1920 DUTCH MISSIONS TO ENGLAND IN 1689 547 France. More than two months elapsed before it obtained the royal assent, and although it was considerably amended in both houses, this does not seem to have been the principal cause of delay .^ The fact was that, however unprofitable the French trade was according to the recognized doctrine of the balance of trade, the houses had no wish to close it to the English while it was left open to the Dutch. Although the Dutch were allies, they were also competitors, and the English did not wish to enter on a vigorous war against French trade unless the Dutch came into it as well. They were ready enough to take the same line they had taken in 1678, but success in that policy depended on loyal co-operation between the allies, in repressing the French trade both amongst their own subjects and amongst neutrals. Indeed, whatever the policy of either state was to be, it was necessary to have a mutual understanding. Other states would be almost certain to blame both for the faults of either, so that unfair or indiscriminate seizures of neutral ships by one would compromise the other. On the other hand, either might steal a march by such confiscations or by continuing to trade with the enemy. On the day of the second reading of the bill, therefore, the commons voted an address praying for the inclusion of a clause for the prohibition of trade with the enemy in the treaties of alliance which the king was negotiating with other powers. On the following day Sir Henry Capel gave them the assurance that this had been looked after in the Dutch negotiations and that the same would be done in all the other treaties of alliance.^ The matter had, in fact, already been under dis- cussion for three weeks between the English and the Dutch commissioners.^ In the course of the negotiations for a treaty of alliance, the English commissioners had brought up the suggestion that a declaration should be issued to all the powers, announcing that the allies would prevent all ships of whatever nationality, belligerent and neutral alike, from entering or leaving French ports. The discussion had made little progress when the commons passed their resolution, and the mutual suspicions are illustrated by Witsen's comment on that event :
- This is a good business, yet England is provided with such
goods for two years ahead.' ^ His opinion became less favourable when he thought over the proposal further, and when an agree- ment on details had been reached, he did not want to sign this > The statute is 1 William and Mary, sess. 1, c. 34 {Statutes of the Realm, vi. 98), and the parliamentary proceedings are to bo found in the Commons' Journals, especially 7/17 August; Lords' Journals, especially 9/19 August; House of Lords Papers 1689-90, pp. 250 f. *
- Commons' Journals, 1/11 and 2/12 July.
^ Secret dispatch, 11/21 June. * To burgomasters, 5/15 July. Nn2
