Thus ended the campaign against the Dutch herring-boats, from which, as we have seen, Charles desired to reap profit as well as honour. So far as the profit went, it did not amount to much. Appended to the official journal of the voyage of the fleet is a statement of the sums received for convoying shipping,--which, in accordance with the advice of the Admiralty, was voluntary,--and also of the “acknowledgment money” taken from the fishing-busses. The former amounted to £999, nearly all of which was earned by the convoying of merchantmen and small traders to Dunkirk and Ostend.[556] Small as the amount was, it greatly exceeded what was exacted from the Dutch busses for king’s license and protection, the total being £501, 15s. 2d., collected in a variety of coins.[557] The detailed schedule is as follows:--
“In Rix Dollo^{ rs} 878 163 10 08 In halfe Crownes 145 018 02 06 In pieces of 3^s 40 006 00 00 In Kunnings Dollo^{ rs} 100 025 00 00 In Ryalls of 8 134½ 029 02 10 English money 018 12 08 English Gold 119 13 00 Dutch and Scotch Angells 015 15 00 Hungare Duckats 7 002 09 00 Dutch and French money 001 05 00 Dutch shillings 066 00 00 Double Stivers 030 00 06 Single Stivers 005 06 00 In Silver 000 18 00 ------------ 501 15 02”
[Illustration: Fig. 12.--_Facsimile of the official account of the monies received from the Dutch herring fishermen for the king’s licenses._]
There is probably no circumstance connected with the English claims to the sovereignty of the seas that has been more frequently misrepresented by historians, pamphleteers, and writers on international law than the operations of Northumberland’s fleet, and in particular the amount paid by the Dutch herring fishermen for the king’s licenses; and so far as appears, the account given here is the first that is authentic and correct. Although Northumberland’s Journal is preserved among the national records, only one author seems to have quoted from it, namely, Evelyn, and he deliberately misrepresented it. Under the hands of various authors the sum of money gradually became swelled to £30,000, or even to £100,000, and it was represented as a rent paid by the Dutch for permission to fish, and played an important part in all later controversies and negotiations.[558]