Journals of the Board of Trade and Plantations: Volume 2, February 1709 - March 1715. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1925.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying and sponsored by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. All rights reserved.
Journal, September 1712
September 25. Present:—Lord Guilford, Sir Philip Meadows, Mr. Moore.
Mr. Attorny General's report on a Virginia Act.
A report from Mr. Attorney General on an Act pass'd in Virginia in November, 1711 [fo. 207; R. fo. 143], for sale of part of the estate of the late Colonel Parke, signifying he has no objection thereto, was read; and a representation, proposing her Majesty's confirmation of the said Act, was signed.
Memorial containing objections to the form of the oath prepared by Mr. Attorny General about re-settlements.
Mr. Campbell and Mr.Duport attending [fo. 195, 216], in behalf of the sufferers of Nevis and St.Christopher's, they presented to their lordships a memorial containing some objections to the form of the oath prepar'd by Mr. Attorney General, to be taken to prove a re-settlement in the said islands (mentioned in the minutes of the 12th of August last), which memorial was read. Whereupon ordered that a copy of the said memorial and of the said form of the oath, be sent to Mr. Attorney General for his opinion thereupon.
Letter from the Lord Bolingbroke about Flanders trade.
Merchants’ opinion thereupon.
A letter from the Lord Bolingbroke, of the 17th instant [fo. 213], desiring to be inform'd of such heads of trade and other matters relating to Flanders, as may be proper to be incerted in the Earl of Orrery's instructions &c., was read; and Mr. Dorpere and Mr. James Ball, Flanders merchants, attending, they were acquainted with the subject of the said letter, and particularly with that part which relates to the raising of two millions of florins for the subsistance of the Imperialists in the Spanish Low Countries. Upon which they said they did not conceive it would be prejudicial to our trade, provided the Dutch did not (in order to raise that summe) lay new duties at Ghent, Bruges, Ostend, and in the New Conquests; nor in that case, provided our goods pay no higher duties than those imported into those places from Holland; and therefore they were of opinion that, if the tarif in Flanders of 1680 (which was revived after the battle of Ramelies) were put in execution, our trade would then be upon a good foot again.
As for the other matters which relate to the disadvantages our trade may lye under in that country, what they said was to the same purpose as what is contained in several memorials formerly presented to their lordships by Mr. Dorpere and others, which their lordships had recourse to; and thereupon gave directions for preparing a letter to the Lord Bolingbroke upon that matter.
Two memorials from Mr. Dorpere about the high duties here on Flanders linnen.
After which, Mr. Dorpere complain'd that the duties here on Flanders linnen was much higher than those on linnens from Hamburgh; and he presented to their lordships two memorials upon that subject, desiring their lordships would take that matter. into consideration. Whereupon order'd that the papers in this office given in by the Hamburgh Company be look'd out and communicated to Mr. Dorpere.