaarlijke nieuwigheden”). See Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken VIII 1815–1825 II No. 31, Febr. 1816, Willink c.s. to the King; and Ten Cate’s report of 1815, treated in chapter II, p. 37,38.
W. L. Groeneveld Meyer, De tariefwetgeving van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden (1816–1819), p. 34, 35, 71, 156, etc.
W. L. Groeneveld Meyer, De tariefwetgeving van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden (1816–1819) p. 89 f. Van der Kooy p. 104.
See for the following paragraph: Groeneveld Meyer p. 22 f.
H. van Houtte, Histoire économique de la Belgique à la fin de l’ancien régime, part I chapter III, and p. 318 f., 325 f.
Ibid. p. 172 f., 252 f., 256.
H. Pirenne, Histoire de Belgique VI (Bruxelles 1926) p. 163, 165. Ch. Terlinden, La politique économique de Guillaume Ier, Roi des Pays-Bas, en Belgique, 1814–1830 (Revue historique 1922 tome 139), p. 9.
Van Houtte p. 269.
Van Houtte p. 346 f., 350.
Van Houtte p. 291 f., referring to his article in Am. Hist. Review XVI 1911: American commercial conditions and negotiations with Austria, 1783–1786.
Several cargoes were reshipped to the firms who had sent them. In 1788, according to a report quoted by Van Houtte, p. 293, only about 8 vessels in all had arrived from Ostendin ports of the United States, i.e. on the average little more than 1 per annum.
Van Houtte, part II chapter III.
Pirenne I.e. p. 347.
Terlinden p. 10, gives the numbers of 3000 sea vessels entered at Antwerp in 1815 alone, 999 in 1817, 585 in 1818, increasing again in the twenties. Compare however Van den Brink, Bijdrage tot de kennis van den economischen toestand van Nederland in de jaren 1813–1816, p. 79.
Groeneveld Meyer p. 34.
Staatsblad No. 9. Groeneveld Meyer p. 21.
Groot Placaatboek VI, p. 1365. “Convooyen & licenten” is the name of the import and export duties in the old Republic.
Staatsblad No. 70.
Staatsblad No. 109.
See chapter IX.
Decree of March 2 1814 (Staatsblad No. 32). Cf. Posthumus, Documenten I p. XVII.
The best treatise is that by Groeneveld Meyer, quoted before.
Staatsblad No. 53.
“L’un attaché au passé, l’autre orienté vers l’avenir”, as Pirenne characterizes them (I.e. p. 317).
Groeneveld Meyer chapter III. Staatsblad No. 10.
See the amounts for 1814–1816 quoted by Van den Brink p. 46 f. They show the enormous quantity of cotton goods in this importation.
Several memoranda on this head will be treated in our chapter which discusses the relations of commerce and navigation with the United States, XX.
See Chapter X.
See Groeneveld Meyer’s conclusion p. 156 f.; Van Mansvelt, Geschiedenis van de Nederlandsche Handel-maatschappij, I p. 6, 38 f.; Van der Kooy, chapters III, V,
Groeneveld Meyer p. 14 f.; Van Mansvelt I p. 35; P. J. Bouman, Rotterdam en het Duitsche achterland 1831–1851, p. 5 f. The “second hand” performed the intermediary function between the importing sea merchants and the next demand either at home or elsewhere. Cf. Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken VIII 1815–1825 II No. 31, Febr. 1816, Willink c.s. to the King.
Stated in a pamphlet of 1819: Nederlands oudste en latere zeehandel, bovenal de tegenwoordige, bevattelijk geschetst.... (Leyden 1819), p. 23.
See Chapter II.
Groeneveld Meyer p. 17.
Baasch, Holländische Wirtschaftsgeschichte p. 302–303, 357.
Van Winter I p. 127 f.; II p. 68, 77 f. etc. See his statistical tables in II p. 58, 71, 72, 74, 90, 113, 116. They clearly show the mutual relation of the two respective trade movements, by the phenomenon that large amounts of merchandise on one side in these years appear simultaneously with small ones on the other.
H. Wätjen, Aus der Frühzeit des Nord-Atlantik-Verkehrs, p. 6 f. A survey in Pitkin (1835) p. 236, 237.
On the linens trade Van Mechelen, Zeevaart en zeehandel van Rotterdam, 1813 – 1830, p. 183.
See the footnote (13) to our statistical table in chapter II, sub: coffee, U.S. -> Holland.
Baasch, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Handelsbeziehungen zwischen Hamburg und Amerika (1892), p. 84, 85 f.
Clauder p. 57 f., 103, 111. To the partial advantage again of Dutch transit trade. Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken V II p. 676, 1808 Gogel: „Consideration over het toe-staan van de transituvaart naar Noord-Amerika”.
On this subject: Walther Vogel, Die Hansestädte und die Kontinentalsperre (1913).
In 1809 alone 119 American vessels entered at Tonningen. Vogel p. 36. Compare Clauder p. 159 f.
Baasch I.e. p. 91, Vogel p. 24 etc.
Vogel p. 57 f. In 1816 only one third of Hamburg’s shipping tonnage was left, sincM798.
„Onpartijdige beschouwing van den toestand des koophandels binnen de Ver-eenigde Nederlanden,in brieven” (by Van Hall, Amsterdam 1819) p. 161,165. Compare however Van den Brink p. 74. For a further comparison of Dutch and Hanseatic shipping in the relations with America after 1814, see below chapter XX, p. 359.
For instance Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken VIII, III p. 296, 300, Jan. 19 1819 and Jan. 27 1820, H. J. Swarth to Van Hogendorp.
Even at Curacoa in 1818 Silesian linens coming from Hamburg and Bremen were preferred to those imported via Holland, as being at least 10% lower in price than the latter (Onpartijdige beschouwing, etc., quoted in the preceding footnote, p. 141).
See in general: Van Mechelen p. 50 etc.; Bouman chapter II.
Van der Kooy p. 58.
Ibid. p. 108 f.
Dec. 1 1814 (Staatsblad No. 109). Groeneveld Meyer p. 21, 102. Venders, De Nederlandsche handelspolitiek, p. 298 f.
Groeneveld Meyer p. ) f., 105 f. Wieners* well-considered project had fixed the maximum rate at 2%.
Ibid. p. 124 f., 129. 6) Staatsblad No. 10.
Bouman p. 8 etc. Of 1353 vessels which visited this port, more than )0 were from England (Van den Brink p. 79).
Groeneveld Meyer p. 134. Van der Kooy p. 112.
A good exposition of its organisation in Van der Kooy p. 16 f.
Although a report from the Department of Foreign Affairs to the King for his Message at the adjournment of the States-General, Oct. 20 1815 (R. A. Coll. Goldberg Port. 205), considered conditions still promising for a revival: all products of the world pass again through our markets !
Rotterdam obtained a valuable trade in colonial produce, especially in tobacco and coffee, and the Antwerp market, which developed quickly, had soon surpassed the others for hides from the West Indies and South America (Van Mechelen p. 181 f., 185 f.).
J. van den Bosch, Nederlandsche bezittingen in Azia, Amerika en Afrika (1818) II p. 308: „Wanneer echter de voortbrengselen onzer Bezittingen geregeld naar onze markt worden overgebragt en de opgeslagen voorraad dier produkten aan de markt van Engeland zal verminderd zijn, — dan voorzeker mogten wij den vreemdeling weder aan de onze verwach ten, tot inkoop van goederen gelijk de specerijen enzv., die hij dan voortaan nergens eiders uit de eerste hand bekomen kan;.... Dan ook zal hij in ruiling zijne waaren uit de eerste hand ons toevoeren, en zoo zal Nederland andermaals eene der aanzienlijkste markten van Europa worden, waar eene goede sortering van alle goederen te vinden is.
See chapter II p. 38. 2) „Eigen handel“. Cf. Terlinden I.e. p. 12.
Cf. I. J. Brugmans, De economische politiek van Koning Willem I, in Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche geschiedenis en oudhe;.dkunde, 6e reeks, vol. X p. 1 f.
See chapter XIX.
N. W. Posthumus, Het internationale element in de handelspolitiek van Neder-and (1922), p. 16; cf. Venders p. 168, 278.
Van Hogendorp’s insistence upon a free trade policy in favor of commerce mostly followed Adam Smith’s theories and was connected with the rising movement of liberalism which was occurring simultaneously in England. The inauguration of the British free trade régime in the twenties was based, however, upon the demands of the modern industry previously founded which had become in need of new export possibilities. (See Georges Weill, L’éveil des nationalités et le mouvement libéral, 1815 – 1848, Paris 1930, p. 301.) No analogy with the situation in the Netherlands is to be drawn therefrom, since Dutch industries were still in too infant a state to bear comparison with the British industries. Only when the national economic life had been sufficiently rebuilt under the cares of protection could an avowed free trade policy again be afforded.
A survey in De Vries, Geschiedenis van de handelspolitieke betrekkingen tusschen Nederland en Engeland in de negentiende eeuw (1814–1872), chapters I and II, for the British; in Hoekstra en Kloos, I.e., for the American relations.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1935 Martinus Nyhoff, the Hague, Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Westermann, J.C. (1935). The Netherlands, and Their Relation with Great Britain. In: The Netherlands and the United States. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0999-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0999-2_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-015-0397-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-0999-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive