International Fisheries Exhibition,

LONDON 1883.

THE HISTORY

OF

DUTCH SEA FISHERIES:

THEIR

PROGRESS, DECLINE AND REVIVAL,

ESPECIALLY IN CONNECTION WITH THE LEGISLATION
ON FISHERIES IN EARLIER AND LATER TIMES.

BY

A. BEAUJON.

[PRIZE ESSAY.]

LONDON :
WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,

13, CHARING CROSS, S.W.

LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,

STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.

/ £ >+ 0

ru

r-
i-n

ru
nj

o
m
o

o

CONTENTS.

PART I.

SEA FISHERY IN THE NETHERLANDS^BEFORE THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DUTCH REPUBLIC

PAGE

PART II.

SEA FISHERIES UNDER THE DUTCH REPUBLIC.

I. Grand Fishery ........ 36

II. Whale Fishery ........ ior

III. Cod Fishery 134

IV. Coast Fishery ........ 144

V. " Dominium Maris" ....... 164

PART III.

SEA FISHERIES SINCE THE END OF THE DUTCH

REPUBLIC.

I. I795-ISI3

II. Protection at a Culminating Point .

III. The End of Protection .......

IV. Revival .

1 86
206
230
259

PREFACE.

THE following pages contain, not a complete history of
the Dutch sea fisheries, but merely the outlines of their
history as connected with legislation.

The subject is a vast one. Sea fishery has throughout
history been either the greatest, or among the most con-
siderable, of the industries of the Netherlands. Some of
its branches have during three centuries and a half been
regulated and organised by laws and bye-laws, and have
been constantly in the minds of the country's rulers, legis-
lators, and publicists ; and the mass of material for their
history is, of course, in proportion to the total of attention
bestowed upon the subject in former times. To read this
subject up and exhaust it would be the work of many years,
and involve a thorough search of the archives of the present
kingdom of the Netherlands, several of its provinces, and
many of its cities ; whereas the present author has only
had the seven months before him which have elapsed since
the subject for this prize essay was known in Holland, and
has during that short period by no means been master of
the whole of his time. Several minor parts of the subject
have for this reason been left out of the range of research ;
such are the sea fisheries of the provinces of Zealand,
Friesland, and Groningen, the whole of the oyster business,
and the salmon, herring, and other fisheries in the river
estuaries, which are very justly reckoned as sea fishery,
and treated as such in official documents of the present day.

r, PREPACK.

Zuider Zee fishery has come in for a share of attention
proportioned to the small area of the water so called, but
perhaps rather short of the historical interest inherent to
the trade and the measures taken respecting it. Even as
regards deep sea fisheries, many details, a perfect insight
into which might have thrown light upon the whole, have
not been investigated for sheer lack of time and opportunity.
I have, in short, had to be satisfied with the certainty of
not having omitted, and a reasonable hope of not having
misrepresented, any of the leading historical and actual
features of the subject. Such as it is, however, the work
contains a quantity of matter drawn from perfectly reliable
authentic documents, into which no former writer on Dutch
sea fisheries has ever looked, as none of them ever at-
tempted a complete historical treatment of the subject.

There is much about laws in the book, and perhaps less
about fishers and fishing. I have taken the centre of
gravity of the given prize subject to lie in the former, and
made it my business to show, first, what laws were made,
and why they were made ; next, what they wrought. For
the same reason, herring fishery, the only branch which
has been constantly legislated on down to twenty-five years
ago, occupies a very prominent place in the following
pages. The former and present proportions of the business
would perfectly warrant the pre-eminence if nothing else did.

Many details will perhaps be more interesting to the
Dutch than to the British reader. The latter, I hope, will
remember, that if a work like this is ever read at all, the
chances arc that it will be read most by the men who can
trace in it some of the thoughts and actions of their own
ancestors.

A. BEAUJON.

April iSM, 1883.

THE

HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES

PART I.

SEA FISHERY IN THE NETHERLANDS BEFORE THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DUTCH REPUBLIC.

ANYBODY may conclude from a slight survey of a map of
the present Kingdom of the Netherlands, that the sea
must at all times have supplied food to its inhabitants.
The country is bounded by the North Sea on two sides ; a
gulf called Zuider Zee runs far inland and multiplies the
extent of its sea-shore ; and both this outer and inner sea
are pregnant with fish of several kinds. The several
river estuaries supply a number of ports and roadsteads
for fishermen's vessels ; for those river mouths, whose
shallowness was until a few years ago a serious obstacle to
the development of modern steam navigation in the Dutch
ports, and has accordingly had to be artificially corrected
in several ways, at the cost of many millions, afford, and
have at all times afforded, plenty of depth for the largest
of fishing craft. A glance on the map along the sandy
and havenless North Sea coast north of the rivers will,
moreover, at once show the existence of several villages
separated from the fertile part of the country by leagues
of sand-downs, and which, therefore, can never have had

8 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

another source of livelihood than such sea fishing as may
be carried on in vessels having no keel, and liable to be
put ashore on the beach at every tide.

Sea fishing has accordingly been mentioned as a means
of existence of the inhabitants of these countries by the
very earliest writers. The early history of the Dutch sea
fisheries is, however, fragmentary for lack of documents.
Some writers mention herring to have been first caught
and eaten by the Dutch in the year 1163.* But this
statement can scarcely be exact, for it is likewise stated
that fishermen from Kampen and Harderwijk, being two
small seaports on the Zuider Zee, used to fish for herring
"off Sconen," i.e. on the shores of the Baltic, before the
end of the twelfth century, f and the trade must have been
carried on for a considerable time before so far developing
itself as to be exercised at such a distance from home.
The first document on record relative to Dutch trade on
the Baltic shore is a privilege granted to the men of
Amsterdam by the Lords of the Germanic Order of Livonia
in 1277, and confirmed by the Bishop of Livonia in 1495.!

This privilege, indeed, does not especially mention the
right of fishing ; it contains simply a general promise of
protection to merchants from Amsterdam in the Livonian
dominions. But it has probably, judging by the unre-
stricted terms in which it is drawn up, been of avail to
fishermen as well as to traders, inasmuch as a similar
privilege granted to the men of Amsterdam, Enkhuizen
and Wicringen by King Albert of Sweden, in I368,§

* Semcyns' Corte beschrijoinghe over de Haringvisscherije in
Hollandt, p. i. The same date is mentioned by a writer in the
periodical called Den Koopman, vol. i. p. 349.

f Boxhorn, Tooncel van Hollandt, p. 234.

| Luzac, Hollands Rijkdom, vol. i. Appendix B.

§ Ibid. Appendix C.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 9

explicitly allows the said merchants to have their own
boats and implements "of fishery in Schoonen aforesaid,
and use them and fish at will, paying a tax of half a
Schoonen merk on each boat, and no more." A certain
toll on herring imported by Dutch fishermen is established
by the same edict. There were regular and privileged
markets for herring and other fish in the Netherlands even
before this period ; such market rights were granted to
the town of Brouwershaven in 1 344, and to that of Naarden
in 1355, by the Counts of Holland then reigning ; and in
1388 another fish market was established at Katwijk, a
village on the North Sea coast.* The fact of Dutch sea
fishery having had considerable extension in the latter part
of the Middle Ages is further placed beyond doubt
by an order issued by Edward I in 1295,! by which the
said King " having understood that many people from
Holland, Zealand, and Friesland, who are our friends, will
shortly come and fish in our sea off Yarmouth," lays his
commands in " custodi orae maritimae snae JernemittJi
and Baillivis suis de Jernemuth" to see that these foreigners
be treated civilly, and not molested, robbed, or plundered,
by the king's subjects.^

Such scanty documents as these are all the footing on
which a notion of the extent of Dutch sea fisheries can be
based, up to the end of the fourteenth century. But, records
failing, it may be assumed as certain that their produce
cannot have gone far beyond the necessities of immediate
home consumption, so long as no proper method of pre-

* Van Mieris, Groot. Charterboek der Graven van Holland,
Zeeland, (enz.), vols. ii. pp. 688, 826, and iii. pp. 498-9.

f Luzac, Hollands Rijkdom, vol. iii. p. 57. v. Mieris, Charterboek,
vol. i. p. 566.

\ Luzac, Hollands Rijkdom, vol. i. p. 136.

E. 8. C

io THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

serving fish was in use in these parts. Fish, indeed, and
herring especially, must have been salted from the very
earliest times, or there could have been no possibility of
catching them off Yarmouth and in the Baltic and carrying
them home, in probably slow sailing vessels, with any
chance of finding a market for them. Salted herrings are
accordingly mentioned in a charter of Louis VII. of France,
dated 1179, and, as regards the Low Countries in particular,
a regulation dated 1177, and issued by Margaret of Alsatia,
Countess of Flanders, on the manner of salting herring,
was preserved in the town of Ostend as late as 1816.*
But there is an immense distance between packing or
strewing fish with salt so as to preserve them for a short
time, and curing them so as to last for years and become
an article of foreign trade.

The man who in any country first found out the latter
method, and thereby first opened up the possibility of
lucrative sea-fishing on such a scale as considerably to
exceed the wants of immediate home consumption, may
therefore be truly called the father of such a country's sea
fishery.

The Netherlands' history records the name of such a
man, which accordingly is till this day known to every
school-boy in the country as that of one of the nation's
benefactors. But history unfortunately does not yield
much information about him beyond his name, which was
William Beukelsz, and his dwelling-place, which was
Biervliet, now a village in the southern part of the
province of Zealand.

Volumes of subtle inquiry and learned controversy have
been written about this personage, among which the above-
quoted paper, read in the Brussels Academy of Science,

* Raepsaet, Note sur la dtcouverte de caquer le hareng, p. 6.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. n

in 1816, by the celebrated Belgian politician Raepsaet, is
perhaps the most concise and interesting. But the pre-
vailing feature of these many disquisitions is the extreme
scantiness of the facts on which they are based. Beukelsz
is universally stated to have lived at Biervliet about the
middle of the fourteenth century, and been a " Stuyrman,"
or skipper, and concerned in the herring fishery. The
year of his death has especially been the subject of much
controversy, being stated by some to be 1347, by others
1397, and by a few 1401. His family are proved by deeds
still extant to have been citizens of wealth and note, and
his coat-of-arms is said to have consisted of two crossed
" kaeckmeskens," or knives used in curing herrings (kaken)
after the manner invented by him, and to which his name
will be for ever attached. But how or by what circum-
stance he lighted upon his great invention is utterly
unknown.

The operation called " kaken ' is still in use with the
Dutch herring fishermen, pretty much, it would appear, as
first practised by Beukelsz. It is described in the same
constant terms throughout Dutch history, and consists in
opening and gutting the fish the moment the net is hauled
aboard, salting them carefully, and packing them in barrels
in a peculiar manner highly favourable for their conservation.
The barrels used were anciently called " kaecken," or " kaeck-
jes," and the name of the curing process is probably
derived from theirs.*

With further regard to the great inventor's person it is
stated by all his biographers that the Emperor Charles V.

* N.B. — I am not aware of an English term for the method of
curage here described. Whenever, in the course of this work, the
words " enrage " and " cure " are used without a further expletive, they
will stand for curage in Beukelsz's fashion, or " Kaken"

C 2

12 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

visited his tomb at Biervliet in 1556, and there offered
up prayers for the benefit of his soul. The sepulchre must
have been an apocryphal one, or at best a cenotaph ; for
it is tolerably well established that the whole of the town
of Biervliet of Beukelsz's time, including the church where
he may have been buried, was destroyed by floods between
the period of his death and that of the Imperial visit, the
place having since then been rebuilt in a safer spot.
Whether the Emperor may have been acquainted with the
circumstance or not, his act of devotion is an instance of
the deep veneration in which Beukelsz's name was held by
his countrymen for centuries — a circumstance which may
have induced Charles V., even after he had surrendered
the government of the Low Countries to his son, to perform
a demonstrative ceremony highly gratifying to his former
subjects of Flanders and Holland, for whom he always had
a strong predilection. If so, he succeeded ; for whenever
Beukelsz's biography has been entered into, the writer
never omits to mention the Emperor's posthumous homage.
Whatever may have been Beukelsz's real character or
his true merits in the case, it appears that about the time
of his invention, his countrymen, the Zealanders, were the
greatest herring fishermen of the Netherlands,* although, as
shown above, the most ancient evidence of extensive sea
fishery is relative to the more northerly provinces as well
as to them. The Zealanders appear, however, to have
lost their pre-eminence in the business soon afterwards,
and writers of later date attribute this falling off to their
having taken to the still more lucrative one of privateering.
An important change in the annual migrations of the
herring shoals, which about this period left the coasts of
Denmark and Norway and began to concentrate about

* Den Koopman, vol. i. p. 237.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 13

the shores of England and Scotland, may likewise have
had something to do with the decline of the Zealand
herring fishery.* At any rate, the next considerable pro-
gress in the fishing art was accomplished by men from the
North ; for it is stated that the first large herring-net was
made at Hoorn in 1416,! and though the dimensions of
this net are of course unknown, its fabrication appears to
have contributed much to the rise of the trade. Leastways
the latter became an object of legislation and warlike pro-
tection soon after the said period.

John Duke of Bavaria and Count of Holland issued
regulations on the fabrication and marking of herring
barrels and the curing of herrings in 1424.! Though no
historical mention of cod fishery is made at the time, this
branch of the fishing trade must also have been then
practised to a certain extent ; for the two great political
parties which divided the country under the Counts of the
Bavarian dynasty took their noms de guerre from it. The
Bavarian coat-of-arms bears some resemblance to the
scales of a codfish, and the followers of the first count of
that dynasty, who wore his colours, were accordingly nick-
named codfish (Kabeljauwen) — an appellation from which
the opposition party took occasion to style themselves
Hooks {Hoekscheii}, and thereby transmitted to posterity
a certain proof that cod was fished for in this period, in
something like the manner in which it is caught to this
day.

* This reason is alleged on p. 12 of the Committee's Report of 1854.
But without further adstruction it is not apparent why the Zealanders
could not fish off Yarmouth as well as off Sweden and Denmark.

f Velius, Chronijk van Hoorn, pp. 32-3. Brandt, Historie der
vermaarde Zee- en Koopstad Enkhuizen, p. 17. Wagenaar, Vader-
landsche Historie, iii. p. 499.

% v. Mieris, Charterboek^ vol. iv. pp. 728, 739.

14 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

The Sovereigns of the Burgundian dynasty established,
or confirmed, a special tax, called last-money, to be paid by
Dutch herring fishermen as -a contribution towards the
equipment of the convoying ships provided for their pro-
tection. Another edict dating from the Burgundian period
prohibits herring caught by the Duke's subjects to be sold
in foreign ports ; and another was enacted against the
salting of herring in barrels before St. Bartholomew's Day,
or August 24th, and the use of salt other than of certain
prescribed qualities.*

Besides this evidence of the herring fishery having had
considerable importance in the course of the fifteenth
century, the fact is established by a remonstrance, or
memorial, delivered to the Grand Council at Malines, by
the inhabitants of Brielle, in 1476. This document states
herring fishery to be one of the nation's principal
industries. An edict relative to trade in herring barrels,
dated June 24th, 1495, has also been preserved,! in which
an annual meeting of delegates of those concerned in the
herring fishery is ordered to take place at the Hague, to
confer on the trade's interests, as long as such conferences
shall be found necessary. Beyond such general indications
as these, however, no clue to the extent of the Dutch sea
fisheries in the course of the fifteenth century is to be
found. A placard emanated under the Emperor Charles
V., on May iSth, 1519,^ and "being very great," as its title
says, inaugurated systematical legislation on sea fisheries in

* See Mr. van Limburg Brouwer's collection of Boergoensche
Charters, pp. 51, 57, 59, 82, (1439 and 144°)-

f Eerste Memoriaelboek 's Hofs van Hollant, fol. 451.

\ Placaet ende Ordonantie of V Stuk van den Haringvaert, '/
branden van de tonnen en V zouten van den Haringh, wesende seer
groot. Derde Memoriaelboek van den Hove van Hollant, fol. 114,
verso).

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 15

the Dutch provinces. The practice of branding barrels, in
which Dutch herring laws have centred ever since, was
first made obligatory by this law, and it is very remark-
able that the principal warrant for the quality of the
•fish was as yet looked for in that of the barrel. The
obligatory brand certified nothing but the latter, and
stamps indicative of the quality of the fish were facul-
tative, except in so far as early herring was to bear a
peculiar mark. The principal contents of the edict are as
follows : —

Every barrel of herring brought to market is to be
provided with two marks or brands ; the first to be apposed
by the cooper who made the barrel, and the second by the
master of the vessel on board which it was filled. Assayers
(keurmeesters) are to be appointed in each town and village
from which fishery is exercised, to control the brands
(" omme den brand te regeren "). The attributions of these
officers, however, involved a control over the barrels only,
not over the quality of the fish. They were to test the
materials and construction of each barrel, and keep a
register of brands, stating the name of each brand's
owner. The brand, in accordance with its meaning, was
called barrel-brand (tonnebrand). None but new barrels
were to be used ; and it was prohibited to " carry to
herring," i.e. to take to sea for the fishery, empty barrels
already used. Besides the obligatory brands certifying the
quality of barrels, towns anxious to secure a high renown
for their produce were allowed to have a peculiar town
brand (here called back-brand) apposed to the barrels
exported from them as a certificate of the quality of the
fish. This faculty was largely used, as will be shown
hereafter.

No other salt was, by the law of 1519, allowed to be

1 6 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

used for salting herring than either "salt sodden from
salt " (meaning refined) or " moor-salt." * Lisboa salt was
excluded — a fact the more remarkable as no other than
Spanish or Portuguese salt was allowed to be used in later
years. No salt was allowed to be taken on board a herring
ship unless covered by a certificate as to its quality ; and
skippers were to be sworn in against breach of this rule,
which was considered extremely important. Four barrels
of moor-salt, or five and half of " salt from salt " were to be
used for one last of herring ; whence it is evident that the
curing qualities of the former (styled either " moer-zont or
zout van zelle ") were even stronger than those of refined
salt.

The quality of the herring and its packing are next
regulated to some extent in the law of 1519. Herring
caught before St. James's Day (July 25) is prescribed to be
packed in separate barrels, on which a peculiar brand
representing a " St. James's shell " {St. Jacob's schelpe) is to
be apposed. Skippers are ordered to observe peculiar
" diligence " in the packing of all sorts of herring, and to
have the fish carefully disposed in layers, and on no
account poured out of the basket into the barrel in heaps.

* Zout van goeden graauwen zelle. These words refer to a peculiar
industry now extinct since centuries. In the alluvial grounds of some
of the Dutch river mouths, which are covered by sea-water at every
tide, a kind of briny moor or turf (darincK) was formerly found in
great quantities. This substance was burnt, and its ashes, when
moistened with sea-water, yielded a peculiarly fine gray salt. This
moor-salt-making industry (zelle-neeringhe) was of course exercised
only about the mouths of the rivers, especially at Zierikzee. Boxhorn
(augmented edition of Reijgersbergeti's Chronijk van Zeelandf)
describes the whole process on page 1 14, and adds : " No other salt
than this was in times of yore used throughout the Netherlands." An
engraving representing the digging and burning of " darinck " is to be
found in Wagenaar, Vad. Historic, vol. iv.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 17

Herrings of different quality, such as full, lean (ijdel),
spawn-sick, and damaged (wrack), are to be sorted, and
each description packed in separate barrels, which are to
be kept asunder from the rest. But there are as yet no
separate brands for these several qualities ; and all
dealers, when disposing of any herring, are enjoined to
declare it to the buyer as either " full and sweet " or of
inferior quality. While at sea, herring already barrelled is
to be pickled, or moistened with sea-water every fortnight ;
whence the name of " pickle herring " (fekelharing) still
applied to the fish salted at sea. Herring caught in
the Y,* as being generally of inferior quality, is not
allowed to be salted and exported, but kept for home con-
sumption, and smoked to bucking when carried ashore.
This is perhaps the first evidence of the existence of the
smoked herring industry in these countries, and certainly
the first vestige of the Grand Fishery's curing monopoly
of later days. In order to enforce the rigid execution of
these rules, all fishing skippers are enjoined, before dis-
missing their crews, to make them declare upon oath before
the competent magistrate that no infraction whatever has
been committed during the voyage.

This placard of Charles V. may, as already remarked,
be considered as the beginning of the era of working
regulations on herring fishery — an era which has lasted
until twenty-five years ago, and witnessed the immense
prosperity of the business, but also its most profound
decline. The placard of 1519 has been often renewed, or
quoted in laws of later date as the original statute on the
subject. It is not, however, until a few years after its date
that anything like a connecting link between the several

* An inlet of the Zuider Zee, formerly the only access to Amsterdam
by sea, now drained and traversed by a canal.

1 8 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

facts and laws on record may be traced, by the resolutions
of the States of Holland, of which a register has been kept
from the year 15 24 downward. As the province of Holland
has always been prominent in fishery as well as in all other
seafaring trades, this register is indeed the principal source
from which the history both of sea fisheries and legislation
relating to them may be constructed, down to the present
century.

Under the government of the Emperor Charles and his
son King Philip of Spain, the main feature of the fisheries'
history is a succession of quarrels about money. The
Sovereign wanted to raise money from the fishermen
towards the equipment of convoying ships for the herring
fleet, and wanted it, not in the shape of temporary subsidies,
but in that of a permanent tax, as to the employment of
which control would of course be inefficient. Against these
pretensions the fishermen's attitude was one of constant
grudging and reluctant granting. Continuous wars in the
meantime occasioned constant need of efficient convoy, and
kept the money question in the foreground as a subject of
unceasing and painful wrangling, in the midst of which,
however, the trade somehow managed to prosper. Such
was, in outline, the course of affairs from the beginning of
the domination of Charles V. and his successive deputies,
down to his son's ultimate deposition from the sovereignty,
i.e. for more than sixty years.

The wars between the Emperor and France first
brought this convoying question into open dispute. The
French, indeed, used much forbearance, and their admirals
were in the .habit of offering sauf-conduits for sale to the
Dutch herring fishermen, subjects of a sovereign at war
with theirs. These sauf-conduits were purchased by many
for a consideration of fifteenpence per head of the crews

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 19

for the cod-fishing vessels, and of twenty-five for the herring
busses.* Still much damage was done to the herring fishery
by the enemy, especially in the fishing season of 1537, to
the effect that those who had not bought sauf-conduits
complained of the straits of the war, and those who had
were discontented about having to pay the enemy for
protection which, in their estimation, was due to them from
their own Government. A plan for equipping and arming
six of the busses so as to be in a condition to serve as
men-of-war in time of need was advised by the Emperor
and much discussed in the States of Holland at the time,
but suffered to drop, mainly because the shipowners who
had taken out sauf-conduits from the enemy declined to
contribute towards the costs, on the plea that such a
measure had become useless. Thus, by the Government's
inaction and dissensions among the parties concerned, part
of the fleet remained at the enemy's mercy ; and in the
year I543t the coast was infested by French privateers
to such an extent that both traders and fishermen found
it impossible to sail without facing imminent danger.
Delegates from the fishing towns and villages met at the
Hague and discussed the expediency of taking their pro-
tection into their own hands ; but they did not come to a
conclusion, although Government, in order to induce them
to fit out their own convoy, resorted to a threat of pro-
hibiting the fishing for the next season. In the States'
sitting of May 2Oth, 1544,$ the town of Schiedam's
representatives again broached the convoying question ;

* Resol. van Holland in Aert v. d. Goes' Register, 1537, p. 279, sqq.

Cf. a Placard of Sept. 18, 1536 (2e Memoriaelboek "van Mr. J. de

Jonge, fol. 62, verso).

f Resol. V. Holland, in Aert v. d. Goes' Register, 1543,

% Resolutions of the States of Holland, 1544, p. 30. /Q"-

(^

uJ LIB

20 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

and as the war with Scotland added to the fishermen's
distress, the point was a subject of frequent resultless
deliberations in the next years. In 1 547 another fruitless
appeal was made to Government, who were content to
advise the fishermen to equip one-tenth of their boats as
ships of war,* and at last, on June I ith, issued a prohibition
to fish, to last till September ist.f This induced delegates
from three of the towns most concerned, Dordrecht, Amster-
dam and Rotterdam, to crave an audience from the Queen,!
and earnestly speak up for their interests. The Emperor,
they said, had been granted taxes or supplies (beden) by
the States under promise of all available protection to
the country's mercantile and industrial interests ; and he
therefore owed the fishermen such covering by ships of
war as should enable them to fish in safety without any
special contribution on their part. Having met with a flat
refusal, for which the Emperor's distressed finances indeed
gave the most stringent of reasons, the delegates came to
terms, and after some protracted negotiations the States of
Holland at length, in 1548, granted six thousand florins
towards the equipment of five convoying ships. These,
however, were not yet ready on the Qth of August, when a
prohibition was issued against any busses sailing till the
convoy should be ready to put to sea, involving the loss of
the best part of the fishing season.§

The States' tardy concession by no means put an end to
the disputes. What Government wanted was not a grant

* Res. Ho II. 1547, p. 1 86.

t Eerste Memoriaelboek 's Hofs van Holland, van Mr. Jan van
Dam, fol. 256. Cf. Wagenaar, Vad. Hist. v. p. 297.

\ Mary of Austria, Queen of Hungary, appointed governess of the
Dutch provinces by her imperial brother, in 1530.

§ Eerste Memoriaelboek van Mr. Jan van Dam, fol. 344, verso.
See Res. Holland, 1547 and 1548, p. 197 sqq., and 245 sqq.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 21

of money for one year, but a perpetual tax under the name
of last-money, such as had formerly been levied by the
Dukes of Burgundy. To obtain this, prohibitions against
fishing were again threatened in 1549, whereupon the States
offered a gratuity of tenpence on the last of herring for the
current season only.* The offer was at once rejected, the
Queen demanding " not a gratuity, but a tax." Holland
then doubled its offerf on the 2Qth of August, 1550, and
last-money was accordingly levied from the fishermen of
the province to the amount of one florin per last of herring
caught, Zealand having before granted two, and the men of
Flanders consented to equip convoying ships at their own
expense. The tax was granted again in the next year,
when a prohibition against fishing was issued notwith-
standing, to which, however, little observance seems to
have been paid.J

The armed protection thus obtained by the States at the
fishermen's expense was very ineffectual. The Imperial
convoying ships appear, indeed, to have been utterly
inadequate to their task. They could neither cover the
whole of the herring fleet, nor be of any use to the busses
sailing home with their cargoes ; they could not even keep
the sea in rough weather, but had frequently to make for
the nearest port and leave the fishermen to their destinies.
The States, therefore, towards the beginning of the fishing
season of 1552, begged the Queen to give up convoying and
get safe conducts for the busses from the King of France.§
A similar request was made in I553,|| when the shipowners

* Res. Holland, 1549, p. 288.

f Idem. 1550, pp. 372-380.

% Res. Holland, 1551, pp. 415, 431 ; Wagenaar, Vad. Hist. v. p. 368.

§ Ibid. 1552, p. 454 ; Cf. Wagenaar, Vad. Hist. v. p. 377.

II Ibid. 1553, pp. 484, 5°4-

22 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

even offered to sail without any protection from Government,
and arm some of their vessels for war, so they might be
freed from last-money. But the offer was rejected. The
Imperial Government was ready, if needed, to send out
some worn-out ships of war after the herring busses, and
would not give up the tax, part of the produce of which
may be confidently supposed to have gone to the Imperial
coffers instead of being employed for the purpose it was
granted for. Accordingly, the last-money, which had
been granted by the States at two florins per last of herring
in I552>* was demanded to the amount of three for 1553 ;
and when refused by the States, a prohibition to sail
without convoy was once more resorted to on the 3Oth of
May, in order to enforce acquiescence.! The quarrel on
the subject between the States and the Queen Gover-
ness rose higher as the fishing season approached, j:
but was brought to an accord ; for a few days before
the sailing term, the Queen's consent to the shipowners
sailing at their own peril, and equipping their vessels
for armed resistance in case of need, was notified to the
States.§

A placard issued July 3Oth, 1553, and "ampliated," on
July 5th of the next year, determines the number of cannon,
pikes, swords, and the quantity of ammunition to be
carried on board each fishing vessel, subject to inspection
before sailing. The extent of the armament was in virtue
of these placards (4° Mem.-boek v. Dam. fol. 117, 232) to be
proportioned to each vessel's size, the largest mentioned
being forty lasts ; and the amount of warlike preparation

* 4e Memoriaelboek v. Dam, p. 260.
f Ibid. p. 91, verso,

\ Res. Holland, June i4th, 1553, p. 506.
§ Ibid. July i Qth, p. 512.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 23

prescribed is such as to constitute a heavy charge upon
vessels of such a capacity.

It would be tedious to pursue the further course of these
money quarrels between Sovereign and subjects, which, as
said above, lasted intermittently as long as the House of
Austria held sway in the Dutch provinces. The depressed
condition of the fisheries under these circumstances is
testified to, not indeed by any statistics, but by several
legislative acts. Desertion was of frequent occurrence
among the seamen hired for service in the herring fishery, as
appears from several edicts against it. The business was
subject to immense risks of war, and crews were difficult to
hire, and apt to disband when hired, as their duty on the
armed busses was more of a soldier's than a fisherman's,
and " shooting " and " fighting " are mentioned in several
placards as a part of their customary work. Shipowners
were often tempted to sell their boats and fishing gear
abroad, as appears from prohibitions against such sales ;*
and, while forced by Government to keep their vessels in
the concern, were during a series of years repeatedly
annoyed by prohibitions against sailing without a Govern-
ment convoy, which appears to have been seldom or never
forthcoming in due time. Frequent grants of money
made by the States to shipowners or their representatives,
in order to enable them to cover losses and repair damages,
likewise testify to the trade's depressed condition as a
result of the Sovereign's unceasing wars. Not only did
these wars expose the fishermen to constant danger, and
occasion frequent extortions of grants from them ; the
fact of the Sovereign being at war with one half of Europe
also gave rise to prohibitions against exporting fish, which

* Placards of July 22nd and Sept. I2th, 1553; 4e Mem.-boek, v.
Dam, fol. 112,1 26, verso.

24 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

of course depressed the markets and occasioned bitter
remonstrances at the hands of the parties concerned.
Working regulations on fisheries must in these evil days
have greatly contributed to the trades' depression ; for
being, one and all, calculated to warrant the excellence of
the fisheries' produce with a view to secure the foreign
markets at the cost of severe restrictions upon the industry's
liberty, their favourable effect of course was lost in times
when many markets were closed, and their only result was
to clog the fisherman and preclude him from taking
instant advantage of such favourable conjunctions as might
occur.

Such working rules were indeed issued with an unsparing
hand both under Charles V.'s and his son's government.
It has been shown that under the placard of 1519 herring
was allowed to be caught and cured before St. James's
Day ; and the beginning of the season seems to have been
left to the fisherman's discretion.

A prohibition to fish for herring before St. James's, or the
25th of July, seems to have been first thought of in the year
1526, when it was adopted by the States of Holland upon
the advice of all the towns concerned in the fishery,
Amsterdam alone excepted.* But this enactment was at
once complained of on the plea that, not being applicable
to the French fishermen, it would put the Dutch at a dis-
advantage against them. A sharp debate occurred on the
subject in a meeting of delegates from Holland, Zealand,
Friesland and Flanders, on March 1 2th, 1526, when by
way of a sharp taunt, the Flemings were upbraided with
having sold early herring at a low price, which imputation
they at once declined in indignant terms. The Northern
delegates persisted in the new rule ; and the matter was
* Res. Holland, in Aert v. d. Goes' Register ', p. 35.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 25

laid before Our Gracious Lady Margaret of Savoy, then
Governess of the Netherlands, in the name of the Emperor
She, however, declined to enforce the new prohibition in
the province of Flanders, upon which the towns of Delft
and Schiedam likewise refused to observe it, which the
other fishing towns of Holland and Zealand were content
to do by way of an experiment* The question was again
moved in May, 1528, between the delegates of Holland,
Zealand, Brabant, and Flanders ;f but no agreement was
come to, and herring fishing appears to have gone on
both before and after St. James's, until the Emperor pro-
hibited the former by a placard dated June 24th, 1536, {
and thereby sanctioned the principle that no early herring
was to be caught or sold by Dutchmen, which has since
been religiously observed as a fundamental fishery law. It
should be noted that initial dates for herring fishery have
been frequently shifted. About the period now spoken of,
a Burgundian law prohibited herring to be salted, i.e. to be
caught, before August 24th. A period of liberty as to the
date came next; it was fixed at July 25th, in 1536, and
shifted more than once in latter years, until definitely
appointed on June 24th. Variations in the annual migra-
tions of the herring shoals must have occasioned these
several alterations of laws.

Besides the edicts just now referred to, police regula-
tions for fishing vessels were issued by Charles V. on
August 4th, 1545, and July 9th, 1546, and renewed by his
son Philip on the same day of the year 1564. This edict,
which was afterwards re-edited by the States, in the King's

* Res. Holland, in Aert van d. Goes' Register ; pp. 38, 39.

f Ibid. p. 80.

\ Twecde Memoriaelboe&s Hofs van Hollant, fol. 43.

E. 8. D

26 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

name, on April 26th, 1578, and March pth, 1580,* contains
dispositions against the stealing or destroying of nets, &c.,
which prove the fishermen, three centuries and a half ago, to
have been similarly addicted, in the way of petty piracy, as
they appear to have been until the late International Conven-
tion. Besides penalties against such piracy, sailing orders
to hoist certain signals by day and night while the nets are
overboard, and to straighten the helm for fear of getting
caught in them, and regulations as to the treatment of fishing
gear lost at sea, are found in these statutes. Whoever finds
a " fleet," or set of nets, afloat and unowned, and hauls it
aboard, is enjoined to carry aloft as many empty herring
baskets as there are brails on the nets found ; and with
these baskets in his rigging, as a sign that he has another
man's nets on board, the finder is obliged to sail till their
owner has claimed them, in default of which he is to
hand them over to the nearest magistrate on coming into
port. It is easier to issue laws of this nature than to
enforce them ; and the several renovations of the placards
in question make it very probable that Dutch fishermen
were in the course of the sixteenth century by no means
averse to make free with the property of friend and foe
when occasion offered, or destroy it if coming across their
own. It would indeed appear that fishermen, who live by
appropriating the unowned and masterless treasures of the
sea, are easily brought to stretch the principle a point or
two, and appropriate objects which have distinct masters

* Groot Placaetboek, i. pp. 684-91. The placards of 1546, 1564 and
1578 have been registered by the Court of Holland, and are to be
found in their memorial books (ist van Dam, fol. 198 ; 3rd Ernst, fol.
173 ; 7th Ibid. fol. 236). It appears from the exordium of the placard
of 1 580 that both this and that of 1564 were renovations of another
dated August 4th, 1545.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 27

and owners ; whence the North Sea has for centuries been
the theatre of a bellum omnium contra omnes, which the
legislation of all countries has till now never succeeded in
thoroughly restraining. The constant presence of con-
voying ships with the busses did not prevent abuses of
the above nature ; nor was this end attained by a more
stringent measure enacted in most of the placards just
named, viz. the skippers' obligation, when home from a
voyage, to have three or four men out of their crews
examined upon oath by the competent magistrate as to
damage done to others or suffered at their hands, or other
breach of statute committed.

Besides police and working rules, taxes were frequently
applied to the herring fishery by the Austrian lords of the
land. Last-money, which we have seen exacted by a
proceeding little short of actual compulsion towards the
end of the first half of the sixteenth century, and which
was then reluctantly granted, " in the hope of its being for
the last time this year,"* became, on the contrary, a
perpetual tax, the amount of which was determined
annually, and varied accordingly as the Government's
wants were greater or lesser, or the occasion for convoying
ships more or less pressing. The tax, however, never
exceeded two florins (or "pounds of twenty pence") till
the end of the century. To this tax, originally a retribu-
tion for convoy, an excise duty on herring was added in
I57i,f amounting to twopence on the barrel, to be paid by
the last seller. A third tax, the exact nature of which I
have not been able to ascertain, is mentioned about 1555
by the name of tithe or tenth penny (" tiende penning")

* Res. Holland, 1550, p. 172 and following,
t Ibid. 1571, p. 512.

D 2

28 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

of all herring.* The levying of this tax was deferred
to William of Orange, appointed Stadtholder, or Lord
Lieutenant, of Holland, Zealand, and Utrecht, when King
Philip left the country after the peace of Cateau Cambresis,
in the spring of 1559. If the youthful Lord Lieutenant
ever levied this tithe at all, he certainly did so with
exemplary leniency. Upon taking charge of the Provinces'
affairs he found the tax considerably in arrear, as appears
from a resolution of the States of Holland dated June 6th,
1559,1 by which they begged to know the herring fishery's
returns for the years 1553 and 1557, in order to determine
the amount due as tithe for the said years. The Prince
answered their request by a prayer to suspend the recover-
ing of the tax till his Highness's return from France, and
it was still due in 1561,^ nor have I found any positive
evidence of its having ever been recovered at all.

A very different method of drawing money out of the
fisheries was pursued by the Spanish governors. The
Duke of Alva, who was sent to the Netherlands in 1567
with orders to put down heresy and generally break the
country to the iron Spanish rule, first obtained a loan of
28,000 fl. from the States in 157^5 by a menace of with-
drawing the fishermen's convoy if the money were not
forthcoming. The exaction was the worse, as the ineffi-
ciency of Government convoying ships was- as bitterly
complained of about this time as twenty years before, and
the Commissioners of the herring fishery, of whom more
anon, were obliged to equip men-of-war for their safety at

* Wagenaar, Vad. Hist. v. p. 386, mentions this tax to have been
first exacted in 1553 ; but is not at all sure about the matter, and
abstains from giving particulars.

| Res. Holland, 1559, p. 289.

± Ibid. 1561, p. 483. § Ibid. 1571, p. 569.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 29

their own expense in 1570, and sued for a loan from the
States in 1571 in order to do the same during the fishing
season of that year.*

Fresh taxes to the fisheries' detriment were exacted
under the terrible Duke's successor in 1575, when a
twentieth penny, or 5 per cent, duty, was ordered to be levied
on all fresh fish brought to market in the towns and town-
ships of Holland, and a new excise duty of sixpence per
ton of salt fish was moreover established, to be paid by the
buyer during the four months succeeding the 1st of March.f

Whatever may have been the fisheries' condition in
these times of violent warfare and constant danger, it is
evident that they were never entirely stopped, though it
may be readily assumed that many fishing vessels and
crews left the nearly unprotected trade and joined the
bold privateers, who, under the name of " Watergeuzen,"
took a prominent share in the military events of the time.
Still, requests of the fisheries for either subsidy or pro-
tection are of annual occurrence even in this period, as
proofs of the fisheries' continuation ; and it is indeed a
strong instance of the trade's vitality that it was never
completely given up in years when fishing vessels were
constantly beset by many enemies, and never obtained
anything like efficient protection.

The year 1575 marks the beginning of a new era for
the sea fisheries of Holland and Zealand. The sovereigns
of the house of Austria and their several lieutenants had
generally considered fishermen and shipowners as subjects
from whom considerable sums might be extracted under
promises of protection which never was efficiently given.
No sooner, on the contrary, did the Prince of Orang(

* Res. Holland, 1571, p. 555.

f Ibid, i "575, pp. 88, 108, 113, 123.

30 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

the provinces' government into his own hands after the
revolution's first successes, but the fisheries came in for
Government's most earnest solicitude, and were treated as
so important an industry deserved. Up to the said year,
the point at issue between Government and fishermen had
been, who should obtain most from the other and do least
for him. The situation at once became the reverse when
a national government was virtually established, and a ready
willingness to do their utmost for the trade's benefit pre-
vailed on both sides.

This altered state of things was first clearly seen when,
towards the beginning of the herring season of I575»
William of Orange called a general meeting of the fisheries'
delegates, and earnestly represented to them the expediency
of summing their trade by their own energy at any cost,
as the state of the country's affairs for the moment left no
possibility of effectual Government assistance.

A body representative of those concerned in the herring
fishery, which in 1575 was recognised by the Prince as a
semi-official institution, had in truth borne such character
long before. The herring shipowners' habit of appointing
some of themselves to forward their common outward
interests appears indeed to have been about as ancient as
the trade itself, inasmuch as " the common merchants " of
certain towns of Holland are mentioned as grantees of
privileges extending to the fishery, in the edict of Albert
King of Sweden (1368), which has been mentioned above.
An organised body of local fishery committees, however,
does not appear to have existed before the middle of the
sixteenth century, when such an organisation seems to
have been the result of constant need of common defence
against both enemies abroad and Government exactions at
home. A committee of the herring fishery is first mentioned

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 31

in 1548* as having conferred with a Government officer
on the ways of furthering the herring fishery's interest.*
In I556,t the same Board, or Corporation, gave a receipt
for moneys granted by the States for the trade's benefit ;
it was then composed of the Burgomasters of the several
towns and townships where herring ships were owned, viz.
Delft, Rotterdam, Schiedam, Brielle, Enkhuizen, Wormer,
Jisp and Grootebroek. About this period requests for
subsidy and convoy to the herring ships are generally
mentioned as having been preferred by " the fishery," " the
common fishery," or " those of the fishery ; " and the
variations in the name by which the corporation was
designed at the time confirm the supposition that its
existence as a recognised public authority cannot date from
a period much anterior.

At any rate, they held considerable official power and
responsibility at the time mentioned. The delegates of
Delft, Enkhuizen, Brielle, Rotterdam and Schiedam in 1558
agreed to an " accord "t by which the fishing boats of the
coast villages were bound, in return for the enjoyment of
warlike protection, to pay into the hands of the Delegates'
Commissioners such a sum per ton of fresh herring sold
either at home or in England, as should be appointed by
the delegates aforesaid ; and this agreement was ratified
and registered by the Court of Holland. By another accord,
dated September 26th, 1558,$ and registered by the same
authority, the " Deputies of the Herring Fishery " agreed to
have every tenth fishing buss equipped for war ; the
expense of such armaments to be borne by the ten

* Res. Holland, 1548, p. 288.

t Ibid. 1556, p. 92.

J Eerste Memoriaelboek. B. Ernst, fol. 136.

§ Ibid. fol. 133, verso.

32 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES,

vessels together, forming what is, in very un-nautical
style, denominated a band (bende). The arrangement
must have been short-lived, if ever executed at all ; but
it testifies to the public authority of those who made it on
behalf of the rest. Again, in 1562, a loan of 10,000 florins
was granted to " Deputies of the Herring Trade" by the
States of Holland and West Friesland.* They were there-
fore at the said period a recognised public body qualified
to act in the name of all concerned in the trade. A much
more extensive range of official qualification was opened to
them after the proceedings between them and the Prince of
Orange, which, as said above, took place in 15/5.

The Herring Commissioners' attitude in this conference
is a strong evidence both of their extensive acting powers
and the considerable resources of their constituencies, in
spite of bad times. The Prince having explained to them
the impossibility of any considerable financial aid out of the
public exchequer, the delegates, with a readiness strongly
contrasting to the reluctant grants formerly wrung from
the States and the fishing towns, voted a supply of three
thousand Carolus florins for the first month of the fishing
season, and two thousand more for each of the three months
to follow, the said charges to be borne by the shipowners
according to a fair repartition.! Twelve convoying ships
of war were to be equipped out of this money, and further
funds, in case of insufficiency, to be found out of the custom-
house duties (licenten) on herring. But the Commissioners'
task did not stop at the granting of money. They were
now for the first time to have a fair share in the disposal
of it. A committee was to be appointed by the States and
the fishers' delegates jointly, for the organisation of the

* Res. Holland, 1562, pp. 689, 694-696.
t Ibid. i575>P- 549

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 33

convoying service, the appointment of officers to command
the ships of war, and the regulation of all further matters
thereunto pertaining.* This agreement between the Prince
and the parties concerned was readily ratified by the States
on July 5th, i575,f and the Herring Commissioners were
further empowered to levy such last-money on the herring
busses as they should see fit, for the gradual reimbursement
of the sums advanced ; i.e. properly, to distribute the
charges of their safety among shipowners as they should
judge equitable. Last-money was accordingly decreed to
be levied at thirty pence per last of herring in the year
1576,1 not by the States' collectors, but by officials ap-
pointed by the Herring Deputies in each of the fishing
towns. Thus the tax, formerly a loathed and hard-grudged
Government exaction, took the shape of a contribution
willingly granted by the parties concerned towards their
mutual protection and safety ; and fishing shipowners, as
soon as the management of their joint interests was put
into their own hands, formed themselves into an extensive
corporation and at once proceeded to take the measures
most urgently required. It is a fact worth mentioning, as
an instance of the national energy of former times, that the
whole of the men concerned in one of the principal indus-
tries thus organised their business, and readily assumed
heavy pecuniary obligations to keep it going, at a moment
when every nerve of the nation was strained in self-defence
against an overwhelming enemy, and the very heaviest
financial sacrifices had to be demanded by Government to
keep up a war, the duration and event of which no one
could at the time foresee.

* Res. Holland^ 1575, pp. 550, 551.

f Ibid. p. 588.

$ Ibid. 1576, p. 89.

34 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

The Herring Committee's official attributes were soon
further extended. They had been appointed administrators
of their own tax in 1575 ; they had judicial functions
granted to them two years later.

By a placard of May 3rd, 1577,* tne States, as in the
King's name (who as yet was the legal Sovereign), enacted
severe penalties against selling herring or fishf caught
by Dutchmen elsewhere than upon Dutch markets, and
exchanging them for salt or barrels with foreign fishermen
at sea. A resolution of the States of Holland, dated
July I2th,j appointed the Fisheries Delegates (" die van de
Visscherije") to enforce this statute and proceed against all
who should infringe it, the fines pronounced to be for the
common fisheries' benefit, as a means of ensuring the
Committee's utmost vigilance.

Legislation on herring fishery had now gradually become
rather extensive. But it was disseminated in divers laws and
placards, the observance of which must have been fraught
with considerable difficulty, as the method of publishing
laws was at this period very defective. This circumstance
probably led to something like a codification of the fishery
statutes, which took place in the year 1582, after the formal
defection of the Northern Provinces and their constitution
as a free State. This statute, in which all former ones were
resumed, may therefore be considered as the first instance
of legislation on fishery under the Dutch Republic.

* Groot Placaetboek, vol. ii. p. 2145. The statute was re-inforced
on April 26th, 1578, and registered in the 7th Mem. Boek. B. Ernst,
fol. 234, verso.

t The wordyfo^ is not used in the ancient Dutch fishing vocabulary
for herring. " Fish " means other fish, generally cod.

\ Res. Holland, 1577, p. 415.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 35

PART II.

SEA FISHERIES UNDER THE DUTCH REPUBLIC.

THE history of the Republic of the United Netherlands
embraces the period of Holland's utmost political greatness.
It is likewise in this period that the Dutch sea fisheries
reached their culminating point, at which they exceeded
those of most foreign nations ; while in the latter days of
the Republic the nation's glory and the trade's prosperity
were both swept away by the effect of one common cause.

In accordance with the tremendous development of the
fisheries, and of the herring trade especially, during the
first century of the Republic's existence, both literature
and legislation relative to them are plentiful in the course
of this period, and a better idea of the trade's importance
may be formed than before, when laws, indeed, were fre-
quently made, but facts on record are few. These several
circumstances make the republican period a peculiarly
interesting part of the fisheries' history.

It is not till this period that some knowledge can be ob-
tained of the different branches of fishery, one of which (the
whaling trade) did not exist before, while as to another
(the cod business) only a few indications exist during
former centuries. The several branches of the fishing
business have throughout the Republic been separate con-
cerns, or nearly so. They were carried on under circum-
stances so different, that laws held necessary for one were
never thought of for others. It is therefore advisable to
divide this part of their history into several chapters, rela-
tive to, i, the "grand " or cure-herring fishery ; 2, whaling ;

36 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

3, cod fishery ; and 4, the minor industry of catching
fresh fish of different kinds, both in the North Sea and
Zuider Zee.

Differences with other nations about the right to fish in
certain parts of the sea have been frequent during the
period which will be treated in the annexed pages, when as
yet there were no generally adopted rules of international
law. As these differences were of vital interest to a nation
whose fishing vessels once frequented the shores of
several States, a brief account of them will be given in a
separate chapter.

CHAPTER I.
GRAND FISHERY.

THE distinctive points about the cured-herring fishery
under the Republic are the following : —

1st. It was exercised in the second half of the year,
chiefly about the coasts of England and Scotland.

2nd. It was carried on in keeled vessels known by the
general denomination of busses (buiz&n), the size of which
afforded room to cure the herring on board as soon as
caught, and thus produce the excellent and easily export-
able article for which Holland has long been famous
throughout the world.

3rd. It was, by reason of the immense market open to its
produce, at one time very far ahead of all other branches
of fishery as regards actual importance, and its preservation
was one of the chief objects of the Government's solicitude,
whence the history of fishery legislation is chiefly that of
regulations on herring fishery.

It has been said at the conclusion of the first part of this
work, that something like a codification of the laws on

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 37

herring fishery was aimed at in the very first year of the
Republic's existence. As these statutes have been in
vigour, with slight alterations, for two centuries and more,
and their influence on the fishery's destinies has been very
considerable, it is necessary to expose their tenor at some
length.

Part of the fishing code alluded to was indeed anterior to
the Republic, being contained in several placards dated
March Qth, 1580,* and issued in King Philip's name,
though his actual authority had then ceased to prevail in
the country, and he was no party to the laws issued, for
form's sake, as under his authority. Besides the police
regulations referred to at the conclusion of Part I., these so-
called Royal placards contain certain rules to be observed
in the hiring of sailors for service in fishing vessels, and
the relations between them and the ships' masters or " steers-
men." The prohibition to carry Dutch herring abroad or
dispose of it at sea to foreign fishermen is likewise repeated
in one of these Acts. The most interesting part of them
is, however, the fixation of the season for " salting herring
in barrels," between June 1st and January ult, being a
derogation to former placards prohibiting the trade before
St. James's Day, which seem to have ere this fallen into
oblivion. To preserve the ancient reputation of the Dutch
brand-herring was once more the object of this enactment.
" Whereas," says the placard, " it has come to Our knowledge
that some, for their singular profit do catch the herring
before its season and time, ere they be good and right
natural to eat, and salt them in barrels and sell them in the
market, though such herrings be quite untimely and often
prejudicious to the consumer thereof, thereby causing in

* Groot Placaetboek v. Hollandt en Wesivriesland, vol. i. pp. 684-
691, 696-707, 715-717, 748-751-

38 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

these countries not only, but also and in particular in other
lands, whereunto herring is carried and diverted, a great
disgust, dishonour and contempt of herring, so that the
taste for good and timely herring is likewise spoiled, the
latter being thereby made unwilling and often remaining un-
sold along with the bad, to the loss of the merchants, and
consequently to the prejudice of the fishery, which is one
of the principal mines of our common countries' welfare ;
against which sundry abuses wishing promptly to provide,
We do well and expressly prohibit," &c. It is a constant
and prominent feature of Dutch fishery legislation that
people are always forbidden to do what they saw fit to do
" for their singular profit."

Legislators never, until twenty-five years ago, could
realise the notion that, upon the whole, the fisherman is the
best judge of his own interests. Constant infractions of
the herring laws, instead of bringing the governing powers
and their advisers to acknowledge that to break the law
must upon the whole be more profitable than to observe it,
only caused them frequently to renew the different Acts,
and enact still heavier penalties against transgressors who
were uniformly considered as reckless and unprincipled
men ready to sacrifice the common interest to the success
of their own misdoings. It was considered laudable to
seek profit by catching herring, provided the profit should
only be looked for where Government pointed it out. All
other profit-seeking was a heinous offence.

The same anxiety to maintain the reputation of the
Dutch cured herring abroad, which speaks from the above-
quoted considerations, also dictated another part of the
herring legislation of 1580, viz. the prohibitions against
tampering with brands. It has been said in the first part
of this work that the branding of herring barrels was ever

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 39

since 1519 subject to control by assayers (" keurmeesters ")
appointed for the purpose in each town ; and the brand
thus constituted an official certificate of the article's
excellence. In order to preserve this character, and like-
wise to protect the Dutch fishermen against foreign com-
petition, it was in 1580 prohibited under severe penalties,
firstly, to privately mark barrels containing spawn-sick and
other defective herring with counterfeits of the controlled
brands, or even with fancy marks,* and next, to pack
herring caught by foreigners in barrels properly branded
before. The use and even the importing of foreign or
unrefined salt f was also prohibited by this Act, and the
prohibition was even extended to " small salt ' made or
refined in the country, which it was forbidden either to
sell or use, unless to foreigners and for the purpose of
exportation.

But these regulations were not deemed sufficient The
brand inspector's control, which till now only served to
warrant the quality of barrels, appears not always to have
been sufficiently close ; and the deputies of the herring-
fishing towns found upon inquiry that the quality of both
herring and barrels exported under the official brand was
sometimes deficient " because of the small control hitherto
exercised thereon." Wherefore, "having often been col-
legially assembled at Delft and ripely communicated on the
matter," they drew up a regulation " touching the making,
assaying and branding of herring barrels, the time of
catching, salting, handling, and packing of herring," which

* Literally, " with ornamented bye-marks or otherwise."
f " Salt not sodden of salt." The " moor-salt," or " zelle " highly
recommended in the placard of 1519, appears to have been utterly out
of use towards the end of the i6th century, as it is not even mentioned
in the laws of 1580.

40 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

was arrested by the States of Holland on April 27th, 1582,*
and is the first instance of Republican herring legislation.
The principal provisions of this Act, which has for more
than two centuries been the base of all working regulations
upon the herring trade, are the following : —

Besides the cooper's private mark, already prescribed by
the placard of 1519, a town-brand, which in the said year
was admitted in such towns as should see fit to use it, is
now ordered to be established in every town where barrels
are made. All barrels, whether whole, half, quarter
(kinnetgens), or eighth part, are to be marked with this
town-brand (here called tonnebrand] previous to their being
carried out of the town. The cooper apposes his own
brand, but the town-brand is added by municipal officers
or branders, under the assayer's supervision. These
branders are forbidden ever to let their tools and marking-
irons go out of their hands, or send them to the cooper's by
their wives, children, or servants. They are enjoined, before
branding each barrel, to examine it well and roll it over
three or four times containing a certain quantity of clean
water, and refuse it if found to leak, or to be worm-eaten,
made of light wood, or otherwise defective. No branding of
barrels is allowed between sunset and sunrise, and when
the brander comes to the cooper's to perform his business,
the latter, his wife and journeymen are not to be present at
the operation, but keep within call either in the house or a
street's width from it, in case the brander should want to
show them any defectivity in the barrels. The number of
staves to each barrel is to be twelve or thirteen as a mini-
mum, and the dimensions of barrels, staves and hoops,f as

* Groot Placaetboek, vol. i. pp. 718-727.

t A standard measure of herring barrels appears to have been kept
at Dordrecht. According to van der Lely's Recucil (p. 15) the

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 41

well as the places where to appose the cooper's and the
town-brand, are accurately determined by the law. Branders
are allowed to exercise the coopering trade on their own
behalf, but they are in this case to have their article
examined and branded either by a colleague or by the
assayer or " keurmeester " himself. The barrels carried to
sea by fishermen are to be either new, or provided with
fresh hoops and assayed and branded afresh since last used.
The packing of herring and piling up of barrels is ordered
to take place either in the public street or with doors open,
so as to enable all and sundry to control the execution of
the aforesaid dispositions as regards the quality of the
barrels used.*

The nature of the salt to be used by fishermen at sea is
regulated in detail. Gross salt, if used at all, is to be
previously examined by the assayer, and, for full herring
caught after St. James's, Bartholomew's, or Elevation day,
" small salt sodden from salt " is the only sort allowed. No
salt is to be sold, bought, or taken on board, unless accom-
panied by a certificate as to its quality, delivered at the
place of fabrication.

As to the fishery itself, the most important disposition of
this Act is the fixation of the fishing season for cured-
herring between July 1st and December ult. of each year.
The former, or opening date, which had been appointed at
June ist two years before, was again shifted to St. John's

Herring College in 1593 resolved to have the assayers' measures
adjusted to this standard, and a general " equalization " of all barrels
was ordered to take place in 1624.

* It was commonly done in public ; whence probably the name of
" Haringpakkery " still applied to one of the broadest quays of
Amsterdam.

E. 8. E

42 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

(or the 24th of June) in 1588* as an evidence of the un-
certainty about, and probably the variations of, the true fit
herring-season. It cannot be doubted that by these suc-
cessive enactments fishermen have often been prevented
from exercising- their trade at times when it mi^ht have

c> o

been done with a fair result To bind a business to certain
dates and seasons is at all times a dangerous practice in
legislation ; but whenever nature shows the fit season for
such an industry to be variable, all restrictions ought to be
abolished at once. The mere fact that an alteration of
laws of this nature is found necessary should be a reason to
repeal them altogether ; for there can in that case be no
certainty that the new law is better than the old.

The treatment, or mode of handling! herring when
caught, is accurately prescribed in the State's placard of
1582. Besides a reiteration of former prohibitions against
disposing of herring either abroad or at sea, the masters of
herring-busses are enjoined on their responsibility, and
under considerable penalties, to see that the fish be laid in
the barrels in regular layers, four in length, from bottom to
bottom. The packing of bad herring together with good
is severely prohibited, and it should be noticed that the
sale of the very worst J article was allowed, provided it
should be classed and owned as such when sold.

* See also a placard dated March I7th, 1593, Gr. Placaetboek,
vol. i. pp. 726-29, where the date is likewise fixed at " St. John's Day
in midsummer."

f " Havenen," a word actually used only in the sense of "damag-
ing."

% " Yelen-, nachtschamel-, kuytsieck-, melk-sieck-, stanck ofte want
haring." The latter words were substituted in 1584 for the original
term : sterke haring. The one means " stinking," the other " bad "
or " strong," in the sense of " strong butter." " Kuytsieck " and
" melk-sieck " are the words indicating extreme ripeness of the spawn

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 43

In order to ensure the observation of these statutes, each
fishing captain is enjoined as heretofore to have his private
mark apposed to each barrel before letting it out of his
vessel, and have this mark and his name entered in a
register kept by the town magistrate. Obligatory inspec-
tion of the fish, if for exportation, is now for the first time
added to assay of the barrels ; the inspector's duty being
to prevent herring of different qualities being packed in
one fust, and to see to the quality of the salt used. It is
prohibited, as formerly, to wash, clean, pack or otherwise
manipulate foreign herring. The present law is ordered to
be annually promulgated afresh in every fishing town, on
the ist of March, at which date most herring captains are
stated to be at home ; and all such alterations and fresh
statutes on the subject as may be found necessary are
ordered to be drawn up by the Deputies of the towns where
the herring trade is exercised, and promulgated after the
States' approval. The Herring Deputies or Commissioners'
functions, which till now involved the police of the trade
and the administration of its common financial interests,
are thereby completed with what is, in fact, legislative
power ; for it will appear further that their draft statutes
were always approved without any alterations by the proper
Legislature, i.e. the States-Provincial or General, as the case
might be.

It will be seen from this brief account of what may
perhaps, though improperly, be styled " the herring-fishery
code of 1580-82," that its chief object was to uphold the
reputation which herring of Dutch brand then already
enjoyed in all foreign markets ; its next, to keep the staple

and milt ; " nachtschamel " I take to stand for " overnight " or herring
not cured immediately after the catch.

E 2

44 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

market of the article in the country, and have it exported
from the Dutch emporiums only.

The first-named and chief pre-occupation of the suc-
cessive Dutch governments had indeed been apparent,
besides laws, from several facts on record previous to the
Republic's establishment. In 1552 it was reported that
citizens of Antwerp had presumed to tamper with the
town brand of Dordrecht, erasing it from certain herring-
barrels and substituting another mark for it, " notwith-
standing the brand of Dordt is older and more authentic,
and known all over Germany, France and other countries."
Dordrecht laid the matter before the States of Holland,
who thought it of sufficient importance to send their
Advocate (whose functions had some analogy with those
of a Secretary of State) to Brussels on purpose to obtain
redress.* In the next years regular lawsuits were carried
on against the authorities of Malines, Ghent, Flushing and
Nieuwpoort respectively, for having repacked herring from
Holland in other barrels,! thereby enhancing their Zealand
and Flemish marks or brands with the excellence of the
Hollands produce, and perhaps using the empty barrels
marked with the Hollands brand to pass off foreign fish
of inferior quality. Again, in 1582, the States of Holland
intervened in a lawsuit then pending between certain
citizens of Spires and Worms, in the heart of Germany,
about the quality of herrings bought and sold between
them, merely because the herring in question bore a Dutch
brand.if

The importance of the salt-herring fishery and trade

* Res. Holl. 1552, pp. 482-3.

f Res. Holl. 1554, p. 584; I555/P- 697 ; 1561, pp. 480, 517 ; 1565,

P- 33-

% Res. Holland 1582, pp. 241, 248.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 45

about this period is testified to by many more credentials.
In 1581, the States thought it worth their while to des-
patch an embassy to Bremen,* in order to obtain the
removal of certain edicts there issued, prejudicial to the
Dutch herring trade's interest ; and let it be remembered
that the Provinces were at this very time occupied by so
very momentous a plan as the abjuration of their Sove-
reign the King of Spain, and their constitution as a free
republic in the face of the world. It is likewise a fact
not to be overlooked that at this most critical juncture of
their history, while weighed down on all sides by cares
innumerable of war, finance, and politics, the Province of
Holland never once let her herring-fishermen lack convoy,
when imminent danger from the enemy at sea did not
force them to prohibit the fishery altogether.

The fishers fully responded to their government's care
and energy ; for though many of their busses were taken
year by year, either by the enemy's cruisers or by Dunkirk
privateers, they never lost heart, but still continued the
trade, under protection generally insufficient, and in the
face of the enormous financial liabilities laid upon them
by their disasters, and borne by them in common, under
their self-appointed commissioners' administration. The
name of Grand Fishery,f which in 1580 and afterwards was
generally applied to the cured-herring concern to indicate
its being " the chief industry of the country and principal
gold-mine to its inhabitants," is indeed justified at the period
now spoken of, by the splendid pluck and untiring tenacity
displayed by the men who exercised it, under circumstances
which reduced to insignificance many industries less directly
exposed to the war's calamities than theirs.

Res. Holland 1581, pp. 579, 732, 766 ; 1582, pp. 240-1.
t " Groote Visscherye?

46 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

The war, indeed, took manifold effect upon the herring-
fishery. Besides losses at sea and taxes ashore, the trade
had to bear the consequences of a prohibition to export
victuals, fish included, which was one of the most un-
popular measures adopted by the Earl of Leicester during
his short-lived and infelicitous administration of the United
Provinces. The interdiction was indeed, at the Herring
Commissioners' request, repealed in 1586 as regarded
exportation to neutral States ; * and traders managed to
get their produce carried to Germany by a circuit, the
Rhine being closed by the town of Nijmegen having
embraced the enemy's cause,! and refusing to let any
merchandise pass out of the revolted provinces, even upon
the States' urgent request. Still the prohibition was
maintained as against exportation to the enemy's do-
minions, and sometimes enforced by the exporters being
obliged, upon their ships' return, to show an attest
mentioning the place where the herrings had been sold.J
It is a curious example of the political status of the
day, that an Englishman sent to govern the Republic
should have enforced a measure which closed the im-
portant markets of Belgium against the herring traders of
the country, while the States were at the same time
making considerable money sacrifices in the latter's
behalf.

Among these sacrifices it is now time to mention the
immunity of excise duty on salt used in curing herrings at
sea, which was conceded to the Grand Fishery as a special
boon by the Prince of Orange, and ratified by the States-
General soon afterwards. This privilege is first mentioned

* Res. HolL 1586, p. 308.

t Ibid. 1585, p. 245 ; 1584, p. 538.

'\. Ibid. 1585, p. 808,

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 47

in 1586;* it has been maintained ever since and exists to
the present day, as will be seen in another part of this
work. It was extended to the whole of the Republic as
emanating from the central legislative power ; but the
province of Holland very soon bought the privilege off, for
their province, by an agreement with the College of the
Grand Fishery, in virtue of which the fishermen paid the
excise duty, and a consideration of fl. 6000 a-year was
granted to the College out of the provincial treasury.f

The duty in Holland then amounted to fl. 14 per hundred-
weight of fine white salt ; whence the quantity of salt
annually used by the sea-fisheries of the province would
appear to have been something less than 43,000 pounds.
It would not, however, be safe to attach much importance to
this average calculation ; for compared to the far superior
quantities of salt now used free of excise by the Dutch sea-
fisheries, it does not correspond to the probable extent
of the trade in the province of Holland at the period
now spoken of. Many considerations, which it would be
highly interesting to trace at leisure, may have led the
Fishery College to sell their immunity for an inequivalent
sum.

Besides the Spanish fleets, the great bane of the Dutch
sea-fisheries at this time were the privateers from Dunkirk,
who may be said throughout the Republic's history to have
been to herring fishers what the dog-fish is to the herring.
Constant complaints were made of busses taken and des-
troyed by these audacious filibusters, against whose superior
strength and seamanship such convoy as the States could

; Res. States-General 1586, June I2th and November 4th, 1587
September 4th.

t Res. Holl. 1588, pp. 133, 231 ; 1589, p. 459 ; 1593, p. 407 ; 1595,
p. 69, &c.

48 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

\

afford was insufficient The plan of self-help, which had
been pressed upon the fisheries by Charles the Fifth's
lieutenants, was now once more adopted ; and by a States
of Holland placard, dated May I4th, 1596,* busses were
forbidden to sail unless either under convoy or "in admiral-
ship " i.e., in squadron of twenty at the least. In the latter
case each of the vessels was to carry a certain quantity of
artillery and ammunition, and the whole squadron to be com-
manded by an " Admiral " appointed by the captains out
of their number. This expedient was especially recom-
mended by the promise of a gratification to the fishing
commander who should capture or sink a vessel of the
enemy's. It does not appear that the premium was much
contended for, as the paying of ransom, or safeguard -
money, was at the time resorted to by numerous fishermen,!
until the passports delivered were denounced by the enemy
in 1599-t A special committee of ship-owners and Govern-
ment officials had meanwhile been appointed § to draw a
plan for the fisheries' perpetual preservation ; but there is
no result of their deliberations on record, and in the end,
as the prevailing financial distress made it impossible to
provide sufficient convoy by Government men-of-war, the
States granted an extraordinary subsidy of fl. 20,000 to the
fisheries' commissioners in i6oo,|| out of which they were to
find their own convoy. The grant was repeated for a long
series of years, when fishermen accordingly sailed under
cover of convoyers equipped at their own expense. These
vessels, afterwards called " Direction-ships," (Directie-

* Groot Plac. Boek, i. 711.

f Res. Holland 1598, pp. 135, 193.

J Ibid. 1599, pp. 27, 623.

§ Ibid. 1598, pp. 128, 193.

jj Ibid. 1600, p. 7i.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 49

•

schepeti)* to signify their nature as belonging to the
Fisheries' directors, were nevertheless commanded by
officers appointed by the Stadtholder and under oath of
fidelity to the States-General. A pusillanimous plan for
pacifying the Dunkirk Vikings, by issuing letters of safe-
conduct under the States' seal to such enemies as should
reciprocally let the United Provinces' vessels fish unmo-
lested, " in the hope," as the States of Holland candidly
aver, "that fewer pirates will this year put to sea from the
ports of Flanders," f was indeed tried a few years afterwards,
but there is no evidence of its having had anything like
success. And this, indeed, seems highly improbable ; for
there was not much promise in an attempt to make the
Dunkirkers give up piracy by offering them a permission
to fish within range of the guns of the States' men-of-war.

The fishery laws were in the meantime strenuously main-
tained, although under considerable difficulties. It was not

o

easy to enforce the prohibitions against carrying herring
caught by Dutch fishermen directly abroad ; and moreover,
the inevitable " gain-seeking ' people, who " for their
singular profit " did not fear to break the law, managed to
smuggle herring not lawfully packed and branded through
the United Provinces, and elude the authorities' vigilance.
Notwithstanding the yearly reminder to the herring-skippers,
the placards, in a word, got out of observation "by the
slowness and the passing of years," and were frequently
re-enacted in the first years of the seventeenth century.

* Cf.dejonge, Geschiedenis van het Nederl. Zeeivezen, i. pp. 257-8.
This institution is also mentioned in Meynert Semeyns' " Beschryvinge
over de Haring visscherye in Hollandt? but with the lack of precisioi
usual in that otherwise precious contemporary author.

t Res. Holland 1606, p. 783.

\ Viz., the years 1604, 1606, 1607, 1612, 16 5, 1620, 16^1^1632,-

Groot Plac. Bock. i. p. 733, and following.

\\j-j

50 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

They were, besides, altered in some points, among which
some importance may be attributed to the shifting of the
salt-herring fisheries closing-day to January ult, the
express prohibition against curing salt-herring ashore, the
prohibition to cure herring with other salt than Spanish or
Portuguese, and the institution of divers brands, each to be
solely exported to certain towns or countries. The leading
idea of these several enactments is an extreme anxiety, not
only to have the foreign markets constantly supplied writh
a good article, but also to have that article packed and
otherwise made up in the fashion customary in the several
markets. For instance, a " Rouen brand " was consecrated
to exportation to France, and there was also a " Cologne
brand." The principle of having distinct brands for herring
caught at different parts of the season, which we have seen
established in 1519 by the prescription of a "St. James's
brand," was much extended in the early years of the seven-
teenth century, when a " Lady Day " (Vrouwe brand), an
" Elevation Day " (Kruis brand), and a Bartholomew brand
were, if not first used, at least first mentioned in the herring
laws.* Each of these brands was to have the peculiar look
customary in the several markets ; and to this effect very
detailed prescriptions were given as to the number of hoops
to be applied to the barrels marked with each brand. In
short, having undertaken in many points to regulate
the fisherman's business, legislation by degrees took the
dealer's, broker's, and expeditioner's likewise into her own
hands, and the merchant's activity and acuteness were
superseded by Government rules. Constant changes in
the different markets' requirements of course led to fre-

* Brands stating the time of capture were then the only distinctives.
The quality-brands stating herring to be " full," " matties," or " ylen,"
are ot much posterior invention.

THE HISTORY OP DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 51

quent alterations of these enactments, and the branding
and packing legislation of the period now spoken of is,
as a consequence, rather intricate.

But of the several ampliations to the herring fishing laws
in the first quarter of the seventeenth century, those rela-
tive to the practice of u sale-hunting ' are the most im-
portant. This peculiar trade has originated in the Dutch
fisheries' particular situation. Being obliged to fish far from
their own shores, the busses would have lost much precious
time if they had been obliged to sail home as soon as their
cargo was completed, and land their fish before catching
more. They would, moreover, in most cases have lost the
advantage of landing herring very early in the season, and
being first in the market, which was, and is, of great im-
portance, as freshly salted or " new ' herring has always
been very much appreciated, and paid for at several times the
price of fish caught or sold later in the year.* To secure the

In fact, a frantic eagerness to be first in the market has always
been an interesting characteristic of the Dutch herring trade in the
early season ; so much so, that it may be doubted whether the very
real advantage of selling the first barrels in any given market was
often worth the outlay of money and trouble made to secure it.
Throughout the Republic's time, slow coaches and slower canal boats
were the only convey ances ; the Dutch never were great horsemen,
and journeys on foot were not disdained even by those endowed with
worldly goods. But on the day when the first " ventjagers" arrived at
Rotterdam, or Vlaardingen, no speed was deemed sufficient to carry
the first barrels of " new'' herring to the inland towns. Dealers kept
light curricles and fleet horses on purpose, and the minute a few
barrels were unshipped and assayed, a furious race to the Hague,
Amsterdam, &c., began. Each of the vehicles could carry a few
barrels only, and the profit of the thing perhaps did not generally
cover the expense. But to be first in the market anywhere was always
a point of honour with the Dutch herring-dealer ; and the day when
the first herring arrived, and the barrels were posted across country in
chaises, with foaming teams and streaming (lags, was a day of general

52 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

advantage of the early market, fast-sailing vessels, called
" ventjagers ' or " sale-hunters," used to accompany the
herring-fleet, buy up the first herring caught and cured, and
carry it home with the utmost speed, leaving the busses to
fish on at leisure. This trade, if not attended to, might of
course have afforded ample facilities to elude the prohibi-
tion against selling herring elsewhere than in the Dutch
emporiums, and " sale-hunting ' was therefore, soon after
the fishing laws before quoted came into vigour, an object
of the legislator's peculiar supervision and solicitude.

From the fact that no particular legislation on the subject
existed before, it appears that the custom of sale-hunters
following the busses did not come into use before the
beginning of the seventeenth century. " Ventjagers " are
indeed mentioned as early as the year 1556, but from a
placard of January nth of that year * it is evident that
at that time they did not go beyond the rivers' mouths, and
the wording of the first law relative to sale-hunting at sea,
(dated 1604), plainly shows the practice to have been then
very recently adopted. The first enactments on the subject
are chiefly calculated to prevent the laws on catching,
curing, landing, and branding herring to be eluded by

rejoicing. Even to the present time, when herring brought home by
the first " hunter " is prosaically sent inland by rail, some of the
traditional festivities are kept up. Dealers in fish sport bunting from
their house-tops ; " New Herring " is cried through every city, and an
old-fashioned one-horse chaise on immense wheels, decked with the
national colours, may be seen to race to the King's palace at the
Hague, in order to supply the royal table with the very first barrel of
herring. The whole of this pageantry , however, is now little more than
a remembrance of the time when " New Herring" actually meant an
influx of millions into the country, and a shower of gold upon
thousands of its inhabitants.

* Vierde Mcmoriaalboefrs Hofs van Hollant, van Mr. J. van
Dam. fol. 37 ; Vijfde, ibid. fol. 201.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 53

" sale-hunters." They prescribe that every skipper who sails
after the fleet for the purpose of buying up herring shall be
provided with a license under the seal of, and delivered by,
the " magistrate and treasurers of the fishery," i.e., the local
fishery boards. Every such skipper is, before sailing,
to take oath not to buy any salt-herring but from
Dutch steersmen, and to have every lot he takes on board
covered by a certificate from the seller, stating the latter's
name and his vessel's, his domicile and the quantity of fish
transferred. Sale-hunters are besides, like skippers, pro-
hibited from carrying their ware abroad.

Sale-hunting appears at the outset to have been allowed
during the whole of the season ; though of course the
business could only pay as long as high prices lasted. A
restriction as to time was first put upon it, and a " hunting-
time " (jaagtijd) established in 1632, the closing date after
which it should not be lawful to transfer herring at sea,
being then fixed at July I5th. The object of the enact-
ment evidently was to prevent an overstocking of the
market at a period when prices naturally declined, the
first eager demand for early herring being satisfied. But the
practice of " hunting " sometimes occasioned a glut at the
very outset of a favourable season, or, as a placard of the
time has it, " so threw the herring-market prostrate * that
neither fishermen nor dealer could make a profit upon it."
This evil was, in later times, prevented by the hunting-
monopoly^ i.e. the prohibition to fishermen to sail home
during " hunting-time ' unless with a full cargo. This
monopoly never legally existed under the Dutch Repitblic ; it
has been a creation of the present century, or may possibly
have been established as a College bye-law late in the eight-
eenth century ; and those who in the course of the dis-
* " Snicks onder de voet wort geworpcn"

54 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

cussions on Herring Law Repeal have given it in part the
credit of the fishery's former greatness, argued from a state-
ment utterly erroneous. The old Dutch herring laws, never
for the hunters' benefit, restricted herring carriage by fishers ;
when a glut occurred they prohibited hunting, and such pro-
hibitions are frequent enough.* As a fact, the industry was
either permitted or prohibited, upon the College's annual
advice, as the state of the market seemed to require abun-
dant or slower supplies. Opinions were generally divided
on the subject in the College ; Rotterdam, Schiedam and
Brielle generally moving to allow sale-hunters to sail, and
Delft and Enkhuizen opposing them. Delegates from
these five towns have for a long period composed the
College, and the point whether three cities could overrule
two was frequently contested a propos of the hunting
question, and generally decided by the majority having
their mind.

The said College about this time showed considerable
activity. Besides the extensive administration of the con-
voying ships, and the collecting of the shipowners' contribu-
tions out of which they were equipped, they were constantly
advising or petitioning the States for such legislative
measures as the times seemed to give occasion for, and
accordingly had their eye always upon the herring-fishery
trade and market in the most extensive sense. Not content
with these functions, " they of the Grand Fishery ' con-
stituted themselves as guardians of the laws enacted upon
their advice. Every town where herring-ships were owned
had a fishery board of its own : and Delft, Rotterdam,
Amsterdam, Brielle, Schiedam, Hoorn and Enkhuizen, and

* See the placards on the subject of the years 1604, 1606, 1607, 1612,
1614, 1615, 1621, 1632, Gr. PL Bock I., pp. 731-748; v. d. Lely.
Recueil, pp. 20, sqq.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 55

probably more towns not particularly mentioned, were by
means of these local boards constantly on the look-out for
each other's trespasses, which, as soon as discovered, were
reported to the central College residing at Delft, who took
steps for the better enforcement of the law. Thus in 1604*
it was discovered that skippers from Enkhuizen sometimes
acted against the fishing laws, and the magistrates of the
said city were compelled, upon the remonstrances of one of
the Burgomasters of Rotterdam and of " them of the Grand
Fishery " to issue an order for the observance of the exist-
ing rules by fishermen hailing from the Enkhuizen port.
On the other hand, some of the fishing towns took upon
themselves considerable responsibilities in the way of
mitigating the laws when found too severe. On the I5th
of December 1609,! the local boards of Delft, Rotterdam,
Schiedam, Brielle and Enkhuizen met at the first-named
town, and agreed, on their own authority, upon a " mild
execution ' of the statutes against selling herring at sea,
provided such herring should not have been caught before
the lawful season. This striking instance of open tamper-
ing with the law is strongly illustrative of the very ill-defined
and swaying conditions under which public power wras held
in the Republic. Still more strongly does it testify to the
fact that, even in the first outset of systematic fishing legis-
lation, its flaws and nuisances were realised by those con-
cerned, who knew their immediate interest even where the
law precluded them from following it up.

The Central Fishery College's influence manifested
itself afresh in 1606, by a prohibition against exporting
herring-barrels, whole or half-staves, nets and cross-
gear,:!: which prohibition was suggested by " those of the

* Res. Holland, 1604, p. 158.

t Res. Holland, 1609, p. 1089. % Kruyswant.

56 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Fishery " to the States of Holland, and by them applied
for to the States- General, who at once enacted it to be a
law for the whole of the Republic.* Nor was the College's
vigilance against transgressions of the herring laws
confined to stopping them at home. When any were
detected abroad, diplomatic intervention was resorted to
upon their advice, and sometimes successfully. As an
instance of this, an " accord," of the nature of what would
now be called a commercial treaty, was concluded between
the States-General and the Senate of Hamburg on May
22nd, 1609,1 by which the latter city bound itself over not
to let any herring caught before St. John's be sold in its
market. This treaty, about the observation of which
considerable difficulties arose a century afterwards, was
urged by the States, upon the College's advice, who had
detected the sale of early herring at Hamburg, in dan-
gerous concurrence with the Dutch exporters, who were
bound by law not to fish before St. John's. \

The year 1609 was a momentous one for the Dutch
Grand Fishery, for more reasons than the treaty with
Hamburg. It was in this year that James the First of
England, by the famous " proclamation touching fishing,"
menaced the trade with a blow which, if not averted,

* Res. Holland, 1606, p. 934 ; Gr. Placaetboek I. p. 755.

f Res. Noll. 1609, p. 918. A copy of the document is inserted in
Ned. Zaarboeken, 1752, p. 483.

\ Treaties, or contracts of a similar nature seem to have existed be-
tween the city of Cologne and those of Rotterdam, Delft, and Schiedam,
at even an earlier period, by which the former bound itself not to admit
any herring unless branded under the Hollands' regulations. In 1754
the Dutch Consul at Cologne reported that herring from Zealand was
admitted there against the treaties, " whereas no other herring than
from Holland had been seen there since more than two hundred
years."

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 57

might have prevented its further development, and the
rivalry between England and the Netherlands as regards
sea-fishery first came to an open outbreak. The several
phases of this rivalry, down to its end in the war of 1652,
are of considerable moment in the Dutch fisheries'
history ; but as they belong to an order of events entirely
separate from the trade's home regulations, it is preferable
to treat of them in a separate chapter.

As regards home legislation, the now following years
offer little or no matter of interest, and are only marked by
a series of renovations of the placards before mentioned,
occasionally varied by alterations of little importance.
The only novelty in any way suggestive of the state of
the business, besides the placards on sale-hunting already
alluded to, is an Act of May I2th, 1620,* by which it is
prohibited to fish for herring among the cliffs of Shetland,
Ireland and Norway ; not in order to avoid collisions with
the inhabitants of those countries, but merely, as appears
from the entire tenor of the statute, because the herring
caught in the said waters was said to be of inferior
quality and unfit for curing. By this edict, besides, a
very notable extension of the Herring Fishery College's
functions is sanctioned for the first time, viz., their being
invested with judicial power. Any person sentenced by
the common magistrate for catching herring in the pro-
hibited waters, or salting, barrelling, or selling herring so
caught, is granted the right of appealing to the college,
who shall examine the matter in their next session, and
finally decide it by a judgment from which there shall be
no further appeal. The college is thus appointed to be a
court of appeal in some fishery cases, and its attributions
as such were in the course of times extended to most other

* Groot Placaetboek I. p. 752.

E. 8. F

58 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

contraventions against the fishery laws, besides those
against the particular statute now mentioned. Nor were
the judicial functions of this board confined to cases of
breach of common law. According to a manuscript
" Recueil of the Grand Fishery," or register of notes
concerning it, kept, or owned, about 1753, by one Mr. J. v.
d. Lely and preserved in the Royal Netherlands Library,*
they have " from all old times " vindicated for themselves
the right of disciplinary jurisdiction against all misde-
meanours ("wandivoiren ") committed by the officers and
men serving both in busses and convoying ships. This
competence was officially confirmed in their hands, and
probably much extended, by a Resolution of the States of

* I have no positive clue to this v. d. Lely's social position. His
title of " Mr." shows him to have been a graduate-at-law. The
Recueil under his name frequently quotes the record-books of the
Fishery College, and its author appears to have been otherwise
possessed of extensive information on the fishery subject. It is by no
means improbable that v. d. Lely may have been secretary to the
College, a post of considerable importance in the republic's later
years. At any rate, such information as his Recueil imparts may,
if not contradicted by other evidence, be accounted conclusive.
Unfortunately the Recueil is drawn up in a very succinct style, so as
often to leave some doubt about the meaning of the words and
abbreviations. It has evidently been composed as a private register
to aid the memory of the author as deeply concerned in fishery
matters, and has never been published. The original record-books of
the Fishery College appear unfortunately to have been lost ; and
without them no very precise idea of that body's constitution and
attributions can be formed. There is extant another " Recueil van de
Groote Visscherye" also manuscript, owned, or written, by Mr. J. van
der Craght, and now in Mr. Nyhoff's private collection. I have, upon
inspection, found both manuscripts to be literally of the same tenor,
and have therefore quoted the one bearing the latest date. V. d.
Craght's is dated 1745. Both look like copies of some original bearing
a still earlier date.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 59

Holland dated December 2Oth, 1625*, which indeed
constitutes the College a supreme court of justice in
fishery matters, with very extensive attributions. All mis-
demeanours of the seamen and officers in the convoying
vessels, who it will be remembered were in the country's
service and under oath to the States, were by this Act
attributed to the College of the Fisheries' Deputies and
expressly withdrawn from the ordinary military courts for
naval matters, i.e., the Admiralty Boards. Proceedings
against convoying commanders guilty of "shameful
running away out of the sea," and " omitting all devoir
against the enemy," as well as common breach of discipline
cases, were at the time now treated of committed to the
college's jurisdiction. Their sentences were decisive and
without appeal. Like all other fishing laws, the statute in
question was enacted upon the college's own presentation,
or rather was enacted by them and ratified by the States
of Holland.

" Devoir ' was indeed required from both convoying
men-of-war and fishing vessels at the time when the college
was thus qualified to enforce it ; for in no period of the
republic's naval history did the Dunkirkers cause as much
prejudice to the fishing interest. In 1625 the town of
Enkhuizen alone is reported to have lost a hundred busses
to them.t Naval battles in forma were fought between
them and the herring fleet and conveyers ; and numerous
instances of busses being taken by ten together, and
convoying ships overcome by "the enemy," are balanced
by accounts of the latter having lost both ships and men.|

* Res. Holland, 1625, p. 604. Recueilv. d. Lely, p. 8.
f Gevers Deynoot de magno sive halecum piscatu Belgico, p. 41.
\ Res. Holland, 1627, pp. 240, 248, 252, and many others in the next
years.

F 2

60 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.
This irregular warfare was not carried on without consider-

o

able outlays of money. Sums averaging up to thirty
thousand florins were annually granted to the Fishery
College for the warlike armament of the busses ; and

o *

subsidies very much larger were granted to the Admiralty
Boards to provide the necessary convoying ships. In 1627
the latter subsidy was carried to one million,* to be fur-
nished by the several provinces, each for a part proportioned
to its interest in the business, and twenty-four men-of-war
were sent to protect the busses in the said year. Indeed,
during a series of years the main part of the States of
Holland's Acts relative to the herring fishery consists of
money grants to the College and the Admiralties, and
exhortations to the latter boards to be prompt in equipping
the necessary vessels. The difficulties with England about
the herring fishery in the North Sea, and the insecurity
arising from the British Sovereign's manifestly hostile
intention to Dutchmen fishing on his shores, of course
made matters still worse for the trade. It is indeed a
marvel that it should, in spite of so many difficulties, have
attained a high degree of development. Yet such was the
case, as appears from Meynert Semeyns' curious little book
already quoted, and which, written in 1639,! gives a very
hieh idea of the state of the business at the time, even if

o

due allowance is made for a tendency to exaggeration
natural in the author as a citizen of Enkhuizen, then one
of the most important among the herring-fishing towns.

With Semeyns it is a point beyond dispute that Provi-
dence has specially destined the Netherlands to be the
centre of the world's herring fishery. " The Dutch," he

* Res. Holland, pp. 164, 166, 247.

f Meynert Semeyns, Corte beschryvinge over de Haring visscherye
in Hollandt.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 61

says, " catch more herrings, and prepare them better, than
any other nation ever will ; and the Lord has, through the
instrument of the herring, made Holland an exchange and
staple-market for the whole of Europe. The herring keeps
Dutch trade going, and Dutch trade sets the world's
afloat," whence the author states Dutch herrings to be
the mainspring of the world's trade and traffic. No other
nation, he says, ever tried this industry but to their detri-
ment ; and as an instance of this, he relates the fact that
herring caught by Englishmen at the same time and place
with Dutch fishermen had been found bad and corrupt at
the market of " Danswyck " (Dantzig ?), while the Dutch
produce was eagerly bought there. Besides such general
statements, which at any rate are additional proof that
herring was at the time a considerable article of exportation,
the author gives some valuable details about the way in
which the fishery was carried on in his days. The first
cast of the nets is made at St. John's (June 24th) about the
Shetlands, Fairhill and Buchan-Ness,* and the fishing
continued in those waters till St. James', or the 25th of
July. From St. James' to Elevation Day (September I4th)
Buchan-Ness or "Sevenjot"| was still the herring-fishers
place of resort ; while in the autumn they sought more
southerly seas, and fished in the so-called " deep water " off
Yarmouth till St. Catherine's Day (September 25th). But
these were general rules ; precise sailing orders to the fleet
were yearly agreed upon by the college of the herring

* "Hitland, Phayril, ende Boekenes." The name of the latter
locality seems to correspond with that of Buchan-Ness.

f As to the place designated by " Sevenjot," I do not wish to hazard
a guess. Luzac (Holl. Rijkdom //., p. 261) spells " Jeveniot," and the
name is given as " Sevenaths " in the periodical called Nederlandsche
Hermes for Dec. 1826, p. 14.

62 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

fishery at their annual meeting at Delft, some time before
the opening of the season. This often-mentioned cor-
poration, denominated by Semeyns, " the Lords of the
Grand Fishery," is stated by him to be composed of two
delegates from the magistrates " of such towns as are
notably concerned in the business." But this is inexact ;
for several towns and villages owning herring-ships were
more than once refused a seat in the college, whose
members appear to have had a full share of the exclusive
spirit common to all who held power of any kind in the
Republic. The college's power over all concerned in the
herring trade was very large, especially as the licenses
without which no buss could sail were delivered under the
Grand Fishery's seal, although by the intervention of the
local fishery boards ; whereby the college were possessed
of the means to enforce their rules upon the ships of towns
not represented. It is therefore a matter of easy compre-
hension that a vote in the college was strongly desired by
every fishing town, whereas the towns already represented
there used to resist intruders with equal perseverance.
Amsterdam and Hoorn, for instance, demanded admission
of their delegates to the college in 1628,* but were repelled,
and not admitted even when the States had appointed a
special committee to bring the rival parties to an agree-
ment ; although it appears from a very obscure entry on
page 2 of v. d. Lely's ' Recueil,' that Amsterdam would, in
order to obtain a seat in the college, have consented to
bear her share in the common charges, but have none in
the subsidies, which were to be divided as before among the
other towns. In 1636, Dordrecht in her turn sued for
a seat in the college, but also met with systematic opposi-
tion. Monnikendam was likewise rejected in 1701, but
* Res. Holland, 1628, p. 556 ; 1629, pp. 665, 7157.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 63

Enkhuizen generously consented to deliver licenses to
fishing captains from this town, which was thereby enabled
to send herring busses to sea on its own account. Besides
the fishing towns of the Maas, Enkhuizen appears for a
long time to have been an influential member of the
college, in which the preponderance of each town was,
according to Semeyns, determined by the number of
vessels hailing from it. Still, as the author avers, the
greater member has no right " to introduce any novelties
into the trade," and especially to permit the sailing of
" sale-hunters," without the lesser's consent. It has been
shown above that, if such a bye-law or tradition ever
existed in the bosom of the college, it was often trans-
gressed, and that Delft and Enkhuizen were overruled by
the other three towns, as regards the admission of sale-
hunters. Still, as a general rule, Semeyns' statement may
be true enough ; for a reluctance to admit " novelties ' of
any description has always been the college's prevailing
disposition, much to the prejudice of the trade they were
called upon to promote.

As regards the herring fishery's extension at this period,
no precise statement can be made out with any degree of
credit ; but it certainly was very considerable. Walter
Raleigh has certainly committed exaggeration by averring
in his ' Observations ' touching trade and commerce,* that
3000 ships and 50,000 people from Holland were yearly
employed in the herring fishery upon the, British coast ;
and other English writers of the period have given lower
estimates. De la Court, in his famous essay, ' Heilzame
Politique Gronden en Maximen,' evaluates the fleet at
1000 busses ; but he wrote at a period when the Grand
Fishery's halcyon days were avowedly over. A writer in
* Muller, Mare clausuni, pp. 72, sqq.

64 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

"den Koopman " (vol. i. p. 235) states 1500 busses to have
sailed in 1610 and 2000 in 1620, and doubtingly adds
that 3000 are said to have sailed a few years later.
According to Semeyns, Enkhuizen alone had 700 afloat in
1639 or thereabouts ; and this certainly was not under-
valuing the resources of a city whose glory and renown are
the author's continuous boast. The towns on the Maas
were then and afterwards ahead of Enkhuizen as regards

c>

the development of their herring shipping. Taking all
together, I should be inclined to tax any one with exagger-
ration who values the number of Dutch salt-herring busses
above 2000 at the time of the fishery's greatest expansion.
Holland and Zealand are the only provinces which under
the Republic owned herring-busses ; and Zealand's share
in them was very small. Considering that foreign trade,
agriculture, and several manufacturing industries have
always occupied the majority of the population of Holland,
and that some eight or ten towns at most were more
or less concerned in the fishery, two thousand herring
ships would appear to be a maximum which can scarcely
have been exceeded ; and it certainly is a matter of
wonder that such a number should ever have been attained.
A herring buss in Semeyns' time cost {1.3150, hull and
standing rigging ; and the " equipment," by which name
the author designs tackle, nets, salt, barrels, and crew's
hire and food, in the course of a season came to fl.438o
more. Each buss commonly made three voyages between
St. John's and December, at the end of which the whole
inventory was used up, and nothing remained but the
vessel's hull, and that generally in a very deteriorated con-
dition. The sum annually invested in the herring-fishery
during its greatest expansion must, by the above consider-
ations, have amounted to something like fl. 15,000,000,

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 65

an immense outlay indeed, considering the value of money

at the time. The expenses of the trade appear to have

augmented fast, notwithstanding the prohibition against

exporting fishing materials. In 1669 a herring ship was

estimated at fl.455o, and its equipment at fl.55oo.* In

1768 the hull was calculated at fl.9OOO, and the equipment

at fl.6ooo for two voyages, and fl.Sooo for three.f As for

the trade's returns, each buss is stated in Semeyns' time to

have brought ashore on an average forty last of herring in

a season. The herring-prices at the time are not known ;

but such sums as 37 and 43 millions, stated to have been

the fishery's annual revenue by several foreign authors,!

are certainly strong exaggerations.

It is not certain how long this golden period of the
Grand Fishery lasted. Statistics were not then in use,
and, as regards the herring fishery, did not begin to be
published till the trade's decay had very decidedly set in.
The College, whose business it was to swear in every herring-
skipper and appose their seal to the license without which
none were allowed to sail, will probably have kept some
record of the number who sailed in each year. But their
books and accounts, if any, are no longer extant ; nor do
any of the authors on the subject give any chronological
details as to the duration of the trade's greatest prosperity.
As for legislation, some slight additions to the placards
before spoken of, and many resolutions of both the States-
General and those of Holland, about convoying-ships to be
sent out and subsidies to be granted, compose the whole
of it on record during the subsequent years ; but these give
no clue to the fishery's annual condition or progress.

* P. de la Court, Heilzame Politique Maximen.

f Den Koopman, i. p. 354. ^O°S

Ibid. i. p. 231;.

/•><;

LI

66 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Such sums as fl. 100,000, borrowed by the Grand
Fishery College in 1647,* and fl. 187,95 8, exhibited by the
Admiralty of Rotterdam in 1641 as convoying expenses,!
do indeed show that, if the requirements for the herring
fishery's safety were heavy both on the hands of the State
and the parties concerned, the latter were able to meet,
and Government found it worth while to cover them. The
first serious check to the trade's expansion appears to have
been the first war between the Republic and England in
1652 ; and from that year downward, for more than 60 years.
War, Convoy and Prohibition are the words in which the
Grand Fishery's history might not improperly be resumed.
The Dutch fisherman's most redoubted foes under the
Republic were the English man-of-war and the French
privateer ; and during the greater part of the period
between 1652 and 1713 the Republic was at war either
with England or France, or both.

Some time before the war of 1652, complaints of Dutch
fishing vessels being taken or plundered by English were
frequent, and peculiar activity in the equipment of convoy-
ing ships was accordingly recommended by the States to
the Admiralty boards. Tromp's encounter with Blake off
Dover, in May, 1652, having determined the formal opening
of hostilities, the herring-fleet were the first sufferers, and a
considerable number of busses, together with eleven con-
voyers, were taken by Blake in July. The States of Holland
at first seriously considered the advisability of calling home
the rest of the fleet, and stopping the fishery till better
times ; but the measure was ultimately rejected, and
twenty-four fishing vessels were armed as convoying ships

* Res. Holland,, 1647, p. 164.
t Ibid. 1641, p. 146.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 67

instead, besides six regular men-of-war.* Some English
herring-boats having been taken by the Dutch, Holland at
first tried to move the States-General to release them, and
issue further orders for respecting the British fishermen, in
the hope of meeting with similar forbearance on the
enemy's hands. But as the English on the contrary made
a thorough use of the rights of war, orders to do their
fishermen the utmost possible damage were issued, and
several more of their boats were accordingly taken in 1652
by Dutch armed fishing vessels.! But the grand tourna-
ment of naval skill and daring, of which the North Sea
was the theatre during the war of 1652-4, left no room
for much casting of nets. Though in the year 1653 the
Herring College applied for protection with even more than
usual persistency, the States, then obliged to strain their
utmost means towards the equipment of the squadrons
which fought under Tromp, Evertsen, de Witt, and
de Ruyter, could afford no men-of-war for convoy through-
out the season, and were obliged to grant " commissions '
to some fishing skippers, which documents, although
ostensibly delivered to promote the fishery's protection,
appear indeed to have been nothing short of lettres de
marque.% Such covering could, of course, be of no avail
against the British fleets, and it is accordingly averred that
in 1653, the herring fleet, then still consisting of some two
thousand vessels, was kept at home,§ not indeed by Govern-
ment order such as was in the said year issued to the
wrhaling fleet, but by the ship-owners' prudence, who saw
the impossibility of fishing in anything like safety.

* Res. Holland, 1652, pp. 343, 387.

f Res. Holl. pp. 364, sqq. Holl. Mercurius, 1652, p. 86.

J Res. Holl. 1653, pp. 462, 538.

§ Aitzema. Zakcn v. Staat en 0 or log, v. iii. p. Sio.

68 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

The Treaty of Westminster, in April 1654, put a term
to the misery inflicted upon the United Provinces by this
disastrous war ; and in the same year the fishing was
recommenced, but still under difficulties, as appears from
several complaints of violence, suffered from English men-
of-war in the next years.* A general renovation, in 1656,
by the States of Holland of the placards of 1582 on the
Grand Fishery is the principal event on record during the
short interval of comparative quiet which succeeded the Peace
of Westminster. Nearly the whole of this placard of i6$6t
is a literal reproduction of the existing laws ; but a few
additions, now enacted for the first time, point out in some
degree the fishery's already altered condition. The fact
of convoying ships equipped by the Herring College being
always with the fleet is now, for the first time, officially
apparent from a clause which enjoins the " captains of the
Grand Fishery J: (i.e. the commanders of the above-men-
tioned direction-ships) to arrest any fishing skipper guilty
of either selling herring to foreigners or attempting to
carry it directly abroad, and send him home to be tried.
Besides this precaution against trespassers, a general
aggravation of the penalties, consecrated by the placard of
1656, may be considered as an indication of the pressure
exercised by the law upon the trade at large, and the
consequent frequency of infraction. A custom of selling
herrings unassayed and unbranded, or, as termed in the
new placard, "as it lies, or upon trial " % is made the object

* Res. Holland, 1656, p. 990 and others.

f Groot Placaetboek, vol. viii. p. 1242.

\ *' Aen 't hoepje te tasten, of zoo die leyd." The former words are
obscure, and may perhaps be relative to some peculiar mode of sale
of unassayed herrings, viz., by touching the hoops of the barrel as a
sign of agreement followed by immediate transfer. But as " tasten "
in the Dutch of the period was, I believe, bometimes used for " to

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 69

of a special prohibition, no other sale than "op Pak en
Keiir" (i.e. after the prescribed packing and assay, and
upon the quality determined by the brand) being per-
mitted. Another clause, prohibiting to pack salt, spices,
or other goods in herring barrels under cover of the brand,
is indicative of fraudulent habits among fishermen and
herring dealers ; and this supposition derives additional
strength from the official fixation, as appendices to the
law of 1656, of a series of very detailed forms of the
several oaths to be taken by herring skippers and sale-
hunters both on sailing and returning, which oaths provide
for every variety of infraction of the law which a person of
either description might have committed or might be
tempted to commit. Even these stringent measures did not
prevent frequent breaches of the law, which, as soon as May
1658, determined a special re-enactment of the prohibition
to sell herring caught before St. John's.* Another reno-
vation of the clauses against selling herrings at sea was
thought necessary in 1 663.1 It is more than probable,
from such indications as these, that the wrong effects of
several of the laws in vigour, and the prejudice they did
to the trade, had by this time been realised by most of
those immediately concerned. A very far-sighted and
able writer, P. de la Court, has delivered an opinion to the
same effect in his " Heilzame Politique Gronden en
Maximen" (edit 1669). "Several placards on the herring
fishery," he says, " have been made ere now ; the which

taste," it is probable that a trial of the ware by the buyer was
substituted for the official brand. The custom is already referred to
in a resolution of the States of Holland of the year 165 1 (Res. Holland,

255).
Res. Holl. 1658, p. 178. Groot Placaetboek ii. 2501.

Ibid. 1663, p. 172 ; 1664, p. 1 10. Groot Plb. ii. 2898.

70 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

tend greatly to the advantage of the foreign Fishermen,
who are not constrained to obey them."

Being unable efficiently to enforce their self-made rules
at sea, the Herring College resorted to the greater stringency
in the execution of such part of them as lay within the
control of their officers ashore ; and the towns whose
delegates were excluded from the college were of course
the first sufferers by this severity. The laws were not
only executed with great severity, but actually overstepped
by the college. Thus, in 1659, Hoorn, which it will be
remembered had no seat in the college, complained of her
ship's masters being obliged, before sailing, to get a licence
(acte van consent) from the Grand Fishery, which docu-
ment was only delivered upon the applicant taking oath
not to fish before July 8th.* This date was posterior by a
fortnight to the lawful opening of the fishing season, and
it is not clear in virtue of what alleged competency of
their own the college established a " keure" or bye-law
derogating from the law of the realm in so vital a point.
The author of Van der Lely's Register, who certainly
wrote at a much later period, does not appear to have
been precisely informed about the matter, and simply
states that, " in 1659," the opening date was at one time
delayed till some day in July," f without adding whence
the college derived a title to such delay. At any rate,
Hoorn, being excluded from the college, alleged the
proceeding to be unlawful as applied to her own busses,
and laid the matter before the States of Holland. A
conference was called between delegates from the college
on one hand and Hoorn on the other ; and as a conse-

* Res. Holland, 1659, p. 199.

f " In 1659, wierd het eens vers (choven) tot in July, maar't Jaar
daaraan hersteld." — Recueil, p. 14.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 71

quence the lawful date of June 24th was restored in the
next year, and not thenceforward departed from.

In 1663 another difference occurred, still more strongly
illustrative of the efforts made by many to escape the
college's rule. One Francis Denick, a citizen of one of

o

the herring towns on the Maas, obtained the citizenship
of Veere, in Zealand, in order to avoid the statute of
Holland which prescribed all herring caught by Holland
fishermen to be brought to one of the markets of that
province. Though now a citizen of Zealand, Denick
continued to send his busses to sea from the Maas, and the
college therefore persisted in applying the law of Holland
to their skippers and cargoes. Upon the owner's petition
the States of Zealand instructed their delegates to the
States-General to remonstrate with those of Holland ; and
a debate on the Denick question accordingly took place
in the latter's assembly, in which the Zealanders advocated
their new made citizen's rights, but without any success,
Holland maintaining the supremacy of the college and the
validity of the provincial statutes of 1582 and 1656 over
all ships sailing from any of the Holland ports, whatever
province the owner might belong to. " The question made
much noise, but led to no result," as Van der Lely mentions
in his ' Recueil.'

The short period of peace with England, as said above,
brought the Grand Fishery only comparative quiet and

* Recueil v. d. Lely, p. 14. Res. Holl. 1663, pp. 336, 352, 609. It
will be remembered that the several Provinces were their own legis-
lators, and that only such statutes as were promulgated by the States-
General took effect in the whole of the republic. As there was no
codification, and laws were often laid down in very unprecise terms,
collisions between provinces on points of legislation were very frequent
throughout the Republic's existence.

72 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

security. The war with Sweden (1656-60) did not directly
affect the herring fishery, as hostilities were carried on in
the Baltic, far from the herring seas. It appears, however,
that English privateers, sailing in English vessels under
Swedish commission, in the summer of 1659, took occasion
from this war to annoy the Dutch herring fleet ; and the
Republic's ambassador was ordered to intercede with the
British Government to obtain the cessation of this abuse.*
Fresh complaints of violence suffered from the English
occurred in October 1660, and Charles the Second's dis-
pleasure being soon after aroused by negotiations between
the Republic and France, by which the States aimed at a
reciprocal guarantee of free fishery all over the sea, the
Dutch ambassador to the British Court was not successful
in his endeavours to obtain redress of his country's fishing
grievances.! The conclusion of the eventful alliance with
France on April 2/th, 1662, by which the fishery were
promised the desired reciprocal protection, and the short-
lived treaty between the States and England, of September
14 of the same year, could not long shield the Dutch
herring trade against the inevitable consequences of the
profound divergence between Charles the Second's political
notions and de Witt's government by an aristocracy. In
the course of 1664 both rival countries captured several
of each other's vessels ; and on January 26th, 1665, even
before England had openly declared that war which already
existed de facto, the States-General for the first time
prohibited all ships from sailing from the United Provinces,
whether for trade or fishery .J England at the time
proffered passports or " actes de suretf to the Dutch

* Res. Holl. 1659, p. 261.

f Ibid. 1660, p. 749 ; 1661, p. 181.

\ Groot Placaetboek. iii. 291.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 73

fishermen against payment of safeguard-money, but the
States of Holland, " considering that this might be of very
dangerous consequence, as making the inhabitants of these
countries indirectly tributary to the King of England,"
prohibited the taking out of such passports, and on February
3rd insisted afresh on a strict observation of the prohibition
to sail* The treasurer of the Herring Fishery at Maassluis
even incurred the States' severe censure for having procured
British passports for the shipowners of his city ; he was
strictly enjoined not to make use of the documents bought
and paid for, and only escaped punishment upon considera-
tion of his having acted " more from inadvertency than
malice."t Wishing, however, if possible, to divert the evils
of war from their fishermen on equal and honourable terms,
the States-General ordered one of their naval commanders
.to offer England a safeguard for her fisheries on terms of
reciprocity ; and a letter to that effect was accordingly
sent from the Dutch flagship to the magistrate of Yarmouth.^
No answer being received, the herring fishery remained
forbidden in the years 1665 and 1666, in the course of
which the prohibition was re-enacted more than once, and
prohibitions against importing foreign herring and salt-fish
were enacted to prevent the enemy's profiting by the
stand-still of the trade in Holland. § A proposition to

* Res. Ho 1 1. 1665, pp. 59, 78.

f Ibid. p. 78. It will be remembered that every town where
herring busses were owned, even though not represented in the
College, at this time and afterwards had a local fishery board of
its own, and a " Penningmeester" or treasurer, appointed to manage
the local fishing interests. The Treasurers of Enkhuizen, Rotterdam,
Schiedam, Brielle, and Delft, were usually the delegates of those towns
to the College.

% Hollandsche Mercuriits, 1665, p. 143.

§ Groot Plac. Boek. iii. 293, 295. Res. Holl., 1666, pp. 101, 310.
E. 8. G

74 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

re-open the fisheries was not made in the States of Holland,
till July 1st, 1667, some days after de Ruyter's splendid
success up the Thames ; and when peace had been con-
cluded at Breda on July ult., and the herring fleet could
sail in safety, the best part of the herring season, being
the third during the war, was over and lost.

There is no evidence to show on what scale and with what
success herring fishery was exercised in the years 1667-1672.
But even admitting these years to have been favourable, the
trade can scarcely have had time to repair the immense losses
undergone during the foregoing war, from ships taken or
kept inactive during the sailing prohibition, and able sailors
turned out of the business and killed in the country's service.
The only indication of the altered state of the business is a
debate which occurred in the States of Holland* in March,
1669, on the expediency of re-enacting the penalties against
selling fishing-vessels and gear to foreigners, and taking
service on foreign herring vessels ; which debate, however,
does not appear to have led to any definite result. The
formidable war of 1672, which eventually brought the
Republic to the verge of destruction, occasioned a fresh
prohibition from sailing on mercantile or fishing expeditions,
which again preceded the war's actual outbreak by some
days, being first proclaimed on March iQth, 1672. It was
indeed repealed on September I5th of the same year, but
re-enacted in the next, towards the opening of the fishing
season ; and it lasted even after peace had been concluded
with England in February, 1674, as the continuation of war
with France still left little chance of fishing in safety.
Mutual grants of free fishing were indeed conceded by
France and the States on September I5th, 1675, and June
22nd, 1677, but on both occasions repealed soon after-

* Res. Holl. 1669, pp. 63, 102.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 75

wards ; * and the liberties taken by French and Zealand
privateers with the reciprocal enemies' fishing vessels for
some time proved an impediment to the protracted negoti-
ations carried on at Nijmegen for the conclusion of peace
with France. Warfare between fishermen and Dunkirk
privateers lasted till late in 1678, and not till the conclu-
sion of the peace of Nijmegen, in August of the said year,
could the herring fishery be recommenced in safety. For six
consecutive seasons the trade had been either interdicted or
virtually impossible except on a small scale. No indica-
tions have unfortunately been preserved as to the extent
to which it was carried on in 1678 and the next years, but
even without precise knowledge of the facts there can be
no doubt that a twenty-five years' period of nearly constant
naval warfare must have occasioned a lasting decline. The
very considerable amount of capital which, as shown above,
was invested in the trade before 1652, cannot but have
been partly withdrawn from it in consequence of the long
and repeated periods of entire inactivity brought over the
fishery by the several wars.

It is apparent from many circumstances on record that
the trade's inward organization has suffered considerably
from the consequences of the war. Although sustained by
annual subsidies, generally to the amount of fl. 30,000,
and in some years more, besides the annual consideration
of fl.6,ooo paid to the Grand Fishery as redemption-
money for the exemption from duties on salt, the
treasury of the Grand Fishery College was in constant
distress from 1670 downwards, and their administration
appears to have been often in a disordered condition.

* Groot Plac. Boek. iii. 292, 298, 305 ; HolL Mercurius, 1677, p.
230 sqq. ', Resol. St. Gen. Sept. 2, 1675, June 3rd and 22, 1677 ; Res.
HolL 1677, p. 381.

G 2

76 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

From a very succinct list of the college's annual balances,

to be found on p. 45 of v. d. Lely's ' Recueil,' it is

evident that yearly arrears, ranging from fl.2i,ooo to

fl.3O,ooo, occurred between 1670 and 1679, and that in

1672-75 and 1677-78, no proper accounts have been kept.

The quality of the fisheries' produce appears at the same

time to have been in decline, as a proof that even by the

most vigorous control and detailed legislation it is impossible

to warrant the excellence of any article against the effect

of the dealer's cupidity. In July, 1683, Dantzig merchants

complained that the Dutch brand-herring brought to staple

in their market was frequently either found unsaleable or

sent back to the seller from the inland German towns in

consequence of the fish being bad, the barrels half filled

with salt, &c. Complaints of a similar nature were sent to

Dutch herring dealers by their correspondents at Stettin ;

and the States of Holland, besides admonishing the college

to better enforce the statutes, resolved to write to the

magistrates of the said German towns and beg them, in

case of any further complaints, to note the marks on the

barrels returned, and communicate them to the States, in

order to facilitate the detection and punishment of the

culprit fishing steersman, cooper, or brander.* Again, in

November, 1687, complaints on the quality of herring

exported to Sweden were laid before the States by the

Dutch Ambassador at Stockholm, who represented that, if

such dealings continued, Dutch herring was in danger of

losing the Swedish markets to the Scotch produce, f

A short return of relative prosperity appears to have
dawned upon the herring fishery after the peace of
Nijmegen. At least, no other statistics being extant, such

* Res. Holl. 1683, pp. 256, 260, 309.
f Ibid. 25 Nov. 1687.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 77

a conclusion may be drawn from v. d. Lely's * Recueil,' in
which (p. 45) it is recorded that from 1679 to 1689 the
deficits on the Herring College's accounts were replaced by
surpluses. The subsidies granted to them by the States
in these years uniformly amounted to 30,000 florins ; and
as their income besides these subsidies was mainly derived
from last-money, the revenue from which was proportioned
to the quantities of herring caught, the condition of the
College's treasury must in some measure have reflected the
trade's prosperity and adversity. Deficits on the books
accordingly recommenced in 1690, a short time after the
beginning of the war against France. This war was indeed
chiefly carried on ashore and in the Mediterranean ; but
for Dutch fishermen war against France meant destruction
by Dunkirk privateers. To keep these at bay was ac-
cordingly one of the principal aims of the English and
Dutch fleets in the course of the war ; but the impossibility
of sheltering the fisheries from them was once more proved,
though liberal grants of convoying ships were made to the
Fishery College by the States of Holland. These, as of
old, proved insufficient against the omnipresent Dunkirkers,
and a prohibition to sail was therefore once more resorted
to in 1691. Having been promulgated in the first days of
the year, the prohibition was indeed withdrawn, at the
College's request, on June 23rd, being the day before the
opening of the herring season ; * but on November 6th,
before the season's end, the fishery was again prohibited
and only permitted in the next years on condition of the
busses' steersmen delivering one-fifth of their crews to the
Admiralty Boards under which they resorted, to be
employed on the Republic's squadrons. Holland at the
same time interdicted the ransoming of busses captured by
* Res. Holl. 1691, p. 347. Gr. Plac. Boek. iv. 235, 237.

78 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

the Dunkirkers,* in order, if possible, to discourage them
by withholding the price of their exploits ; and it may be
assumed that in these circumstances the Grand Fishery
fared very miserably even during the short periods of the
war when it was not subject to an actual prohibition. A
declaration proclaiming the mutual freedom of the fisheries
was agreed upon between the Dutch and French delegates
towards the close of the negotiations which in September,
1697, led to the peace of Rijswijk ; but the results of a six
years' war, in the course of which neither the efforts of the
allied English and Dutch fleets, nor Jean Bart's taking
regular service under the French colours, could quell the
Dunkirkers' audacious invasions, told heavily upon the
herring fishery at the end of the seventeenth century. The
" extraordinary ' subsidy of 30,000 florins, which during
the war had been withdrawn and replaced by Government
convoy, was granted again on November 5th, 1701, upon
the Grand Fishery's representation to the States of Holland,
to the effect that they had got deeply indebted during the
war, in consequence of many busses and several of the
College's own conveyers having been taken by the enemy, f
Nor was the end of their trials then at hand. The war
for the Spanish succession again brought the Republic and
France into the field as foes in 1702 ; and even before war
was declared by the States (May 8th) they once more, on
March 3Oth, laid an interdiction on all sea fishery.^ Now,
as in 1691, the interdiction was withdrawn on June 23rd,
the day before the opening of the herring season; and this
time the Grand Fishery was, in consideration of its supreme
importance for the country's most vital interest, exempted

* Res. Holl. June 22, Aug. 22, 25.
t Groot Placaetboek, v. p. 1562.
\. Ibid. v. p. 376.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 79

from the obligation to send one-fifth of the crews to serve
under the Republic's colours,* to which all other branches
of fishery were indiscriminately subjected. In the course
of the war, frequent deliberations on convoy by men-of-war
to be granted to the fisheries, at their urgent and repeated
request, again form the main part of the States' records
concerning them. An idea of the convoyers' efficiency may
be formed from an account of an engagement between four
of them and four heavy French men-of-war, in which, on
June 26th, 1703, the Dutch convoyers were either sunk or
taken, and part of the herring fleet burnt by the French in
the Shetland seas.f A fresh renovation in 1707 of the
existing laws against exporting herring barrels or nets,J and
a "warning," proclaimed in August, 1708, against herring
fishers taking passports from the enemy " whereby the foe
is much strengthened and our other subjects are exposed
to serious prejudice," § are further sinister testimonies to
the Grand Fishery's sufferings by this war, which were only
terminated by the peace of Utrecht in April, 1713.

An era of peace now dawned upon the Republic. But
her herring fishery was broken down by the series of wars
and disasters, of which the last pages contain a very rapid
account. It is in the nature of sea fishery as a trade to
require an uninterrupted rotation of capital ; for, besides
the stock sunk in ships being subject to deterioration, the
considerable floating capital annually expended in equip-
ment cannot of course lie idle, and must be withdrawn from
the trade if an interruption of any length occurs. To keep
a fishing vessel idle for a season is to incur a clear loss ;

* Groot Placaetboek, v. p. 377.

f Europische Mercurius, 1703, ii. p. 107.

\ Groot Placaetboek) v. 1566.

§ Ibid. v. 1573.

8o THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

and the only way in which to avoid this loss is, if possible,
to sell her, and buy a new ship when better times are come.
Wherefore, a fishery which during sixty years was scarcely
ever exercised without danger, which was several times
prohibited for years together, and from which it was con-
stantly forbidden to sell out, may by a safe deduction be
assumed to have been brought down to a low level at the
end of such a period, not to speak of losses of ships to the
enemy. I have not found any statistics or positive records
as to the Grand Fishery's condition immediately after the
peace of Utrecht ; but it may be safely assumed to have
at the time presented but a shadow of its former greatness.
And now the full weight of the legislative restrictions
imposed upon it contributed to keep it down. Being
intricated in a net of regulations intended to warrant the
quality of its produce, it could not compete with foreigners,
who managed under a more liberal system to produce an
article equally marketable, if not equally good. Being tied
to one first-hand staple market, viz. the Dutch emporiums,
it could not regain in the foreign markets that privileged
position which it had of course lost during the years of its
actual stoppage and stand-still. The fishing laws have
perhaps contributed to the herring trade's greatness, but
they have certainly prevented it from rising when prostrated
by the force of events. As a very convincing proof of this
the herring negotiations with Hamburg may be cited, which
are the principal centre of the present narrative's interest,
in the period to which it has now advanced.

It will be remembered that a treaty had been concluded
in 1609 between the Republic and Hamburg, in virtue of
which either party was to exclude herring of whatever
origin from its markets if not certified to have been caught
after St. John's, or June 24th, and cured on board.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. Si

Holland had obtained this agreement as a shelter against
competition by Scotch fishermen, whose laws left them at
liberty to fish at an earlier date, and whose coasts lay so near
the herring seas as to enable them to cure their fish ashore.

fj

As " new ' or first herring was sometimes paid tenfold
prices, it was of great consequence to be first in the market ;
and this privilege Holland hoped to secure by binding
Hamburg over to apply the Dutch law to foreign herring.

In the course of the seventeenth century, however,
Hamburg's execution of the treaty seems to have been
such as from time to time to occasion recrimination on the
Dutch side. In 1668, a plan formed by some citizens of
Hamburg to fish for herring very early in the season and
pack the fish in Dutch barrels was detected by the Fishery
College and protested against by the States of Holland.*
In the first years of the eighteenth century, the British
herring fisheries having meanwhile acquired considerable
development, Hamburg was eagerly sought as a market for
Scotch herring. Hamburg dealers were, on their side,
peculiarly anxious to have their market stocked early, and
often complained of having to put off their expeditions to
the inland of Germany, till herring caught on or after the
24th of June and cured at sea could be brought to their
market.f There were two ways of gratifying this eagerness
for early herring : firstly, to fish before June 24th, and
secondly, to sail to Hamburg straight from the fishery.
Dutch fishermen were of course precluded from the former
method, and as their law forbade them to carry their
herring elsewhere than to their own ports to be assayed and
branded, they were likewise obliged to refrain from the
latter, and thereby placed at a very great disadvantage.

* Res. Ho II. 1668, p. 173.
t Ibid. 1715, p. 724.

82 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Matters became still worse for them when Hamburg- began
to take liberties with the treaty of 1609, and admit Scotch
herring without the certificate required by the treaty with
the Republic, which infraction seems to have been pretty
habitual in the first years of the eighteenth century. The
British Ambassador at Hamburg appears to have employed
himself in favour of these imports, and the Senate for some
time closed their eyes on them, whereby Holland was in
danger of losing the considerable advantage inherent to
having no early rivals in the Hamburg herring market.

The Republic's Ambassador at Hamburg in 1715 detected
what was going on. He straightway reported matters to
the States-General, and upon their instructions insisted
with the Hamburg Government upon the strict observation
of the treaty of 1609. England, he urged, in virtue of her
treaties with Hamburg, was not entitled to any more
favourable treatment than the Republic, or to have her
herring admitted under conditions refused to Dutch and
other herring upon the terms of the treaty. This was true
enough, and indeed made out a strong case for the Republic ;
but she spoilt it by adding another argument based upon
her adversary's interest as interpreted by herself. The
States instructed their diplomatic agent to represent that
the Dutch regulations imposed by treaty upon the Hamburg
market had been observed there for a century, and found
beneficial for that market as well as for the trade in
Holland. Being averse to let Dutchmen manage their
own interests in the herring concern, the States could not
see that Hamburgers were perhaps the best judges of theirs.
After some exchange of memorials, Hamburg on October
25th, I/I5) pledged herself henceforward strictly to observe
the treaty. But even admitting this pledge to have been
quite sincere, it was impossible to fulfil it against the

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 83

combined interests of Hamburg dealers and English fisher-
men, the latter backed more or less openly by their Govern-
ment's ambassador ; and, in consequence, complaints about
Scotch herring being admitted without a certificate were
heard in 1716 even louder than in the preceding year.

Here, now, was a tangible indication of the Dutch
regulation system's wrongs and of the danger of maintaining
it. Evidence had already been, and about this time was
still further obtained to the system's inadequacy ahvays
and everywhere to warrant the excellence of the Dutch
brand-herring, and it was now clearly shown that, so far
from shielding the Dutch fisheries against foreign competi-
tion, it left them at the competitor's mercy by preventing
them from using the only expedient by which concurrency
could be upheld, viz. doing as the foreigners did. It is a
remarkable instance of the force of habit and long convic-
tion, that no one among the Republic's legislators seems in
1715 and following years to have realized this most evident
truth. They were imbued with the notion so strongly
expressed by Semeyns of old, viz. that Providence intended
Holland to supply the world with herring ; and in virtue
of this notion they did their utmost to enforce the supremacy
of their laws, but neglected such measures as might have
actually maintained their superiority in the market. In
the long list of States' Resolutions registered on the
Hamburg question no mention is made, till it was too
late, of any proposal either to relinquish the system of
the herring laws or adapt it to circumstances. The Dutch
Ambassador's reports on the subject were invariably laid
before a Committee of the Herring Towns Delegates to the
States of Holland, who had been trained to a stalwart and
uncompromising belief in the herring laws' impeccability ;
and upon their constant advice the year 1716 was wasted

84 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

in futile representations to Hamburg, to the effect that
admitting early herring in the market was tantamount to
ruining Hamburg trade. Hamburg traders by their conduct
manifested a contrary opinion ; but to such evidence Dutch
legislators were blind, being accustomed since long years
to consider the trade's regulation as their exclusive business,
and their supreme wisdom as the only safe guide for all
parties concerned.

The course of events strikingly belied this policy of self-
importance and obduracy. While the Dutch Ambassador
was memorialising the Government of Hamburg upon his
principals' instructions, his colleague of England succeeded
in concluding a convention relative to the importation of
British herring in Hamburg, which, when a copy of it had
after some fruitless efforts been obtained and sent to the
Hague, was there judged irreconcilable with the treaty of
1609, and gave rise to fresh protests on the Dutch side,
and high-toned rejoinders from the Hamburg senate, in
the course of the spring of 1719. As a conclusion the
States acquiesced in the convention between England and
Hamburg, "readily believing the latter city to have had
good reason for concluding it," but at the same time
instructed their ambassador to strictly supervise the
application of the treaty of 1609 to British herring as well
as to Dutch. It may be doubted whether this control
was exercised with adequate vigilance, or whether it was
possible so to exercise it. At any rate for the next ten
years the matter seems to have occasioned no further
difficulties.

In 1722, Dutch dealers indeed complained of their
herring being re-packed by their Hamburg correspondents,
and considered the expediency of transferring their staple
importations to Bremen, whereupon the governor of the

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 85

rival port of Altona tried to secure the staple market for
his place, and conferred with the Dutch Ambassador at
Copenhagen on the subject.* But there is no evidence of
this plan having led to any result, and Hamburg in the
next years retained the transit trade of Dutch herring
bound for the greater part of Germany.

In the course of the year 1731, the Republic's Embassy
at Hamburg being then held by J. J. Mauricius, a diplo-
matist of great vigilance and activity, a series of complaints
about Scotch early herring being sold there without a
certificate reached the States-General ; and it appeared
from the ambassador's despatches that the Dutch brands
were gradually disappearing from the market. Mauricius
at the same time sent over a copy of a new convention
between Great Britain and Bremen, dated October i/th,
1731, which opened the latter market for Scotch herring
without any restriction. With Bremen the Republic had
no treaty, so to prevent the loss of that city's market for
early herring there was nothing to be done but leave the
Dutch at liberty to concur on equal terms with the Scotch
fishermen ; but this measure was never thought of. Ham-

/ O •

burg, on the contrary, was still bound by the treaty of
1609, and with that city a fresh exchange of memorials and
remonstrances was opened, the result of which, in 1732,
was another promise from the Senate that the treaty of
1609 should be strictly adhered to. Similar difficulties
arose in 1737, and led to an identical result, viz. the receipt
by the Dutch Ambassador, for the third time, of an " ex-
tractus protocolli " to the effect that the Hamburg Senate
was disposed to observe the treaty of 1609. And while
transmitting this document to his patrons, Mauricius
ventured to express his opinion " that they of the Grand
* Res. Holl. 1722, pp. 398, 531 ; 1723, p. 29.

86 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Fishery had better do their utmost to keep the Hamburgers
in their present favourable mood."

There was but one way of following this sensible advice,
viz., to take measures in order to stock the Hamburg market
in time, and not keep the dealers waiting for Dutch herring
till the time required for lawful catching, packing and
branding of the fish had elapsed. But the college as yet
would not be brought to give up their habits of leisurely
observing the placards to the letter ; and of course the
Hamburgers, treaty or no treaty, went on dealing in early
Scotch herring, to the Dutch exporters' incalculable pre-
judice. In 1750, the then Dutch Ambassador Buys once
more reported considerable imports of Scotch herring with-
out a certificate, and in the course of the next two years,
upon the States-General's instructions, delivered several
remonstrances to the Senate and was answered by the
usual " extractus protocolli," containing promises, the ful-
filment of which never came. The Republic, time after
time, let herself be silenced by these stale promises, and
still kept up her worn-out belief that the treaty of 1609 was
for Hamburg's good, and could conveniently be observed
there. At last, in July, 1752, it appeared from one of Buys'
despatches that a cargo of English herring had been sold
at Hamburg without a certificate before Dutch herring had
been heard of by anybody upon the market. And now, after
some forty years' steady perseverance in a rotten system,
and fruitless and futile efforts to enforce that system upon
others whose interest was opposed to it, the College at last,
upon Buys' most pressing advice, made one single tardy
concession which, if made in time, might perhaps have
prevented all the difficulties just now related. They asked,
and of course obtained, the States' permission to send
herring to Hamburg direct from the North Sea. This was

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 87

a breach of some width in the system ; for it was a deroga-
tion from the laws made to uphold the herring markets of
Holland ; and besides, herring brought straight to Hamburg
was of course to go without the sacred brand of the Dutch
assayers. For these reasons there was much opposition to
the plan. The delegates from Enkhuizen foresaw " the
most ruinous consequences " if it were to be adopted ; and
by way of a transaction the exports of herring to Hamburg
direct from the fishery were restricted to three vessels'
cargoes in 1753 and the next year. The step was taken,
but the States hung back from taking it thoroughly, and
still did things by halves. Nor were these restrictions
abandoned when the measure, such as it was, proved a
brilliant financial success. In 1753 two Dutch sale-hunters
brought the first herring to Hamburg and sold it, although
unbranded, at fl.i562, and fl.8i4 a last severally, whereas
the first English herring-ship, having reached the same port
a few hours later, made only fl-543 for the same quantity.*
But even this could not convince the ultra-conservative
Dutch legislators of the expediency of trying the experi-
ment on a larger scale. Having so far belied the provisions
of the opposition in the Herring College, the experiment
was indeed repeated in the next years, but always with a
very few ships. Although of course involving a tacit ad-
mission of the existing legislation's noxiousness, these ex-
ceptional expeditions were to the very last treated as an
irregularity contrary to the law, and strictly limited in con-
sequence. If, having succeeded with three ships, Holland
had next sent thirty and aspired to send three hundred
from the North Sea to Hamburg, there is reason to believe
that great profits might, as of old, have been made in that
market ; for the eagerness for " new ' Dutch herring was
* Ned. Jaarboeken, 1753, p. 1226.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

now proved to be unabated. As it was, a few vessels only
were sent, a few shipowners made handsome profits, and
the trade's decline was not for a moment retarded by the
event of 1753. The market was not entirely lost ; in 1768
Hamburg and Bremen were still markets for Dutch brand-
herring.* But the shower of gold which used to be poured
down upon the Dutchmen who landed the first herring was
now, if not transferred to, at least shared by, others. Ham-
burg had grown accustomed to see British vessels first in
the market, and even when competition was brought on a
square footing in 1753, Holland could not regain what was
lost.

The herring fishery's general history now takes us forty
years back, after the above disgression relative to the
Hamburg affairs.

Some renovations and ampliations of the placards
against exporting herring barrels, staves, nets, and fishing
implements in general, which were enacted in 1719 and
1725^ first show that even after the peace of Utrecht the
fishery's extension was not such as to open a sufficient
inland market for the industry of those who fabricated
fishing materials. No such renovations were required at
the time when Holland wanted all the barrels and nets she
could produce ; and if the supply now exceeded the
demand, the herring legislation certainly was one of the
causes. The trades of coopering and net-making might, in
virtue of the renown of Dutch barrels and nets, have
survived the fishery's greatness if the former's produce
had now been allowed to be exported. But such a
departure from the established rules was against the
legislators' views, and the prohibition once made in order to

* Den. Koopman, i. p. 237.

t Groot Placaetboek, v. 1580, and vi. 1433.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 89

prevent a scarcity of fishing materials, was maintained
at a time when its only possible effect was to make the
auxiliary trade share the decay of the principal one. It
certainly did at times prevent coopers from selling off
their stock, as is proved by the following facts. On
January Qth, 1722, a change was made in the lawful dimen-
sions of the herring barrels as established in 1582. As,
however, a considerable stock of staves, hoops, &c., made
under the old regulation was still upon the cooper's hands,
and unexportable under the placard of 1719, branders and
assayers were, by Resolution of the States of Holland,
empowered to brand such barrels until June 1st, 1722.
And to prevent the branding at a later date of barrels
made upon the old model, it was further enacted on June
2nd, 1723, that each brand apposed to a barrel should
henceforth mention the year of its branding.*

Despite these sundry provisions against the depreciation
of the Dutch brand, herring bearing that mark of excel-
lence was more than once, at this very period, shown to be
of inferior quality. In 1721, the magistrates of Stettin f
or " Old Stettin " (Oudstetijn) again remonstrated with the
States of Holland, about their brand-herring's quality and
packing, and were put off with assurances that the Dutch
laws on packing &c., were maintained with the utmost
possible severity. At the same time the Stettiners were
invited, as they and the Dantzigers had been before, to
co-operate towards the maintenance of the Dutch laws by
transmitting to the States the branded stave of each
herring barrel which should have occasioned complaints as
to the quality of its contents, in order to have the guilty
steersman or brander detected and punished. There is no

* Groot Placaetboek, vi. pp. 1431-2.
t Res. HolL 1721, pp. 578, 618.

E. 8. H

90 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

instance on record of the Stettiners having acceded to
the invitation ; but in 1727 they again found reason to
complain of Dutch herring being bad.* It would
not be worth while to mention such incidents as these,
if they did not stand as curious samples of the Dutch
legislator's candid belief, against all evidence to the
contrary, that his work was perfect and could not but be
admired and seconded by all who had dealings with the
Grand Fishery's produce.

While Holland tried, by such means as these, to
maintain some of her herring fishery's ancient splendour,
foreign competition rose and prospered in proportion to its
decline. It will be superfluous in this place to digress upon
the rise in the business in Great Britain at the time.f
Nor was Great Britain the only concurrent. In 1727, a
privileged fishing company was chartered at Nieuwpoort,
in the Austrian Netherlands, against whose competition
measures had accordingly to be taken. These measures
were once more based on the customary belief that the
existing system, if thoroughly enforced, sufficed to put
foreign competition down. Instead of taking steps to
place the Dutch on an equal footing with them, the Herring
College, fully convinced that without Dutch sailors a
foreign society could do nothing, sued for and obtained a
renovation, by the States General, of the prohibitions
against taking service on board a foreign fishing vessel, and
the penalties against breach of this law were aggravated by
the semi-barbarous enactment that the families of such
fishermen as should be abroad in foreign service should be
removed from their dwelling-places and be entitled to no

•

* Res. Holl. 1727, p. 5.
f Europische Mercurius, 1720, i. p. 279.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 91

succour from the public poor-houses.* But no laws, however
severe, could withhold the vital elements of the Dutch fishery
from taking refuge abroad in their present state of decline,
as is shown by an extensive correspondence carried on in
1727 and 1728 about a Dutch vessel arrested for smug-
gling nets, &c., to Nieuwpoortf The Nieuwpoort business
does not appear to have been prosperous, but Dutch com-
petition certainly was no party to the scantiness of its success ;
for, in 1736, its further encouragement was considered by
the Belgian authorities, mainly upon the plea that Dutch
herring was not imported into the Austrian Netherlands
in sufficient quantities to supply the fast-day requirements
of the Catholic population.^ And this, again, is not a matter
of wonder, for the Grand Fishery was by this time reduced to
about one-tenth of what it was a century earlier. In a
Paper contributed to the often-mentioned periodical " den
Koopman," in 1768,5 it is stated that only 219 herring-
ships and 31 sale-hunters sailed in 1736. This precise
statement, being the first instance of herring statistics
during the trade's decline, is sufficient proof of what it had
been brought to in the course of a century, by frequent
naval wars, and by its inability to compete with foreigners
at a time when peace allowed the fishing interests to be
actively pursued abroad.

The renewed war with France in 1743 does not appear
to have greatly affected the Dutch herring fishery. Be-
yond a renewal of the subsidy of fl.3o,ooo formerly granted
for convoying purposes, || and which had not been sued for

* See Res. Holl. 1727, pp. 844,994, 1012, 1042.

t Ibid. 1727, pp. 1029, 1031 ; 1728, pp. 53, 281, 325.

T iota. 1727, pp. 1029, 1031 ; 1725, pp. 53, 281, 325. XT \(j A /
t Ibid. 1736, p. 666. PS*,

§ " Z^;z Koopman" vol. i. p. 236.
|| Tfor. //i?//. 1744, pp. 380, 391.

92 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

between 1715 and 1743,* and a further resolution of
July 7th, by which one ship of war was detached to
protect the herring fleet, no trace of the war's effects
upon the trade are visible in such documents as form
the basis of the present narrative. The institution of a
fishing company in Sweden, reported by the Dutch
ambassador in 1745, did not elicit any particular measure
from the States. Matters became different when, in
1750, Great Britain took steps for promoting her herring
fisheries on a very extensive scale, by chartering a company
with a capital of half a million sterling and the promise of
considerable premiums. Such protection as this could
not but reflect on the Dutch concurrents ; and from the
day on which Engl. nd definitely adopted the policy of
encouraging her fishery out of the public pocket, the
Dutch shipowners' cry was for having the same expedient
resorted to. In 1749, the Grand Fishery had spirit enough
left to decline a subsidy of fl. 50,000 in consideration of the
Treasury's exhausted state ;t but when England in the
next year set an example of paying fishermen out of the
public purse, no such generosity further occurred, and
Dutch fishers likewise began to look to the Exchequer for
the profits which the sea no longer yielded. Direct
premiums were not indeed resorted to at once. Protection
was first applied to the once Grand Fishery in the shape of
exemption from taxes. On the 6th of May, 1650, Holland
granted an immunity of the several provincial excise duties
for articles used in victualling herring-ships ; and as both
the number and the amount of these duties were consider-
able, the privilege was worthy of note. Three days
afterwards, the States-General allowed an exemption of

* Receuil v. d. Ldy p. 43.
t Res. Ho II. 1749, p. 274.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 93

export duty on Dutch herring, which duty then amounted
to fl.2-io (i.e. two florins and a half) per last on St. James'
brand-herring, and to fl.4 on the Cologne (also called
St. Bartholomew's or Elevation Brand) and the great Rouen
brand.* Both exemptions were granted to last three
years, and were renewed every three years till the end of
the Republic. At the same time the placards against
exporting herring barrels and gear and taking service on
board foreign fishing-vessels were once more renewed,!
and this furbishing up of old and worn armour was believed
to be sufficient precaution against the now stimulated
concurrency of English fishermen. The trade fared ill in
1750, notwithstanding its new privileges. A paragraph by
a contemporaneous writer states the condition of the
Grand Fishery to have been such, that " most busses sailed
money overboard, some returned neither gain nor loss,|
and a very few brought a small clear profit." As for the
number of herring-ships sailed, it will be found in Ap-
pendix A to this work, for this and the following years, and
will show the quondam Grand Fishery's now reduced and
still further declining condition. The table is taken from
the Committee's Report of 1854, who compiled it from the
contemporary yearly statistics to be found in the "Ned.
Jaarboeken." The figures are certainly exact, or very
nearly so, and are the first regular herring statistics ever
compiled in the country.

Further encouragement was obtained by the salt-herring
fishery in 1758, when France, as a reward for the fidelity

Groot Placaetboek, vii. p. 1592. A supplementary exemption from
a peculiar duty on salt, known as " round-measure duty," was granted
for herring-ships in 1754 (Gr. PL Boek, viii. p. 1077-1080).

f Gro ot Placaetboek, vii. pp. 1593-4.

\ " Speelden Kamp? see Ned. Jaarboeken, 1750, p. 723.

94 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

with which the Republic kept neutral in the Seven Years'
War, opened her frontiers for Dutch herring, which had
long been forbidden the country. The neutrality did not
tend to the Republic's political glory, and its fruit did not
yield the fishery much profit ; for it will be seen from
Appendix A that the decrease in the number of herring-
ships was peculiarly rapid in the years following 1758.
Even the opening of such a market, from which English
herring was excluded, * did not act as a stimulus on the
once Grand Fishery, whose energy, as a natural result of
two centuries' paternal regulations, was now at as low an ebb
as the Republic's in general. The privilege was contemp-
tuously withdrawn by France in 1763, after the war's
termination ; and as a proof that it had not been taken
advantage of while it lasted, its withdrawal, instead of further
injuring the herring fishery, was actually followed by a
slight increase of it in the next two years (see Ap-
pendix A).

Fiscal immunities proving inefficient to restrain the
fisheries' decline, direct premiums were now resorted to.
Such a premium seems to have been first granted by the
city of Flushing in 1754, to the amount of £.30 for each
herring-ship sailing from the said port, and for a period of

* So strictly was this exclusion maintained that the French
ambassador at the Hague in the course of 1758 took steps to prevent
English herring being sent to France together with Dutch, or packed
in the same barrels. A placard dated July 24th and expressly pro-
hibiting to mix up foreign herring with Dutch (Gr. PL Boek viii. 1261)
was issued by the States merely to content France's apprehension,
which power does not seem to have placed much trust in the famous
Dutch fishing laws, which implicated a similar prohibition since two
centuries. This disgraceful moment in the fisheries' history is fully
described in Wagenaar's Vad. Hist. xxii. p. 456 ; xxiii. p. 77, and Ned.
Jaars. 1758, p. 1045. See Res. Holland, 1758, pp. 601, 874, 988.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 95

seven years.* A premium double the amount was allowed
to fishing boats from Burch in Zealand, in 1758, out of the
provincial treasury ; and some inhabitants of Veere having
applied for a similar bounty, the premium system was
extended to all Zealand fishermen in 1759-t Holland
adopted it some years afterwards.

Some fresh difficulties with Hamburg are on record in the
following years. English and Dutch herring at this time
were still concurrents in the Hamburg market, both under
certificate as to their having been caught after St. John's
Day ; and as a few Dutch sale-hunters were annually sent
to Hamburg straight from the fishery, competition between
them was now on a fair footing. But others began now
to obtain unlawful advantage; In 1769, England and the
Republic ordered their ambassadors jointly to remonstrate
against the proceedings of the Danes, who managed to
smuggle forbidden herring into Hamburg under certificates
mentioning not the date of their catching, but the one on
which the Danish trader had taken them on board.J
Worse enemies than these appeared in the Hamburg
market in 1773. A Prussian fishing company, incorporated
at Embden some time before, toward the opening of the
season of that year, boldly announced its intention to bring
herring to Hamburg a week before the lawful term ; and it
was the Prussian charge d'affaires' boast, that the ancient
city would not dare to refuse these cargoes, treaty or no
treaty. He was mistaken in the first instance ; for an
Embden vessel, having fished as early as June iSth, was
refused admittance by the Hamburg authorities, although
coming into the port a day after the first lawful Dutch
cargo. The King of Prussia in the next year, quite in the

* Ned. Jaarb. 1754, pp. 92, sqq.

t Notulen Stateu v. Zeeland, 13, 20, 21, 24, Sept.

\ Res. Ho II. 1769, p. 701, Res. Stat. Gen., April 2ist

96 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

spirit of Frederick the Great's downright politics, ordered
the sovereign magistrate of the Free City of Hamburg to
admit early herring from Embden at whatever period such
herring might have been caught ; and when the order was
protested against, vouchsafed no answer. Hamburg
excused herself to the Republic " as being unable to with-
stand a powerful neighbour ; J: and the States, who at this
period of their government were as a rule very anxious to
keep out of harm's way at any price, did not venture any
opposition. The herring treaty of 1609 being thus virtually
annulled, there was now, if ever, good reason for Holland
to allow her fishermen to fish as early as the Embdeners ;
the more so, as the Dutch ambassador Hop had recently,
in 1770, strongly impressed upon his Government the
stringent necessity of being early in the market at
whatever cost, since the first herring, 'whether good or bad,
English, Dutch or Danish, was sold there at fabulous
prices. But once more the States were deaf to the most
urgent expostulations, and though every shadow of observ-
ance of the treaty of 1609 was now withdrawn, still kept
their St. John's rule upright.* It would indeed appear
from such facts as these, that some notion at the time
prevailed to the effect that it was better to catch herring
after St. John's and find no market for it, than to
catch it earlier and sell it at good prices. The system was
maintained with the more obduracy in proportion as its
powerlessness to do any good to the fishery became more
strikingly apparent on all sides.

The Grand Fishery was now indeed beset on all sides.
Denmark, in 1767, chartered a herring fishery, and, in 1774,
prohibited all importation of foreign fish. Austria did her
utmost to promote the fisheries of Nieuwpoort and Ostend.

* Res. Holl. 1770, p. 1272 ; 1773, p. 485 ; 1774, p. 496; 1775, pp. 155,
193. Res. St. Gen. 1775, p. 419.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 97

England persevered in encouraging hers by considerable
bounties. Prussia, besides making free with competitors
in the summary way described above, in 1775 prohibited
Dutch herring to be imported in July, August, and
September of each year.* The trade in Holland and
Zealand, as the often-quoted writer in "den Koopman'
picturesquely states, f had, " despite all unceasing offerings
up of sighing prayers and zealous heaven-solicitations,
aye, notwithstanding all public supplications in the
Reformed Churches of these countries by so many up-
lifted hands and hearts, come to diminish from year to
year, a matter of wonder as regards the one, and of sorrow
with respect to the other." Besides leaving the trade at
liberty and repealing the herring statutes, which measure
was never thought of by an enlightened and paternal
government, there was but one remedy as yet untried,
viz., direct bounties to fishermen out of the tax-payers'
pockets, besides the fiscal immunities they were already
possessed of. This last resource of all protective legisla-
tion, which as shown above had been adopted in Zealand
before, was accordingly sued for in Holland, in May 1775,
by " those interested in the herring fishery at Delfthaven,
Rotterdam, Schiedam, Vlaardingen, Maassluis, and in the
north quarter at Enkhuizen de Rijp and Noordend, being
the whole of those concerned in the trade in Holland and
West Vriesland." J No less a premium than fl. 600 for

* Res. Holl. 1775, p. 445 > J777> P- 326 ; Res. St. Gen. 1775, p. 277.

f " Den Koopman" i. p. 235.

\ It is to be noted that, according to this enumeration, the herring
trade had before this been entirely abandoned at Hoorn and Brielle,
where it was formerly exercised to some extent. The towns named in
the text petitioned as severally concerned in the common interest, and
not as members of the College, in which several of them were not
incorporated.

98 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

each buss was asked for, besides a bounty on exportation
of herring at fl.i per ton, and a recommendation ex officio,
that the inhabitants of all poor-houses, and similar estab-
lishments, should be fed on herring at least twice a week.
The College of the Grand Fishery examined the request,
and of course seconded it, " because the business could not
be kept going without notable assistance." The College
besides reminded the States that, having in 1748 refused a
proffered subsidy when not required, they were entitled to
it now they could not do without it. They omitted to
state that the subsidy rejected in 1748, had been formerly
accepted readily enough whenever there was occasion for
it, and that the said subsidy was widely different from the
premium now sued for ; the former being a grant to the
central direction of the fisheries to meet convoying expenses,
and the latter a direct payment to each skipper out of the
provincial treasury, to be obtained in full peace, and upon
no other consideration than the fact of his having sailed for
herring. The States of Holland, however, granted the new
bounty by Placard of May iQth, 1775.* Upon mature
consideration, related in the intolerably tedious style
of the period, they allowed fl.5OO to the proprietor
of each herring ship which should sail in the course
of the next two years. The other measures sued for,
viz., the exportation bounty and the order to the poor-
house boards to feed their poor on herring, were both
declined.

It was expected that in the course of the two years for
which the bounty had been allowed, the herring trade, thus
encouraged, should beat foreign competition out of the field
and regain its former greatness. And as a fact, now they
were sure of a bounty, the number of busses increased

* Res. Holl. 421, 464. Groot Placaetboek ix. 1303.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 99

from 158 in 1775, to 179 in 1776. But they were now
fishing more for the premium than for herring, and accord-
ingly, when after the lapse of two years the bounty was
reduced to fl. 400, in order to maintain equality with the
amount allowed to whaling vessels, the number of busses
sailing decreased faster than ever, as shown by Appendix
A. In 1780 it came down to 151, or about as low a figure
as had occurred before bounties were granted.

The war declared by England to the Republic on
December 2Oth of that year inflicted another heavy visita-
tion upon the herring trade, although at the war's outset
the fleet, then not yet returned from the Deepwater,
escaped destruction by a hairbreadth. The moment the
declaration of war was known at the Hague, a fast-sailing
sloop was sent to warn the busses ; and though closely
chased by British cruisers, the vessels all got safe home,
where their return was commemorated by a day of public
prayer and thanksgiving, and the coining of a medal.*
But there was no durable occasion to rejoice. The Re-
public had scarce men-of-war enough to cover her coasts ;
convoy was therefore out of the question, and on January
26th, 1781, a general sailing prohibition, improperly styled
"embargo," was laid on all Dutch merchant and fishing
vessels, and not repealed even upon the fisherman's most
urgent request. A negotiation which the Dutch ambas-
sador at Brussels was directed to open with his British
colleague, with a view to the parties' engaging to leave
each other's fishermen unmolested,! led to no result.
Herring was now, perhaps for the first time, actually
imported into the Republic from Denmark, and the Danish
Herring Company kept an agent at Amsterdam, who tried,

* Ned. Jaarb. 1781, p. 250.
t Res. St. Gen. 1781, p. 333.

ioo THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

though in vain, to obtain an immunity of import duty for
his principal's article.* No herring busses sailed during
the season of 1781, and this time, as a further derogation
from the herring laws, the States-General saw the expediency
of allowing shipowners to sell their vessels abroad, under
a promise of buying them back in better times, and subject
to the advice of the Admiralty Board on the Maas for each
special case.j

In 1782 it appears some Dutch busses went about their

trade, and fished unmolested under the British men-of-war's

guns,! but this was a mere act of toleration, as passports

were only exchanged in 1783,5 pending the negotiations

which on August 28th of that year led to the signing of

peace preliminaries. No less than six hundred passports

were applied for at the time by the local fishery boards in

several Dutch fishing towns ; but only 120 busses, besides

a few trawls of the coast fishery, appear to have sailed.

The trade was recommenced on a somewhat larger scale,

but as yet without a premium, in 1784. In the next year,

"those concerned in the herring trade of Holland and West

Vriesland " once more sued for a bounty of fl. 700 or 800

for each buss, which was granted in 1786 to the amount of

fl. 700 for each ship that had sailed in the preceding year.

At the same time the Admiralty of the Maas having

reported that William Cunningham, Receiver-General in

Ireland, had tried to induce a skipper from Vlaardingen to

establish himself on the Irish Coast, the prohibition against

engaging in foreign fishing concerns was renewed once

* Res. St. Genl. 1781, pp. 647, 734 ; Res. Holl. 1781, p. 778.
t Res. Holl. 1781, p. 1286 ; 1782, pp. 85, 121 ; Res. St. Gen. 1782, p.
1388.

t Ned. Jaarb. 1782, pp. 566, 663 ; Vervolg op Wagenaar, pp. 4, 376.
§ Res. St. Geti. 546, 560.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 101

more by Placard of May 3rd, 1786.* In 1788 the bounty
system was regulated on a footing intended to be durable,
a premium of 6.500 per herring buss being granted by a
States of Holland's Publication dated April I7th, to be
repeated annually for twelve years.f The measure once
more called forth a slight increase of the trade towards the
Republic's end, although the number of 200 busses was
never reached. Fishing laws were maintained to the end.
A renovation of the edict against sending herring to the
Weser and Elbe unless cured, packed, and branded accord-
ing to the law,J which law had been last re-enacted in 1715,
at the outset of the difficulties with Hamburg, is the last
act of legislation on herring fisheries under the Republic.

CHAPTER II.
WHALE FISHING.

THE origines of both Dutch and English whaling coincide
with the beginning of the second decade of the seventeenth
century.

Spitzbergen having been discovered by Van Heemskerk
in 1596, and by British mariners the next year, reports
about the seas off this island being very full of whales,
soon began to spread, and set ship-owners' imagination and
spirit of enterprise working in both countries. Still, in
Holland, some time yet elapsed before any one ventured in
a trade so entirely new. One Captain Huygen van Lin-
schoten, in 1601, published an account of his voyage to the
Arctic seas, accomplished in the years 1594-5; and he

* Res. Holl. 1786, p. 2952. Gr. Plac. Boek. ix. p. 1310.
f Groot Plac. Boek. ix., p. 1313.
\ Ibid. ix. p. 1315.

102 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

described the whales, their tameness and multitude, and
added, " A goodly fishery might be made upon these
animals, if people would turn their thoughts that way." *
But in the next years nobody did. The novelty and risk
of the thing probably deterred single-handed enterprise ;
and subscriptions towards a whaling company are not
reported to have been collected until the year 1611. The
two first Dutch whalers sailed to Spitzbergen in 1612, but
failed utterly : firstly, in consequence of outrages committed
upon the ships by English concurrents, and, secondly, from
lack of experience how to manage the business. Having
sailed in quest of the whale, the Dutch found securing and
killing him a very different sport from their accustomed
business of netting the herring and hooking the cod, and
were unsuccessful till the fashion of hiring harpooners from
the Bay of Biscay came into use, when the trade at once
proved a promising business. Frenchmen from Biscay,
and from St. Jean de Luz especially, had practised whaling
at a more remote period, when a peculiar kind of whale
was found off their own coasts. They seem to have
afterwards followed the animals to Greenland and acquired
a degree of training which fitted them to teach the Dutch
the art of whaling, in which the latter soon became such
adepts as to find plenty of skilful harpooners in their own
country.

The command of a whaling expedition was at first
divided. The navigation department belonged to the ship's
master ; but when in sight of the fish he abdicated, and the
harpooner took the direction of the further proceedings
upon himself. By his orders boats were manned, fish
attacked or left alone, and when killed towed alongside
and left in the water till they " rose," so as to enable the

* P. 7.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 103

men to stand on them, which period was the fit one for
slicing or " flensing " the blubber. As the harpooning and
blubber-carving business was the most important in the
eyes of the ship-owners, the harpooner of course was a
great personage on board, and his authority seems at first
to have exceeded that of the skipper or " commandeur."*

Spitzbergen, as said before, was the cradle of the whaling
industry. Its seas were then alive with whales ; and,
moreover, its geographical position and the nature of its
coasts afforded the trade peculiar advantages.t In con-
sequence the shores of the newly-discovered island were
soon the theatre of contentions between British and Dutch
whalers, as both nations claimed to be its first discoverers.
A collision between the rivals in 1612 (see Chap. V.) led
to the chartering of the Dutch Arctic Company (NoordscJie
Couipagnie}.

This company appears at first to have borne a merely
private character. Subscriptions towards it, as said above,
were raised as early as 1611. In 1612 they made their
first and unlucky whaling attempt, after which the States
made it their business to succour them. This was first done
in 1613, by a prohibition to all Dutchmen fit for whaling
service to take such service abroad,! in order to prevent
a scarcity of men trained to" the business. In the same

* Zorgdrager, Bloeyende Opkomst der aloude en hedendaagsche
Groenlandsche Visschery, p. 99. The author speaks of but one
harpooner, but of course the vessels carrying five or six whaling boats
had several men to perform this part of the service. The personage
mentioned by Zorgdrager is probably the chief harpooner, who in the
first years of the trade was always a " Biscayer." Several harpooners
are mentioned in the lists of some whaling crews which have been
preserved.

f Zorgdrager •, Bloeyende Opkomst, etc., p. 160.

% Res, St. Gen.) March 23rd, 1613.

104 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

year the company sued for a charter from the States,
which was granted them on January 2/th, 1614, and in
virtue of which they set up as monopolists, after the
manner of the East India Company, then already extant.

Their charter of monopoly, though applied for to last
ten years, was at first granted for three only.* It con-
ferred on them the exclusive right " to trade and fish from
these United Netherlands, on or to the coasts of the lands
between Nova Zembla and Fretum Davidis," including
Spitzbergen, Beeren-Eiland, Greenland, etc. Partners in
the company were to be entitled " not only to the profits of
their money in proportion to the sums they shall have
ventured, but also to all such further advantages as shall
arise to the company within the aforesaid time, whether
pertaining to the administration of the said company and
equipage, or otherwise." On April 4th, 1614, towards the
beginning of the whaling season, the States-General
decreed that the company's ships should sail under convoy,
and pay last-money ; and in the next years one or more
of the States' men-of-war generally sailed with the whaling
fleet. The object of these warlike expeditions, and of
the company's own armaments, was twofold. Besides
catching whales, they meant to discover new countries, and
as a fact, made several discoveries of islands in the Arctic
seas. Their charter, as shown above, included such islands
in their fishing monopoly, which circumstance of course
stimulated their exploring ardour. The principle that the
discoverer had a right to profit by his discovery, was
applied by the Republic with remarkable fairness. In
1618 the States of Holland granted their worst enemies,

* Groot Plac. Boek. i. 670. The document is also to be found in
Aitzema, Saccken van Staat en Oorlogh, vol. ii., p. 356 ; Zorgdrager
//., p. 173 ; Wagenaar Vad. Hist. vol. x. p. 68.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 105

the Dunkirkers, the right to fish off a small island dis-
covered by some of them, provided they should sail thither
under Dutch colours, and contribute towards the expenses
of the common defence, i.e. pay last-money.* The foreign
discoverer's rights were thus respected at the price of a
breach of the company's monopoly.

The ardour for discoveries on the company's side was
great. They even seriously attempted the north-east
passage, and towards the opening of the whaling season of
1615 resolved to send some ships to China, or " Cathay,"
by that route, and applied to the States-General for
permission, if obliged to return by the Indian seas, to
water and victual their ships in the colonies then comprised
in the East India Company's monopoly.! The whaling
ships and their conveyers seem from the very first to have
sailed in a sort of squadron ; for it is registered that on
April 29th, 1614, the States-General drew up an instruc-
tion for "the commander of the ships, both of war and
others, destined to the Northern islands whether for the
purpose of whaling or making discoveries." Their occasion
for convoy and armament was constant and pressing ; for
besides repeated difficulties and conflicts with British
whalers, they in 1616 had to provide against apprehended
violence from the King of Denmark, who in the said year
set up a claim to the exclusive right of fishing on the
shores of Greenland. Both these matters will be treated
of in another chapter. The States-General in the course
of the year 1616 granted the Arctic Company no less than
five convoying men-of-war, and, moreover, lent them
artillery to arm their own whaling vessels. J

* Res. Holl. 9th April, 1618, p. 591. ~os ^

f Res. St. Gen., 2nd April, 1615. /

\ Ibid. April 13, 28 ; May n, 12 ; June 2, 1616. See ch.

E. 8. I

io6 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Fishing operations were in the meantime commenced on
a large scale, and a permanent establishment was set on
foot on Amsterdam Island, near Spitzbergen, including
warehouses and accommodation for boiling blubber and
making barrels. This factory, called Smeerenburg (or Oil-
city), in course of time formed a village, which in 1636
was fortified and provided with guns and ammunition.
Smeerenburg of course decayed with the Arctic Company,
but its remains were still to be found in 1768,* long after
the first prosperous days of the trade had ceased.

A very thriving business was at first done by the
company, notwithstanding frequent collisions with foreign,
and especially with British, concurrents. In the very year
of their chartering they sent out eighteen whalers, and the
number increased greatly in following years. The Spitz-
bergen shore waters in these times were extremely redundant
with whales ; the shores were accordingly in a few years
covered with blubber boilers and warehouses, and swarmed
with whalers from several countries. The company's charter
was prolonged in 1617 for the space of four years, the area
monopolised this time including the island of Mauritius or
Jan Mayen, discovered since 1614; and such was the

t

number of fish caught by their skippers, that the whaling
vessels did not suffice to carry home the blubber, oil, and
whalebone, and several ships were chartered year after
year solely for this end,t sometimes bringing to Amsterdam
in one summer two freights of a thousand quarters of train
oil each.

In spite of this extraordinary prosperity of the trade,
discord arose between the Arctic Company's partners in
1621, towards the expiration of their charter. There were

* Den Koopman, i. p. 239 ; cf. Zorgdrager, p. 191.
f Zorgdrager, p. 180.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 107

several chambers, or separate boards, in the company, viz.
one at Amsterdam, one in the towns on the Maas, one in
North Holland (or the "North Quarter"), and one in
Zealand ; and these had agreed to a repartition of
convoying, and other general expenses between them. In

1621, the charter being about to expire, a change in this
repartition was desired by some, and opposed by others ;
and as very high disputes arose on the subject, a
simple renovation of the charter under these circumstances
was impossible. The rival parties laid their differences
before the States of Holland, who, on January I4th, 1622,
appointed a committee to inquire into the matter and
effect a reconciliation. These umpires proposed to leave
the repartition as it was, viz., a quarter of the common
expenses for each chamber. But to this the parties did
not agree ; the " small company," by which name the
chamber for Zealand, though not then a separate body,
seems to have been designated, pretending to pay less.
There were, moreover, differences about the right to
establish blubber boilers, &c., on some parts of the available
coasts, to which rights both Holland and Zealand pre-
tended. The upshot of the matter was the separation
of the Zealand chamber from the company, and their
establishment as a separate corporation. On May 28th,

1622, the States-General issued a placard assuring the
Zealand company the right of whaling on the coasts of
Mauritius or Jan Mayen's Land, and enjoining both parties
not to trouble each other's establishments there, as the
island was large enough for both. Upon this provisional
charter the fishery was carried on in the course of the year,
but the contending parties in the same year came to a
definite agreement, in virtue of which, on December 22nd,
the charter of 1617 was renewed for twelve years, for the

I 2

loS THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

benefit of both the companies of Holland and Zealand,
whose rights to the whole available whaling area, Jan
Mayen included, were by this Act made equal.*

It may be mentioned here that in the early days of the
whaling trade a rival concern sought to obstruct its
progress. When in 1621, the Arctic Company applied for
their usual convoy, their request met with some opposition
in the States, on the plea "that it had as yet to be
established whether the public at large should profit by
the whaling business, whereas any measure taken for their
protection was sure to hasten the ultimate ruin of the
ancient and respectable industries of manufacturing and
dealing in rape-seed oil."f

But such arguments as this prevented neither the
granting of the demanded convoy nor the trade's general
prosperity. A very tempting account of the latter, about
and after the time now spoken of, has been handed down
to posterity by an author before quoted, Zorgdrager, wHo,
however, wrote about 1720, and was then a retired whaling
commander, and may, both as an old man and an old
sailor, have been inclined to magnify the .splendours of
yore and the exploits of his predecessors on the deep.

Dutch vessels, he says,! used in the whaling season to
lie alongside of each other in Smeerenburg Bay, so close
together that boats could barely pass between them, and
tow aboard the oil barrels manufactured and filled ashore.
The vessels were moored safely, three or four miles from
the high sea, in an excellent roadstead, having an anchor

* Groot Plac. Boek. \. p. 674 ; Res. Holl. 1622, pp. 627, 641 ;
Zorgdrager, p. 181 sqq.

f Res. Holl. 1621, p. 403 ; Res. St. Gen. April 28th and 3oth, and
May i$th, 1621.

J Pp. 174, I91-

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 109

seaward, and fastened by ropes to large whale's ribs set up
on shore as mooring stocks.* From this station the fishing
business was done at ease, without unmooring the vessels,
by boats cruising in the bay, which was uncommonly full of
fish. The ships were manned double, one half of the crews
being constantly employed in killing whales and towing
them ashore, and the other in cutting the blubber, preparing
the train oil, and rolling the full barrels into the water,
whence they were floated to the ships and hauled on board.
A fleet of merchant vessels from Amsterdam, Rotterdam,
Hoorn and other ports was constantly to be found along-
shore, the vessels from each town lying close to their own
blubber-boiling establishments to ship cargo ; and a vast
stock of blubber, oil, whalebone and whaling implements
was constantly to be found in the Smeerenburg warehouses,
to which dealers in all the commodities of life had begun
to repair, making existence in the Arctic Sea a tolerably
comfortable one. Rolls, hot from the baker's, were even to
be had every morning in the height of the whaling season.

The company's halcyon days did not, however, last
many years. In 1633, the expiration of their charter
being again at hand, they, in spite of their monopoly, com-
plained of ill-usage by foreign competitors and the back-
ward state of the business, and further protectory measures
were taken in their behalf. It had been shown to the
States that, " By the act of certain unquiet persons, envious
of the welfare of these United Countries," sailors were
frequently tempted forth from the company's service, and got
to exercise their abilities abroad. Wherefore in the true
spirit of the times, when Governments were always ready

Such posts have been brought home as curiosities, and may still
be seen here and there in the Dutch pasture grounds, where they are
used as scratching poles for cattle.

no THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

for the interest of a privileged few to prevent the people at
large from seeking their gain where they best might, it was
enacted that " No man living in the United Provinces
should navigate to Greenland, &c., in the whaling trade,
or after any sea-monsters, either from this or other
countries, except it be in the Arctic or Greenland Company's
service ; " and heavy penalties were at the same time
edicted against hiring out vessels or sailors to foreign
whalers and participating in foreign whaling concerns.
Dutch whaling vessels and implements were then indeed
in some demand abroad. A month after the date of the
placard just mentioned, the King of Denmark applied to
the States-General for an exception in favour of one of
his subjects, who used to procure whaling sloops and gear
from Holland. The Royal letter was submitted to the
Arctic Company, and I have not found whether the request
was granted or not*

The Arctic Company's charter being now once more
about to expire, some enterprising inhabitants of the
province of Friesland determined to try competition ; and
the delegates of Friesland to the States-General sought, in
June, 1633, to prevent another prorogation of the Company's
monopoly. But the delegates of Holland contrived to have
this instance put off, and the Prisons found themselves
excluded as before. Far from acquiescing, the whaling
season being meanwhile advanced, they sent three snips
north, and the states of Friesland, as sovereigns in the
province, in the next year granted their subjects a license
to exercise the whaling trade for twenty years, provided
they should be entered as shareholders in a Frison whaling
company chartered by the same Act (dated November 22nd,
1634). This charter was based upon the consideration that

* Res. Hoi 1. 1633, p. 471.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. in

it was " unlawful and contrary to the Union for one province
to preclude another from traffic in the free sea," and the
Arctic Company's monopoly had therefore no title to be
respected. But the participators in the Prison Company
nevertheless found it expedient to apply for the States-
General's approbation on their charter, to prevent "mis-
understandings and actual collisions ' (dadelijkhederi)
between the whalers of both provinces. The Holland Arctic
Company's Charter had meantime been prolonged for
eight years, by a fresh privilege dated October 25th, 1633 ;
but in spite of the monopoly thus maintained the States-
General issued orders for Hollands whalers not to molest
the Prisons. The latter accordingly fished, in virtue of
their own charter, and, as it were, on sufferance from the
States-General ; while at the same time the Arctic
Company averred the Prison charter to be void, as in
collision with their monopoly. This ambiguous state of
things, a result of the very ill-defined rights of sovereignty
in the Republic of the United Provinces, of course gave
rise to frequent disputes between the rival parties, to
terminate the which the States of Holland once more
offered their mediation, and had a series of meetings held
between delegates from the Zealand, Holland, and Prison
whaling companies before a committee of the States, in the
course of the years 1635 and 1636. As the result of these
deliberations, an accord was agreed upon on July 25th of
the latter year. To this agreement or " treaty ' (which
was simply a private contract concluded before a notary)
the companies of Holland and Zealand combined were one
party, and that of Friesland was the other, and the latter
was allowed to share the whaling monopoly.*

A repartition of common profits and expenses was
Zorgdrager, p. 188 ; Aitzema,\\. p. 359 ; Gr. Plac. Boek, ii. 3018.

ii2 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

»

agreed to in proportion as three for Friesland to twenty-
four for Holland and Zealand combined ; and Friesland
was secured the range of the other companies' whaling
area, provided they should not place their establishments
nearer to each other than was reasonable. A general
assembly of shareholders was to be held thrice a year, in
which Holland was to have six votes, Zealand two, and
Friesland one, and all parties agreed to trade only to and
from the United Provinces, and keep secret, and exploit
for the common advantage any new discoveries or inven-
tions to be made by any of them. The Prisons soon
afterwards established a blubber-boilery of their own at
Smeerenburg, from the ruins of which part of the shore
was called the " Harlinger* Traankokery " till late in the
eighteenth century.

Notwithstanding this extension both of their capital and
working power, matters went backward with the Arctic (or
Greenland) Companies after the renewal of their monopoly
in 1633. Several very unfavourable seasons, in which the
state of the ice occasioned the loss of many vessels, con-

•

tributed to their decline ; but Zorgdrager, who certainly
was a competent judge of the matter, mainly attributed it
to their improvident way of fishing. When the great
whaling establishments near Spitzbergen were first con-
structed, the company seems to have counted on a per-
petual affluence of whales to the same spots. But as this
animal procreates slowly, and has, moreover, a propensity
to migrate when much chased and annoyed, sport became
rare after a few years of abundance and reckless destruction
of them. The train-oil and whalebone mine had been

Harlingen is a town in the province of Friesland, and one of its
burgomasters, named Hilbrancl Dirksz, was one of the first partici-
pators in the Prison whaling concern.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 113

much overworked, and consequently became exhausted ;*
and the Spitzbergen whales, formerly described as'
"innocent creatures," who unsuspectingly came and dis-
ported within a short distance from the ships lying off
Smeerenburg, in time became cunning enough to avoid
them, and retreat into the more northerly ice regions.
They were, indeed, pursued from place to place, but the
greater distance from Smeerenburg made the landing of the
prey more and more difficult Whalers were at last obliged
to " flens ' or carve the blubber and whalebone while
out at sea, and carry home blubber instead of oil, whereby
the extensive Smeerenburg boiling establishments and the
thriving trade of the oil-ships had to be gradually aban-
doned, involving, of course, considerable loss of capital.
This caused the ardour for whaling to slacken, and thereby
prevented the founding of new establishments on other
places, which was, besides, made very difficult by the fact
of other nations having by this time taken possession of
most of the available whaling area, and. each excluding others
from the shores of his own domain, to which, as stated by
Zorgdrager, no foreign boat was admitted unless the harpoon
were previously taken out of the " mik " or stand used in
shooting or throwing it. The pretensions of Denmark
relative to the exclusive right to some parts of the whaling
sea will be spoken of in another chapter.

The company's charter once more expiring in 1641, the
state of their affairs was such as to prevent their suing for
another renewal of it. Still, whaling experiments in parts
till then unvisited seemed full of promise, and the trade was
accordingly commenced at once by men from several pro-
vinces and towns, as soon as the discontinuance of the

* Wagenaar, VaderL Hist. x. p. 68.

ii4 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

monopoly left competition free.* Not being bound to any
particular place or establishment, nor burdened with a con-
siderable capital sunk in buildings, boilers, forts, &c., whalers
from Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Zaandam, Rijp and many
other towns began to sail after the whales wherever they
could be found, and generally brought home sufficient cargoes
of blubber and whalebone. The killing of walrus and seals
was likewise practised with some success after the Arctic
or Greenland Company's dissolution, which took place in
1645 ; and the trade, which had at first been fostered by the
company's monopoly, thus acquired renewed vigour after its
extinction.! It should, however, be added, that quarrels
and even actual deeds of violence between Dutch whalers
occurred frequently in the first years after the expiration of
the monopoly.^

A trade so very dependent on climatic circumstances
could scarcely yield anything like constant profit ; and it
is accordingly described as being " more of a lottery than
a trade," by most of the authors who have written about it.
A series of accounts of ships wrecked and crews miracu-
lously saved from death by cold and starvation sufficiently
corroborate this statement, and are corroborated in their
turn by several placards issued at different periods by the
States of Holland to secure the owner's rights to vessels
abandoned in the ice in various parts of the Arctic Sea.
These accidents gradually became more frequent as the
whales retreated into or under the more northern ice ; a
period of their migrations which coincides with a consider-
able change in the method of fishing. During the prosperity
of the Arctic Company, when whales, as related above,

* Zorgdrager, p. 195.

f Den Koopman, vol. i. p. 239.

% Res. Holl. 1644, pp. 5/6-578 ; 1645, P- IQS ; 1651, p. 279.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 115

flocked round the coasts of Spitzbergen, whaling was a
harmless and easy, though very profitable, summer sport,
and such danger as it involved was amply recompensed
by pleasant life at Smeerenburg. As the fish retreated
seaward, things became less pleasant both for the ship-
owner and the whaling crew ; but the real hardships of
the trade, as writers of the period express it, did not com-
mence for either till the whales began to hide away in the
ice, and " sea fishery ' was forcibly superseded by " ice
fishery." Worn-out merchant-vessels were at first used,
or " risked," in this perilous trade ; but the number of
casualties increasing, shipowners gradually found it worth
their while to provide new and very strongly built vessels,*
and this circumstance caused fresh capital to be invested
in the trade. In a word, as a writer in the commercial
review ' Den Koopman 'f shows, the whaling trade revived
when it became a less easy one, and ceased to be in the
hands of a few monopolists.

Another circumstance must have contributed to this
phenomenon. Whereas the herring fishery was from the
very beginning regulated by law down to minute details,
whalers were always left at liberty to fish where and how
they judged best. They were, indeed, no less than the
herring trade an object of Government solicitude, as appears,
besides frequent grants of convoy, from the above-mentioned
prohibitions to export whaling ships and implements and
take service in foreign whaling ships. They were, on the
other hand, occasionally ordered to stop their trade in
times of war, and were not exempt from the financial
burdens imposed upon the fisheries in general. The latter
were indeed the chief cause of the only restrictive measure

* Zorgdrager, p. 204.
f He wrote in 1768.

ii6 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

ever put upon their trade, viz. a placard of May 25th, 1652,
by which whalers were enjoined to carry the whole of their
blubber, oil, and whalebone home and sell them in the
Dutch markets " for the conservation of the custom-house
duties and the market tax."* Besides this edict, which
probably was never enforced with much vigilance, no
working regulations were ever applied to them. There was
no fishing season determined for them by law, and no rules
for branding their produce. Government, however pater-
nally minded towards them as well as others, never under-
took to teach them their business. They were protected,
not directed ; guarded, not led. They accordingly managed
to mind their own business with generally satisfactory
results, and keep their trade going when others, fettered
down by a multitude of working rules, saw theirs go to
ruin.

This important difference in the Government policy
towards the two fisheries is fully explained by the different
nature of the trades. One of the leading features of herring
legislation under the Republic was to prevent unripe, or too
early herring being caught ; and as the whale's existence
is not limited to one season, no such measures were required
for the Arctic fishery. Next, train-oil and whalebone are
not subject to amelioration by any peculiar process, such as
the curage of herring ; whence Dutch train never excelled,
or was fancied to excel, that of other nations, and there was
no occasion for branding it, or for any of the several
obstructions to trade which result from such a process.
Thirdly, the annual migrations of the herring shoals have
always taken place at a date recurring with a considerable
degree of regularity every year, and their progress through
the North Sea is traced upon a constant route, whence

* Groot Placaetboek, i. p. 683.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 117

herring fishermen could be told when and where to sail
without exposing them to utter discomfiture ; whereas the
whaler, by reason of the shifting ways of his sport, could
never have done well without entire liberty of action.
Thus, until the era of Bounties set in, whalers never looked
for gain but to their own enterprise, spirit, and labour ;
while herring-fishers were forbidden to seek it elsewhere
than in the observation of laws. The latter were regulated
over, and by degrees lost their energy ; whalers were free,
and preserved theirs long after the herring trade's decay.
These are the reasons why there never was a whaling
legislation properly speaking ; and certainly the principal
reasons why the prosperity of the whaling trade survived
that of the Grand Fishery, although the produce of the
former obtained no Government warrant as to its excellence,
and whalers were by the nature of their trade exposed to
far greater risks of accident. On the other hand, as regards
risks by war, the Grand Fishery were worse off, being
obliged to exercise their trade in seas constantly swept
by the enemy's squadrons, and in the centre of warlike
operations. Moreover, Dunkirk privateers seldom roved as
far as Greenland or Spitzbergen, and the whaling fleets
were only exposed to their depredations while sailing north
or returning home. The latter circumstance, besides
legislation, accounts for the fact of the Grand Fishery
having decayed long before the Arctic, or as it was generally
called in the 1 7th century, the Greenland business.

The war with England of 1652-1654, which occasioned
the beginning of the Grand Fishery's decay, was also
prejudicial to the Greenland trade. In April of the
former year, before hostilities had actually begun, Holland
resolved not only to permit the said trade for the next
season, but even, if possible, to prevent its being thwarted

n8 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

by lack of able seamen.* In July, the advisability of
calling the whaling fleet home to prevent the vessels being
taken was strongly considered, but for the moment the
States of Holland only warned them to keep together
" in form of Admiralties " (or squadrons) for their safety.f
In December, a request of some whaling shipowners for
restitution of the expense of a vessel of war equipped by
them to protect their other ships, was favourably advised
on by Holland,! from which fact it is evident that the
trade was actually kept going during the summer of 1652.
On March 2 5th of the next year, however, the States-
General prohibited it,§ not only in order to keep the
vessels safe in port, but mainly because Government
wanted the sailors, and perhaps some of the ships, for
warlike ends. Seamen who have learned their business
under the Northern lights have always been found very
valuable for any service ; and the prohibition to sail was
therefore enhanced by a reinforcement of the former
edict against hiring out seamen into foreign service, and
especially into the whaling business abroad. l|

For the same reason, while the States' fleet operated in
Sweden in 1659, the whaling prohibition was repeated by
placard dated April 4th. It was indeed repealed soon
afterwards (May 2nd) ; but " navigation to Greenland '
was then permitted only on condition that the shipowners
and captains concerned in the trade should put fifteen
hundred able sailors at the disposal of the Boards of
Admiralty or buy them off for fl.i5 per head.H

* Res. Holland, 1652, p. 172.

t Ibid. 1652, pp. 343, 387.

\ Ibid. 1652, p. 659.

§ Groot Placactboek, ii. p. 505.

|| Ibid. p. 302.

1 Ibid. pp. 507-510.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 119

The repeated wars of course took some effect upon the
Greenland trade's prosperity ; and it appears that about
this time whaling ships were sometimes sold to foreigners,
or freighted to sail under their flags. The prohibition
against this proceeding issued in 1633, for the Arctic
Company's benefit had of course become void upon that
body's dissolution ; and a fresh prohibition against letting
Dutch vessels go into foreign whaling service was therefore
enacted on March loth, 1661, and renewed on De-
cember I4th, 1663.* Both this edict and the penalties
against Dutchmen taking whaling service abroad were
strictly maintained. In 1662, the magistrates of Emden
interceded in favour of one Klaas Dirks Meunsz of Edam,
who had served as commander in a whaling vessel from
Emden ; but instead of acceding to their wish, Holland
ordered the prosecution against the culprit to be main-
tained without any consideration, and on March 2oth of
the next year re-enacted the placard, adding expressly
that Emden should be considered as a foreign town.f

The war against England in 1665 brought a fresh
prohibition over the whaling business^ when as a conse-
quence " certain gain-seeking persons ' once more sold
their vessels abroad, to the effect that the laws against
such sales, and against exporting whaling implements,
were re-enacted in the course of the spring of the said
year.§ Still the danger to the trade did not appear to be
very imminent, as the English naval force was at this
period required on other service than that of pursuing
whalers to Greenland. Several Dutch shipowners there-

* Gr. PL B. ii. pp. 2639, 3°87-

t Res. HolL 1662, p. 523 ; 1663, p. 114.

+ Placard dated Jan. 24th, 1665 ; Gr. PL B. iii. p. 291.

§ Gr. PL B. iii. 292-293.

i2o THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

fore prepared to try their luck in the Polar Seas as soon as
the Republic's naval preparations had come to a close,
" deeming the prohibition might as well be withdrawn
after the country's fleet had sailed ; ' but they were re-
minded of the placard of January by another dated March,
1665, besides which, on the 25th of April, the States went
the length of cancelling all contracts between sailors and
shipmasters or shipowners for the Greenland trade. The
whaling prohibition was moreover renewed in December,
1665, and February, 1666 ; and there was no whaling, as
far as can be traced, during the whole of the war. No
sooner had peace been concluded (July ult. 1667) than
Dutch whalers set about their business with renewed
energy, to stimulate which an amnesty was granted in
1669 to all whaling commanders and sailors who had,
against the placard, taken service abroad during the late
war. Moreover, Holland in 1670 decreed differential
duties against the importation of foreign whalebone and
blubber,* while the prohibitions against selling whaling
implements to foreigners were re-enacted more than once.
Zorgdrager's statistics of the trade, which begin at the
year 1670, mention 148 vessels to have sailed in that year
and mastered 792 whales (see Appendix B).

The disastrous war of 1672 soon put another forcible
stop to the proceedings. All whaling expeditions were
expressly prohibited as early as February, 1672 ;| and
while the other fisheries were at one time re-opened during
the war, the prohibition against whaling lasted for three
years without an interruption. But the suspense does not
appear to have done much prejudice, as the trade was
recommenced in 1675, with a number of vessels scarcely

* Res. HolL 1669, p. 120; 1670, pp. 434, 534, 552.
f Gr. PL B. iii. p. 298.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 121

inferior to what it was before the war. And now a
vestige of working regulations was for the first time
imposed upon the trade, but for reasons widely different
from those prevailing with the herring fishery. In order
to ensure their sailing together, i.e., in squadron or " Ad-
miralty," Holland decreed that no whaling vessels should
sail before April 28th, and the order was repeated in
several subsequent years.*

The only object of this measure was of course to
promote the safety of the Greenland fleet. It was taken
at the request of a body representative of the whalers'
common interest, which now appears for the first time as a
duly organised corporation.

A representation of the whaling interest did, indeed,
exist some years earlier. In 1665, two whaling ship-owners
named William Bastiaansz and A. den Hertog, sued for an
exemption from taxes for all whaling vessels, and in return
offered to supply the Republic's fleet with 1200 sailors ;
and the offer was made in the name of, and upon authori-
sation by, " the community of those concerned in the
Greenland trade." \ Request and offer were both declined,
but the event appears to have occasioned a closer organisa-
tion of those concerned in the whaling trade, and the
appointment of a definitive Committee, analogous to the
College of the Grand Fishery. In 1675 this Committee
was already invested with defined powers, and qualified to
act on behalf of all without especially naming its consti-
tuents, as appears from the fixation of a sailing date by the
States in the said year, upon the request of 'the community
of those interested in the whaling business at and about
Greenland," and not of one or more individuals as repre-

* Res. Holl. 1675, April 4th ; 1677, March 27th.
f Ibid. 1665, May 6th and I2th.

E. 8. K

122 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

senting that community. This variance in the denomina-
tion, and the fact that no such requests made by some in
behalf of all are on record in earlier years, justify the
supposition that an organisation of the trade had not taken
place since the downfall of the Arctic Company, and that
such an organisation, and the appointment of a perpetual
representative body, was effected between 1665 and 1675.
At any rate, the Committee, or central representative body
of whaling shipowners, never had anything like the attri-
butions of the Herring College, and they never seem to
have acted in any other capacity than as the spokesmen of
their constituents presenting requests to the States, and the
draftsmen of such bye-laws as seemed advisable for the
common weal. The vast power with which the Herring
Deputies were invested was a result of the herring legisla-
tion ; and no such power was held by the Whaling Com-
mittee, who had no laws to enforce, no licences to deliver,
and no skippers to swear in. In their quality as draftsmen
of bye-laws, the " Commissioners of the Greenland trade '
in 1677 issued an order, or regulation concerning the
salvage of ships wrecked, and goods lost in the northern
seas. They sued for the States of Holland's approbation
upon the document, which, however, was not granted till
January 22nd, 1695.* The order was, however, printed in
1677, and although as yet unapproved by the proper legis-
lator, was observed not only by whalers from the United
Provinces, but also by those of Hamburg, Bremen, and
Emden.t The above-named William Bastiaansz was again

* Res. Holl. 1677, p. 87 ; Gr. PL Boek, iv. p. 1355.

f The approbation was granted in 1695, because applied for anew
by the Committee who had in the course of eighteen years " on some
few occasions (soo nu en dan] experienced difficulties in the execution,"
whence their authority appears as a rule to have been unquestioned.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 123

the first signer of this bye-law, and thence appears at the
time to have been President of the Board of Whaling
Commissioners. The principal dispositions of the order
are as follows : When a vessel is wrecked, and her crew
leave her, the first ship they meet is obliged to take them
on board, and is entitled in her turn to transmit half of the
men saved to the next vessel she hails. Such victuals as
may be brought on board by the wrecked crew shall be
consumed by themselves ; if they have none, they shall be
fed out of Christian charity, and be obliged in return to do
a common sailor's work.

If the crew do not leave the wrecked vessel, her com-
mander shall be free either to accept or refuse salvage by
others, as long as he remains in or near his ship. Whoso-
ever finds a ship abandoned, shall be free to take her cargo
and whaling gear on board, and on coming home be
entitled to one half of the goods saved, the other half to be
given up to the owner, without any further claim upon him
for salvage-money, freight, &c.

Sailors, whether serving on monthly-wage or share in the
returns (Maentgelders of Parteniers) shall be entitled to
nothing out of the value or cargo of a whaling vessel
abandoned by them. If they have remained near her and
aided in the salvage, they shall be entitled to their wages,
&c., to the amount of one-fourth of the value of the goods
saved, and have no pretension whatever on the other three
parts.

A vessel's crew having killed a whale and been prevented
from appropriating it, remains entitled to the fish as long

Hamburg, Bremen, and Emden, were accustomed, as regards whaling, y

to sail in the Republic's wake ; i.e. join their fleets to hers and sail
under a common convoy, cf. Zorgdrager p. 178.

Ki,2" :ARY

124 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

as any of her crew shall have remained near the body.
If abandoned, the fish becomes the property of the first
occupant, unless it should have been killed near shore, and
made fast to an anchor or buoy bearing some mark of the
vessel by whose crew the fish was caught, in which case the
finder has no right to the body.

The period between the years 1675 an^ J^^5 was one °f
considerable prosperity for the Greenland trade, as appears
from the statistics contained in Appendix B,* which also
shows the extreme vicissitude of whaling luck. It will be
remarked in consulting this table, that years of very
prosperous fishery were usually followed by a considerable
increase in the number of vessels sailed, as a proof of the
unabated energy and interest with which this trade was
carried on. Being no longer a monopoly, and being,
besides, free from legislative working rules, there was a
" considerable ardour for Greenland," as stated by a writer
in ' den Koopman.' f The trade was indeed a lottery ;
but many tried their chance in it, often with favourable
results. Five or six fish caught in a season were then
considered a fair success, as stated by Zorgdrager ; and the

* As this table is now given for the first time in its present shape,
I feel bound to state the origin of its contents. The entries from 1670
down to 1719 are taken from Zorgdrager's book, quoted above.
Between 1719 and 1738, the decennial totals are taken from Mr. Brand-
ligt's ' Geschiedkundige Beschouiving van de Walvisch-visscherij?
The annual returns between 1737 and 1750 are collected from
the periodical called ' Europische Mercuurj and the rest is drawn
from the table printed as Appendix XVI. to the report of the
Commission on Sea Fisheries, 1854, which table appears to have been
compiled out of the ' Nederlandsche Jaarboeken? The figures now
given are tolerably reliable, for whenever statements as to one and
the same year are found in more than one of the works quoted, they
always coincide, or very nearly so.

f Vol. iv. p. 222.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 125

number was often considerably exceeded. So great was
the ardour for whaling, that when a fresh prohibition to
sail was issued by the States-General in 1691 * on account
of the French war, a couple of ships belonging to Dutch-
men were sent to Greenland from Hamburg and Bremen,
and the experiment was repeated in the next years on a
scale very much larger, although the prohibition was
maintained during the next six years, and the States-
General had expressly stipulated all contracts between
master and sailors for whaling expeditions to be void,
"setting all such sailors and seafaring persons, none
excepted, on their free feet, to pass into the country's
service." f The trade was not lawfully re-opened till
April ist, 1697, under provision that the vessels should sail
in squadron, and under a sufficient convoy, the expense of
which was to be repartitioned among those concerned in
the business.^:

The war for the Spanish succession once more occasioned
a considerable demand for able sailors in the Republic's
squadrons, wherefore all navigation from Dutch ports was
once more prohibited on March 3ist, 1702, and re-opened
on June 2$rd on condition that each ship should give up
one fifth of her crew or pay 1 5 florins per head of them to
the Admiralty officers.§ The Grand Fishery was exempted
from the latter charge, but the Greenland trade was not,
the difference being made on account of the superior skill
of the sailors trained to the latter business. The trade rose
to a high pitch in the same year, notwithstanding the crews'

* Gr. PL Boek, iv. p. 236.
f Ibid. p. 240 (Nov. 1691).

% Res. St. Genl., April ist, 1697 ; Gr. PL B. v. p. 3/6-7. R*s* HolL
March 29th, 1697.

§ Res. Ho II. 1702, p. 441.

126 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

decimation,* and though the expense of convoy equipped
by themselves appears to have burdened them considerably.
On August iSth, 1702, the States of Holland considered
the request of " certain persons styling themselves the
Commissioners of the Greenland Fishery," who having
procured convoyers and demanded of the shipowners a
retribution of 300 florins per whaling vessel to cover the
costs, had met with opposition at the hands of several
shipowners, who wanted the contribution for each ship to
be proportioned to the quantity of train-oil brought home
in her.j The contribution was either paid very irregularly,
or denied outright, whence in 1704 it was two years in
arrear, and part of it irrecoverable, so as to necessitate the
intervention of the regular legislative authorities. On
July 1 7th of the said year the States of Holland declared
the Commissioners entitled to recover the arrears by
execution.^ As a fact, the Committee's authority, having
not been hitherto expressly sanctioned by law, was at the
time very ill obeyed ; and this led to a Resolution of the
States-General dated March 24th, 1706, § by which the
Commissioners of the Greenland Fishery were authorized
and qualified " to issue the necessary orders for the Green-
land fleet, for the next season, and especially to establish
a convenient Admiralship, determine a sailing day and
rendezvous, and enact such secret orders as shall be found
advisable for the conservation and well-being of the fleet ; "

* It appears that whaling vessels were frequently manned with
foreigners. On March 3rd, 1713, the States-General granted a re-
quest made by the Greenland Fishery Committee to be allowed as
usual to draw sailors from Jutland for their crews, although a
contagious disease was then prevalent there (Gr. PL B. v. 1579).

f Res. Holl. 1702, p. 441.

% Ibid. 1704, p. 419.

§ Gr. PL B. iv. p. 1564.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 127

which orders all whaling commanders were enjoined to
obey strictly, under a penalty of 300 florins, to be recovered
out of their pay and available goods and chattels. This
power, though at first granted to the Committee for one
season only, was continued in the next years.*

A change of some importance was introduced into the
whalers' proceedings about this time. They had, from the
exhaustion of the Spitzbergen seas down to the season now
spoken of, fished chiefly about Greenland, and restrained
their operations to the seas once included in the Arctic
Company's monopoly, of which " Fretum Davidis " was the
western limit. It now became customary to look for
whales in Davis' Straits also. It is not certain when this
part of the northern seas was first visited by Dutch whalers.
Zorgdrager, who was quite at home in the details of the
business, does not particularly mention the Straits fishery in
his valuable work, of which the first edition was published
in 1720. Still, in the said year whaling in the Straits had
already acquired some extension ; for an immunity from
last-money granted to the Greenland fishery in 1687, was
then expressly extended to those who navigated to the
Straits " whither a considerable part of the ships are now
bound." f The same fact is evident from a States-General
Resolution dated November iSth, 1720,^ by which penalties
are enacted against offering violence to the natives of the
Straits shores. It appears from this edict that the first
exploits of Dutchmen in the Straits were anything but
glorious, and that robbery and ill-treatment of Esquimaux

* Res. Holl. March 23rd, 1707 ; Feb. iSth, 1708, £c. The subject
was generally re-considered by the States in the course of February of
each year.

f Res. Holl. 1720, p. 197, 306 ; Res. St. Gen. ibid. p. 786.

\ Gr. Plac. Poek, v. p. 1581.

128 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

by them were matters of daily occurrence. Their
behaviour, in a word, was that of pirates, and as such
accordingly, the above-quoted Resolution prescribes those
guilty of further acts of this nature to be proceeded against.

A writer in ' den Koopman ' states the Straits fishery
to have become considerable after the year 1714, and a
separate statistical table relative to that branch of the
trade, added by Mr. Brandligt to his above-quoted pamph-
let, begins at the year 1/19. Zorgdrager's not especially
mentioning the Straits fishery is not contradictory to these
statements, for his book was written some years before it
was published. The period when Dutch whalers first began
to visit the Straits may, upon these several authorities, be
stated to be not much anterior to the year 1720.

In the next years, besides statistics, no facts of any
importance relative to the whale fishery are on record. In
1724 a whaling company was chartered in England ; f but
their competition does not appear to have severely
prejudiced the Dutch, as the years 1719-1728 were, accord-
ing to Brandligt's statistics, a period of very considerable
prosperity for the Straits trade especially. In 1731, the
Dutch Ambassador to England reported on a contrivance
to shoot harpoons out of a musquetoon, or portable cannon,
by which the instrument was thrown fifty feet, or thrice the
distance the best harpooner could cast it, and without
setting the line on fire ; but though the Dutch diplomatist
had seen the instrument alluded to in a London wharf, and
spoke of it in highly commendatory terms, there is no
evidence of its having been adopted. { In 1739 and the
next years, Denmark's pretensions to exclusive fishing

* Vol. i., p. 239.

f * Europische Mercuurj 1724, vol. ii. p. 32.

\ Res. Holl. 1731, p. 172,

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 129

rights in the Northern seas, which will be treated of in
another chapter, caused the Dutch whalers some uneasiness.
A few of their vessels were actually taken by the Danes,
and they had for some years to sail under convoy by
Government men-of-war. Still these events did not
materially affect the trade ; for the number of ships
sailed to Greenland, which were especially the object of
Denmark's animosity, was much greater in the years
1739-1748 than in the preceding decade. In 1747, the
Republic's war with France having necessitated extra-
ordinary measures to get crews for the squadrons, a general
obligation to give up one third of the crews to the Admi-
ralties, or redeem them at the price of 40 florins per head,
was once more laid upon merchant vessels in general ; but
the Greenland and Davis' Straits fisheries were expressly
exempted from either charge, by a Resolution of the States-
General, dated December 1st*. The favour was partly
cancelled on February iQth of the next year, when the
States-General resolved to allow the trade two men-of-war
as conveyers without the retribution they had hitherto paid
for them to the Admiralties, provided each whaling vessel
should furnish five able seamen, or the whole fleet together
should furnish five hundred such seamen to the Admiralties
of the Maas and Amsterdam!. In other words, the
whalers were to have convoying vessels without paying for
them, but on condition that they should man them out of
their own crews ; for the men-of-war offered by the States
were to carry forty guns and two hundred and fifty men
each.

Besides these measures in their behalf, whaling ships were
in 1750, upon the request of the Commission of Greenland

* Gr. PI. Boek,v\\. 515.
t Ibid. p. 1591.

130 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Fishery, allowed exemption from excise duties on victuals,
wine, spirits, &c., consumed on board.* The measure was
indeed taken on a very liberal scale, for it was extended
not only to the victuals actually consumed, but, as regards
bread, to the whole quantity taken on board, even though
some parts of it should be brought home again.
Immunities of a similar nature were at the same time
allowed to other branches of fishery ; but there is reason to
believe that whalers derived peculiar profit from theirs, as
they were in the habit of dealing in divers commodities
with the natives of the northern countries whither they
were bound. It will be seen in another chapter that this
propensity to do spurious business was one of the principal
causes of the difficulties with Denmark ; and it may be
assumed that Dutch whalers upon occasion were not only
petty tradesmen, but did by no means disdain smuggling
on foreign coasts, towards which they were of course
peculiarly benefitted by having some of the articles most
heavily taxed in all countries at their disposal duty-free, by
the States-General's express licence. Considerable light is
thrown on this feature of the Greenland trade by a curious
controversy kept up in the often-named periodical, ' Den
Koopman/ in the course of the years 1772 and 1773-t A
free-spoken letter-writer styling himself " Lubertus
Piscator " is especially communicative on the subject. The
results of whaling in itself, he says, now amount to
average losses ; and the trade is kept going by the
profits of a fraudulent commerce in goods exported free of
duty and smuggled ashore on the coasts of Norway and
Scotland. These irregular profits are mostly pocketed by
the manager (boekhouder) of the ship and a few of the

* Res. Holl. 1750-52, passim, Gr. PI. B., viii. 1253.
t Vofr iv. p. 33, 90, 194, 199, &c.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 131

chief partners, and dissimulated in such a manner as not to
let the others have any share in them ; and most of the
ships now engaged in whaling are kept afloat merely because
a majority of votes in the partnership are in this manner
interested against their being sold or broken up, although
the returns of the whaling business proper are generally
very unfavourable. Lubertus' indiscreet statements were
indeed contradicted by other correspondents ; but the
fact that much irregular business was done at the time by
Dutch whalers is not positively denied by any of them.
Some of these writers, who have all made a secret of their
names, account for the continuation of the trade, in despite
of unfavourable results, by the fact that the whaling vessels'
purveyors were at the time generally part-owners, and
recovered on the price of the stores what was lost on the
business itself. And this state of things they approve,
in virtue of a course of reasoning strongly and curiously
illustrative of the economical notions of the period. The
money lost on the voyage's balance, says an apologist of
the trade in 1773, goes to the ship's victuallers, com-
mander, and crew ; it remains in the country, and therefore
is not lost to the nation ; and the value of every whale
caught, however small their number, is to be accounted
as a clear profit, though the sums made by the trade do
not cover the expense !

If the above controversy sets one point beyond doubt, it
is the fact that towards the end of the eighteenth century
there was a rottenness in Dutch whaling. Its rapid
decrease in the same period, shown by Appendix B, proves
that even illegal proceedings could not cover losses as a
rule ; and the demonstration is wound up by the fact that
in 1775 the Commissioners of the Greenland and Davis
Straits fisheries applied for a bounty, and were not behind-

132 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

hand in the race for premiums which at this period charac-
terises the whole of the sea-fishing concerns. The pre-
mium applied for was limited to 40 florins per head of the
crews, besides exemption from export duty on train-oil, &c.
Some objection was at first made to the plan. A Committee
of the States of Holland, before whom the request was laid,
considered premiums as a rule to be very useful in bringing
a new trade to prosperity, but doubted their efficacy in
upholding a business the decay of which was attributable
to causes beyond the legislator's control, such as the
development of whaling abroad, and the closing of some
foreign markets. Still, the Committee were not averse to
grant the trade some succour, and advised a bounty of 30
florins per head of the crew, for such vessels only as should
return deant i.e. empty. The matter was treated with the
prolixity and slowness characteristic of the later years of
the Republic's existence, and Holland did not take a deci-
sion till January iSth, 1777, when a premium of 30 florins
was granted for all whaling vessels indiscriminately, and
the immunity from export duty declined.* The premium
was granted again in the next years.

The result of the application of the bounty system was
as negative upon the whaling trade as on the herring
fishery ; and the table contained in Appendix B shows an
actual decrease of the number of vessels sailed after bounties
had been first allowed in 1777. The Whaling Commis-
sioners accordingly in 1779 sued for an increase of the
bounty to 80 florins per head of the crews ; but the demand
was declined. The war against England in 1781 next put

f Res. Holl. 1775, p. 607, 793, 990 ; 1776, p. 38 ; 1777, p. 73. The
collection of printed documents emanated from and received by the
States in these years, moreover contains a series of long memorials
exchanged between them and the Greenland Committee.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 133

a stop to all whaling expeditions for two seasons, in the
course of which many vessels were sold out of the trade. A
special permission was necessary for this, as the ancient
laws against selling whaling ships to foreigners were still
in vigour ; and this permission was granted by the States of
Holland in 1782, provided that each person inclined to sell
a vessel abroad should procure a licence from the
Admiralty Board under which he resorted, and moreover
that if the ship were sold to be used as a merchantman, the
whaling implements should not be destroyed, but kept for
better times. At the same time, the Admiralty Boards were
empowered to grant permissions to hire out whaling sailors
to foreigners, English excepted, under caution for their being
sent back to the Republic after the war.* As a conse-
quence, of the vessels formerly employed in the Straits
fishery only nine were left in 1783, when whaling was
recommenced ; and the business never recovered its losses.
Premiums were granted till the end of the Republic, and were
even determined for twelve years at their former amount of
30 florins per head, by one of the several Resolutions taken
on April I7th, 1788, by the States-General for the fisheries'
preservation from utter ruin.f Another, and a very peculiar
form of encouragement was resorted to by a Resolution of
the States of Holland dated October 3rd, 1788 ; viz., an
"indemnisation ' bounty of 50 florins for every quarter of
train wanting to a hundred in a vessel's cargo. In order to
prevent mock whaling trips, by which the said bounty might
have been secured very easily indeed, certain conditions
were added as to burden and equipment of ships, strength
of crew and duration, and latitude where to fish. Even

* Res. Holl. 1782, p. 138, 174 ; Res Si. Generaal 1782, p. 175, 232,
273, 289.
f Groot Placaetboek, ix. p. 1313.

134 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

this thorough application of the premium system was of no
effect. As the institution of bounties had been followed
by a decrease in the trade, so their continuation and
extension proved unable to prevent its ruin ; and at the
close of the Republic's existence the Straits fishery, as will
be seen from Appendix B, was nearly extinct, and the
Greenland business reduced to utter insignificance.

CHAPTER III.

COD FISHERY.

THIS branch of the fisheries never was of paramount im-
portance under the Republic. The name of " small fishery"
(kleine visscherye) * which is commonly applied to it, as
an antithesis to the denomination constantly given to the
herring-fishery, sufficiently points out the fact. One part
of the business, the cod-fishery off Iceland, was indeed an
extensive concern requiring separate capital ; and as the
produce of this fishery was either salted or dried, it com-
manded an extensive foreign market. Cod-fishery in the
North Sea, and on the Dogger bank especially, was a minor
branch of the trade, and indeed more or less an appendage
of the herring-fisheries, inasmuch as most of the vessels

* There has been some controversy about this denomination.
Some state it to have been commonly used to designate the whaling
trade ; others the Iceland fishery, and the cod and fresh-fish business
in the North Sea. As a fact, it has been applied to all three, but very
seldom to the whale fishery, which by reason of its importance had no
title to the name. In the States' official publications, " kleijne vis-
scherije " is used for cod-fishery and for " the trade of the fresh "
(de neeringhe van den versche). A Placard of 1665 expressly mentions
" the Great and Small fishery, by which we mean the herring trade
and the fishery on Doggersbank."

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 135

used in the latter after St. John's Day were in winter and
spring sent to the Dogger bank for haddock and cod-fish.
The method in which the trade was carried on by Dutchmen
has always been the same as when, under the Bavarian
Counts, political parties derived their names from it ; viz.
by lines to which were attached hooks baited with small
fish of different kinds, or very early herrings. A Placard
of the year 1612 expressly allowed cod-fishers to catch
herring for bait before the 24th of June, provided they
should not cure or salt such herrings, nor lay them in
barrels, nor carry them ashore or sell them at sea.*

Keelless boats from the North Sea coast villages from
early times downward combined cod-fishery on the Dogger
bank with " the trade of the fresh," as shown by a Resolu-
tion of the States of Holland dated 1585, and mentioning
" all fish caught by fishermen of the Side, except cod and
haddock? Keeled vessels from the fishing towns on the
Maas likewise fished for cod in the North Sea out of the
herring season ; and besides, the Iceland cod fishery, which
could not be combined with herring fishery, centred in some
of those towns, and Vlaardingen and Maassluis were pro-
minent in the Iceland business long before they became
" herring towns" of importance. The vessels sent to Iceland
were called " hookers," from the fishing gear they carried ;
although by their build they were fit for the herring trade
also, and were used in the latter in some years when the
state of the several markets, or other circumstances made a
voyage to Iceland unadvisable. Still a mixing up of both
trades could not occur, as the seasons for both were the
same ; whence Iceland fishery was a separate business, and
had an organization of its own. Its object was to cure the

* Art. 2 of the herring regulations, 1604-1632 ; Gr. PL Boek, i.
P- 733-

136 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

fish either by salting it as " Zoutevisch " " labberdaan " (also
called dbberdaan) or drying it as stock-fish, in both of
which conditions it was a considerable article of exporta-
tion. In the fresh state the two varieties of cod-fish most
caught bear the Dutch names of kabeljauw (also called
bakkeljauw or baccalauw *) and " Schelvisch " (the latter
appearing to correspond exactly to the English denomina-
tion of haddock}.

There is no literature to my knowledge on this peculiar
branch of Dutch sea-fishery, and very few legislative acts
are on record relative to it ; whence its history must
necessarily be very incomplete and succinct. North-sea
cod-fishery had some importance as early as the establish-
ment of the Republic, as appears from the fact that two
men-of-war were sent " ter Dogge," i.e. to the Dogger bank,
for the cod-fishers' convoy, in 1589 ; f and as the place, of

* The latter word was also used now and then for cod salted and
dried. Bacallao is Spanish, Baccala is Italian, and BacalJido is
Portuguese, for dried cod. The assonance between these words and the
(now obsolete) Dutch term baccalauw is so striking that the question
can only be whether the word was derived by the Dutch from the
Roman languages, or the reverse. Holland in the i/th and iSth
centuries exported great quantities of salt and dried cod to Spain, and
never, so far as can be traced, imported any from that country ;
whence it would seem natural that the name should have been
exported together with the article. On the other hand, I am not
aware of the Dutch etymological derivation for " baccalauw," and I have
heard it said, upon authority which I can neither back nor question,
that in Spanish and Portuguese the word has something to do,
etymologically, with stick (Lat. Baculum). In the latter case, Bacalhao
&c., might be literal translations of the Dutch term Stokvisch, and
Holland, having first exported the article, might have re-imported its
Romanized name. I beg to refer the question to professional linguists.
Such dictionaries as I have at command do not show any close
relation between the Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese words, for a
cod-fish and a stick.

t Res. Holl. 1589, p. 14, 836, 840.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 137

all the North Sea, was perhaps the one most exposed to
every naval foe, orders for ships to convoy the " Doggers ':
are numerous throughout the Republic's history. There is,
however, another circumstance to account for the extra-
ordinary liberality with which they had convoy doled out
to them, viz. the fact that fishery on the Dogger bank took
place at a season when both herring and whale fishery stood
still ; whence it was possible for Holland, on Jan. 3Oth, 1597,
to order the Admiralty Board of Rotterdam to send out
the whole oi their available vessels for the " Doggervaarders ':
convoy.

In spite of Government protection, cod-fishery seems to
have been subject to severe losses by war, for a contract
for their mutual insurance against damage by sea or foemen
was passed in 1622 between the shipowners of the towns
on the Maas concerned in the business, and ratified by the
States of Holland in 1623, under their charter or " octroy."
I have not found any positive information as to the contents
of this document, which appears somehow to have been
prejudicial to the steersmen's real or presumed private
interest. The latter in the autumn of 1623 twice interfered
with the publication of the Octroy (which took place, as
usual, by cry, and by the posting of handbills), and got up
a serious riot at Maassluis, whither soldiers had to be sent
in order to maintain the peace. The matter was even of
sufficient importance for a deputation from the Court of
Holland to be sent to Maassluis with instructions to pacify
the mutinous seamen, and the men of the law effected this
object by putting a new interpretation upon the charter, in
virtue of which "the pennies of the second word were to be
left among the steersmen to the end of the fishing season,
and then to be restored to the partners, if no damage had

E. 8. L

138 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

been incurred." The true sense of these words can only
be found out by detailed investigation ; but even though
not quite understood they make it evident that the terms
between shipowners and skippers in the cod-fishery were
then commonly regulated by some intricate contract, full
of antiquated words of doubtful meaning, such as are still
in use in the Dutch sea-fisheries, and are frequently the
cause of protracted, and by the nature of the men concerned,
violent disputes between employers and employed.

The Dunkirkers in the next years did not spare the cod
fishery any more than the other branches. Cod fishers
accordingly used to sail in squadron to the Dogger bank,
under cover of two or more men-of-war supplied by
Government, which convoy having been destroyed by
seven Dunkirk privateers in April 1628, the whole fleet of
the " small-fishery," reported to have, at the moment, been
1 80 vessels strong, retreated into port before the end of
the season. f Three years afterwards, six men-of-war were
allowed to " de groote Abberdaan vissckerije op de Maase"
at the request of their Committee of Shipowners and
Steersmen.! These words of "great salt cod-fishery " were
commonly used to designate the Iceland business, which
accordingly must have had some organization, and a re-
presentative board, early in the seventeenth century. The
mutual insurance contract just now mentioned may have
been the beginning of a farther organization of the
trade. An association called " de Schelvis visscherije"
of Maassluis is mentioned as having in 1636 applied for

* " De Penningen van het tweede woord gelaten zouden worden
onder de stuurlieden tot het einde der teelt, en dan te restitueren aan
de Vennots, indien geen schade en viele." Cf. Res. Holl. 1622, p. 751 ;
1623 p. 94, 206, 214.

f Res. Holl. 1628, p. 444.

\ Ibid. 1631, p. 171.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 139

convoy by the organ of its commissioners,* and as Maassluis
(then not yet a " herring town ") was likewise the seat
of the above-mentioned board, both names are perhaps
indicative of one corporation. At any rate, the body
representative of the several cod-fisheries was, like the
Herring College, invested with more extensive powers in
the course of time. In July 1678, during the protracted
negotiations with France at Nijmegen, we find them
engaged in negotiations with the States of Holland to
obtain French passports ; and when these were not
obtained fast enough by diplomatic correspondence, the
Committee offered to apply for the documents themselves.f
On Sept. 5th, 1695, the treasurer and commissioners of the
fishery at Maassluis were empowered by the States of
Holland to levy, collect, or farm a tax of one penny per
barrel of salt fish, including several kinds of cod-fish,
plaice, and in general " everything that is salted be-
tween two bottoms," cured-herring of course excepted,
which never was called " fish ' in any publication of
the period, and was moreover already subject to last-
money under the herring laws. The contribution was to
be due upon the fish being unshipped at Maassluis, and so
bore the character of a local staple-duty. Annex to it, the
Commissioners were entitled to levy the 4Oth penny
on all fresh fish brought to market at Maassluis, whether
alive or dead, and moreover to collect " ship-money " to the
amount of fl. 12, upon each herring buss, and fl. 8 upon
each hooker sailing either for herring or to Iceland. The
privilege was granted anew for twelve years on Dec. i/th,
17064 I should incline to conclude from these facts,

: Res. Holl. 1636, p. 394, 413.
t Ibid. July 8, 1678.
\ Gr. Plb. v. p. 730.

L 2

1 40 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

that herring-fishery first began to develop at Maassluis
towards the end of the seventeenth century, and that it was
from the beginning under the superintendence of the same
corporation who represented the cod-fishery. If the
Commissioners here alluded to had been the delegates of
one fishery only, the States would never have allowed them
to levy a tax upon the other. A similar unity of interests
and business probably existed in the other towns where
both herring and cod-fishery were exercised.

These very scanty and incoherent indications are
indeed quite insufficient to establish a notion as to the
importance of Dutch cod-fishery in the seventeenth
century. Besides the convoy usually granted them by
the States, some testimony to the extension of the trade
may be found in the fact that their salt or dried produce
was constantly exported on a considerable scale. In 1657
a dispute arose about four Dutch vessels laden with
" baccalauw ' which had arrived at Cadiz, but were de-
clined admission by the Spanish authorities on the plea
that their papers where insufficient ;* and it is apparent
from the terms in which the matter was reported upon
that Spain was a market of importance for Dutch salt cod-
fish. So were many other Catholic countries, whose fast-
day requirements were in part supplied by Dutch
fish. The Catholic provinces now forming the Kingdom
of Belgium were, in this respect, of particular importance,
for their situation allowed Dutch haddock and cod, as well
as plaice, sole, &c., to be imported there fresh, as a Friday
delicacy ; whence the protective measures applied to the
Flemish fisheries by their Austrian Government, in the
shape of elevated custom-house duties upon foreign fish,
were particularly prejudicial to the Dutch Cod-fishery

* Res. Holl. 1657, p. 1 80.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 141

and fresh fish business. Extensive correspondence was
carried on between the Dutch Ambassadors at Brussels
and their principals at the Hague, in the earlier years of
the 1 8th century, on the subject of duties on salt-cod, and
fresh fish of several descriptions ; but all efforts to obtain
the removal of these duties were in vain, and the decay of
the Iceland cod-fishery in Holland appears to have taken
its origin from protective duties in the Austrian Nether-
lands and France. Difficulties with Denmark, the nature of
which I shall expose in another chapter,* were also particu-
larly prejudicial to the Iceland cod-fishery in 1740 and the
next years ; and the first Dutch vessels confiscated by
Denmark were not whalers, but cod-hookers from the Maas.
The actual effect of the differences with Denmark upon
the Iceland cod-fishery cannot be traced, as no statistics
of the trade are extant earlier than 1751, from which
year they have been annually noted down in the ' Neder-
landsche Jaarboeken," and collected into a table by the
Committee on Sea-fisheries, 1854, from whose Report
Appendix C to these pages has been derived. The striking
ups and downs of the trade, as shown by this table, may
frequently be accounted for by vessels being transferred
from the herring fishery to the Iceland business, and vice
versa, as the state of the cured-herring and cod markets
made such shiftings desirable. I should be at a loss, for
instance, to find another reason why the number of vessels
sailed to Iceland was 95 in 1756, and in in the next year,
although the fishing returns of the former were miserable.
A knowledge of fish-prices throughout the Republic's
existence would be necessary to acquire a full understanding
of this, as of other phenomena in the fisheries' history ; and

* See Chapter v.

142 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

as statistics, if kept at all, were at the time incomplete and
unwarranted, to obtain such a knowledge would alone be
the work of years.

Besides "hookers' transferable from one business to
another, there were under the Republic vessels fit for no
other service than the capture of fresh fish, cod and
haddock especially, and provided with wells to keep the
fish alive. Such well-boats must have been in use from
early times downward ; for without them it would scarcely
have been feasible to carry fish caught on the Dogger bank
to the Friday-markets of the Catholic provinces unsalted.
No mention, however, is made of well-boats till 1777, when,
one Jongeneel of Rotterdam having built such a vessel
to meet a foreign order, a petition to prohibit its export-
ation was preferred to the States of Holland by the
Commissioners of the Cod-fishery of Vlaardingen and
Maassluis. The States instantly appointed Rotterdam to
take provisional steps to baulk the said Jongeneel's
purpose ; but as in point of fact there was no law against
it, they at the same time applied to the States-General for
a special prohibition to export well-boats (vishoekers met
bimnen), which was accordingly enacted on January 5th,
1778, notwithstanding Jongeneel's remonstrances, who by
reason of the depression then prevailing in the trade could
hope for no chance of selling his vessel at home. The
Placard of January 5th, 1778, contains prohibitions for
the Republic's subjects not only to sell or hire vessels of
the above description out to foreigners, or build them upon
orders from abroad, but also to take service on foreign
wharves towards the building of such vessels, or put wells
into foreign vessels while staying in Dutch ports. All
steersmen in the cod-fishery are, moreover, enjoined by

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 143

this Act to take oath to observe the new law.* From
these several enactments it may perhaps be assumed that
the Dutch had then a reputation as well-boat builders
abroad. It would not be safe, however, to give this law
the credit of the considerable increase in the Dutch cod-
fishery in 1779 (see Appendix C) ; for the latter fact is
amply accounted for by the very favourable fishing returns
of the two preceding years.

The " embargo l! laid upon all Dutch shipping by the
States in January 1781 brought cod-fishery to a full stop as
well as its sister-trades ; and several requests of the
Commissioners of the Cod-fishery of Vlaardingen and
Maassluis, to have their trade permitted in the North Sea
and off Iceland, were declined in the course of that year
and the next The scarcity of fish resulting from this
" embargo " took effect upon the cod-fish as well as upon
the herring market. While, as shown in a former chapter,
herring was now actually imported into the Republic,
certain dealers in salt cod-fish applied for leave to import
that article and re-pack and re-export it ; which permission,
however, was strongly opposed by the Commissioners of
Maassluis. It would appear from these proceedings that
some particular fashion of packing and arranging cod was
then in use in Holland, and Dutch salt-fish and stock-fish
were in some way distinguished from foreign produce of a
similar nature. The request having been declined, the
Commissioners in 1781 obtained from the States-General a
permission to sail, by way of experiment.! It does not
appear that the experiment was attended with any success ;
for several shipowners preferred to sell their vessels abroad.

* Res. Holl. 1777, pp. 1229, 1414, 1443 ; Res. St. Gen. Ibid. p. 866.
Gr. PL Boek, ix. p. 1309.
f Res. St. Gen. 1781, pp. 1054, 1182.

144 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

As this, however, was contrary to the law of 1778, it was
necessary to obtain the States-General's permission for it,
who accordingly, upon the request of the Commissioners of
Maassluis, empowered the Admiralty of the Maas to allow
vessels to be sold out of the Dutch cod-fishery to foreigners,
under the sole condition that they should be bought back
at the end of the war. The condition probably was not
very faithfully observed ; for 63 hookers sailed in 1780, and
only 49 in 1784. The next years were very unfavourable,
and the trade had come to nought in 1787, when only two
vessels are stated to have been employed in it. The
bounty system was then applied to the Iceland as well as
to the other fisheries. The Commissioners of Maassluis
applied for a premium in June 1788, and were by Resolution
of April Qth, 1789,* allowed fl. 500 per hooker, being
the same sum promised to the herring busses the year
before. But premiums failed in the cod-fishery, even more
utterly than they had failed in other branches. Not one
hooker sailed to Iceland in the next years ; and the cod-
fishery had virtually come to a close before the final over-
throw of the Republic.

CHAPTER IV.

COAST FISHING.

In using this title, which is a common denomination of
several distinct branches of the Dutch sea-fisheries, a
previous elucidation is necessary to prevent misunder-
standings. " Coast-fishery " is thus named because carried
on, not off or under the Dutch coast exclusively, but from
that coast ; i.e. by flat-bottomed vessels owned there.

* Groot Placaetb. C. vol. ix. p. 1314.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 145

These vessels until recent years have been principally
employed in two distinct trades, viz., catching herring to
be smoked, and catching fish to be sold fresh, cod and
haddock included. The former fishery was generally
exercised off Yarmouth, in the so-called " Deepwater,"
and the latter all over the North Sea, on the Dogger bank
especially. The name of "neeringhe van den Versche" or
" trade of the fresh," is generally applied to the latter
fishery only, although herring salted preparatory to smoking
is frequently, though improperly, styled "fresh herring''
Both the trades now alluded to were under the Republic
exercised only in flat and square smacks called pinken or
bomschniten (bum-boats) the model of which can have
undergone no considerable variations, as they were and
are bound from villages having no ports, and therefore
must be built so as to bear going ashore and remaining
on dry land at low tide, without prejudice to their soundness.
The Zuider Zee fisheries, which have a history of their own,
may also be comprised under the general term of coast
fishery. This chapter will therefore treat of three subjects
essentially different, viz., the fisheries for smoke-herring
and fresh fish in the North Sea, and Zuiderzee fishery.

Bum-boats were, in the Republican period, owned at the
North Sea coast villages of ter Heide, Scheveningen,
Katwijk, Noordwijk, Zandvoort, Wijk op Zee, and Egmond.
Vessels of the kind never \vent as far north as the coast of
Scotland in those times, and consequently had no share
in the earlier herring fishery. They went for herring only
to " Deepwater," off Yarmouth, in autumn and in the latter
weeks of summer ; and although herring caught then and
there was successfully cured in keeled vessels, and bum-boat
fisheries were at first not prohibited from curing it likewise,
they have long abstained from the practice, probably on

146 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.
account of the small size of their vessels. Herring causrht

o o

in bum-boats was summarily salted, or strewn with salt, on
board, and carried home in baskets to be smoked in the
coast villages, and sold as " bucking." The salting process
destined to preserve such herring until brought to the
smokeries was, and is now, called steuren ; whence smoke-
herring is generally styled steurharing.

" Bucking," although an article of extensive home con-
sumption, never fetched anything like the prices of cured
herring ; but smoke-herring fishermen found a compensa-
tion for this inferiority in the nearly complete liberty of
their business. They were at liberty to carry their fish
abroad, and it appears from an entry in v. d. Lely's Recueil
(p. 1 3) that they used, " from early times downward," to
sell " fresh "' herring at Yarmouth. As their produce never
was held to be of a particularly fine quality, they were of
course not subject to any of the laws on packing and
branding. They were, indeed, subject to the St. John's
rule ; for by the Placard of 1607, quoted in Chapter I.,* it
was prohibited, in the most general terms, to wet any nets
fit to catch herring before St. John's in midsummer, and
the only exception to the rule was in favour of the cod-
fishers, who were allowed at any time to catch unripe
herring as bait for their hooks. Fishing steersmen from
the coast were moreover obliged annually to take out a
licence from the College of the Grand Fishery, which was
only delivered upon their taking oath not to use foreign
nets or buy herring from others at sea. As this obligation
is first mentioned in the Herring Act of 1656,! it is probable
that they sailed without a licence before, and were not
brought under the College's rule till the said year. But

* Gr. Plb., i. p. 733-

f Ibid. viii. p. 1242, art. 3.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 147

the College's yoke was easy upon them so long as they
abstained from curing herring, and therefore were not
competitors of the Grand Fishery. In 1663, according to
v. d. Lely, they were " suspected " of curing herring ; whence,
in the said year, the college inserted a clause against such
curing into the oath to be taken by steersmen from the
coast previous to receiving their licence. The proceeding
was clearly an encroachment, as the law did not prohibit the
coast fishermen from curing their herring. But it has been
shown in Chapter I. that the College did not usually shrink
from extending the law to their competitors' prejudice. In
this instance they actually conferred on themselves a very
important monopoly, which was afterwards the object
of much controversy and one of the main features of
herring legislation ; but which, when first claimed, was not
based on any law.

It appears that this monopoly was not always observed
to the letter. In 1735 and 1736, coast fishermen from
Katwijk were found to cure herring caught by them in the
Deepwater, on the plea that a very warm season made it
impossible for them to preserve their herring uncured till
they should have reached the coast and brought the fish to
the smokery. The proceeding, as they argued, was for the
benefit of the smoked-herring industry ; for if they had not
cured the earlier part of their catch they would have been
obliged to smoke it some time after capture, whereas no
herring above two days old was now carried to the smoke-
house, and Dutch " deepwater " bucking thereby maintained
its excellence over the Yarmouth bloater.* But the grand
Fishery would not hear of admitting competitors into the
cured-herring business upon a plea based on the smoked-
herring interest ; and once more prohibited the coast
* Ned. Jaarboeken, 1751, p. 1043, sqq.

148 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

fishermen to cure, which prohibition their competency to
grant or refuse licences to all herring fishermen enabled
them to enforce.

The prohibition appears to have been generally observed
till 1751, in which year the Stadtholder Prince William IV.
paid a visit to the coast village of Katwijk, and the fisher-
men of the locality availed themselves of the occasion to
petition His Highness for re-instalment in their ancient
right to cure herring. The Grand Fishery's self-made
curing monopoly being thus menaced, petitions in a
contrary sense were immediately sent in from some of the
towns concerned in the cured-herring business, and a con-
troversy ensued, of which a full account is to be found in
the periodical called ' Nederlandsche Jaarboeken.'* The
College of the Grand Fishery, before whom the petition
from Katwijk was laid, of course advised against it ; and
although the coast fishermen (or parlevinkers as they are
called in a contemporaneous Act of the States of Holland)!
presented another memorial to the Princess Governess!
after the Stadtholder's demise, the question at issue was
ultimately decided against them, and the College rule
maintained.

The logic in this dispute was all on the side of the coast
fishermen, and their opponents indeed contradicted their
own arguments by using too many. First, said they of
the Grand Fishery, the herring caught in bum-boats is of
inferior quality and unfit to be cured. Secondly, fishing
boats from the coast are equipped at less risk and expense
than herring busses, and the former's owners are already

* Ned. Jaarboeken, 1751, p. 1043, 1181 ; 1752, p. 481.
t Res. Holl. 1751, p. 318.

% Princess Arme, as guardian of her son William V., then three
years old.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 149

privileged, inasmuch as they are allowed to sell herring at
sea and abroad ; and it would be the Grand Fishery's ruin
to expose them to competition on such unequal terms as
these. Thirdly, the smoked-herring business will be upset
if coast fishermen take to curing, and English " bucking 5:
will gradually supersede the Dutch. To the first of these
arguments it was objected that there could scarcely be any
difference in quality between the herring caught by either
party, as busses and bum-boats, or " pinken " fished side by
side, in the same sea and season. Besides, if the herring
caught by the latter were unfit for curage, how could the
Grand Fishery fear their competition, or the extinction of
the smoked-herring business ? The argument based upon
the Grand Fishery's greater risks and charges was met by
the query " whether it was more expedient for the country's
interest that much should be risked for little gain, or that
considerable profit should be made with little or no ex-
posure ? " As for the liberty to sell herring abroad, any coast
fishermen would of course have had to give up that
privilege if he had taken to curing. As a last and conclu-
sive argument, the petitioners from the coast showed that
the Grand Fishery, in prohibiting them from curing herring,
acted as judges in their own case. So they undoubtedly did ;
but their judgment does not appear to have been further
appealed from at the time, and their monopoly of curing
remained in force long after the end of the Republic.

The coast fishery might indeed have proved serious
competitors to the Grand Fishery if they had been given a
chance. It is stated that in 1751 one hundred and twenty
boats sailed from Scheveningen alone* and the whole
number of busses in that year was not quite double the
figure. The smoked-herring business appears in the next
* Europische Mercurius, 1754, vol. i. p. 62.

I5o THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

years to have declined rapidly, chiefly on account of
measures taken to prevent the importation of Dutch fish
into the Austrian Netherlands, of which the fresh and
smoked fish concerns were equally the victims. In 1777,
the Grand Fishery having obtained a premium two years
before, the owners of herring boats of Katwijk and
Noordwijk in their turn petitioned the States of Holland
for " such a bounty (douceur) as it shall please their Noble
and Grand Mightinesses to grant " and they likewise sued for
a prohibition to the busses to bring home uncured herring,*
whence it may be inferred that they of the Grand Fishery,
although anxious enough to shelter their own trade from
competition by those of the coast, did not disdain occa-
sionally to meddle with theirs. No resolution was taken as
to the latter part of the petition, and the former was at the
time declined. The application for bounties was renewed
in November 1786,! and kept under consideration for more
than a year. A premium of fl. 200 was awarded, on
April 1 7th, 1788,$ to the owners or managers of all such
herring boats equipped in any of the villages on the
North Sea coast as shall be used in the fishery, for " salt-
herring or bucking " between Elevation day, or Sept. medio,
and Dec. medio, " or thereabouts." The premium was
granted for three years only, but the grant was renewed in
1791 and 1794. The fact of the coast fishermen being still

* Steur-eti Korf-haring. Such herring was kept in baskets
(korven) and strewed with salt (steuren) till brought home to be
smoked, whence fish thus treated was called either steurharing or
korfharing. The name of zoutharing (salt herring) is also occasion-
ally applied to it, but this " salt herring " should be carefully dis-
tinguished from "cured herring." See Res. HolL 1777, p. 928, and
1778, p. 880.

f Res. Holl. 1786, p. 4413.

\ Gr. PL Boek, ix. p. 1314.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 151

at the time under obligation to take licences from the
College of the Grand Fishery is evident from a clause of
this Resolution, by which the said College is ordered to
yearly state the number of boats sailed from the coast under
their supervision.

The differences about the right to cure herring are, as
has been shown, the main subject of the smoked-herring
trade's history under the Republic. A very different point
of working legislation has been contested between those
concerned in the " fresh-fishery ; ' viz., the nature of the
nets to be used by them.

It would appear to be still a point at issue between
technical writers on sea-fishery, whether the sea can be
exhaiisted. Whatever views may at present prevail upon
this question among experts, the provincial legislators of

Holland under the Dutch Republic held it possible to

»

extinguish fish-life under their shores ; and they ac-
cordingly at one time took steps to prevent its destruc-
tion by enacting penalties against the use of such nets as
either sweep the bottom of the sea, and thereby are said to
extirpate spawn and fry of certain fish residing on the
ground, or destroy fry of fish by their undersized meshes.

Fresh-fishery of the North Sea coast, commonly called
" the side ': in former times, appears at an early period to
have been of some importance, as a Resolution of the States
of Holland dated December /th, 1585,* proves that fresh
fish from Scheveningen was at the time sold in the London
market. Still the profits of the trade were small, and
fishermen " of the fresh ' are throughout the Republic's
time styled " the poor, or miserable (schamele) fishers of the
side." In 1595 they were allowed, on account of their

* Res. Holl. 1585, p. 808.

152 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

poverty, to fish on public prayer-days, " provided it should
be done with good discretion." Measures for their safety
were frequently taken by the States of Holland, and they
had generally one or two small ships of war for their
special protection in time of war. Agreements to leave
each other's coast fishery unmolested were concluded with
Dunkirk, or their conclusion proposed, in 1606, 1644, 1674,
1703, and 1707 ; but as to the effect of these measures I
have not found any evidence. The circumstance of Dutch
coast fishery being mostly exercised at a short distance
from shore, and by flat and shallow boats, liable to be
stranded whenever a foeman hove in sight, may have
induced the Dunkirkers to show forbearance to prey so apt
to escape them, when the reciprocal safety of their coast
fishery from Dutch privateers and men-of-war was to be
gained by it. For the same reason " fresh-fishery ': was
sometimes permitted when the other sea-fisheries were
prohibited on account of the wars.j

Measures to prevent the exhaustion of the coast waters
are not on record before the year 1676, when at the request
of the coast fishermen themselves, viz., those of ter
Heide, Scheveningen, Katwijk, Noordwijk, Zantvoort, Wijk
op Zee and Egmond, a Placard of the States of Holland,
dated September ioth,J prohibited all such proceedings as
were reputed obnoxious to the preservation of certain
species of fish. " It has always been customary," says this
Act, " that nobody should fish with narrower gear than
plaice nets, being drift nets made upon a chip of the size of
a full eight-and-twenty " ( whatever that measure may have
been). " Some time before this, however, certain gain-seek-

* Res. Holl. 1595, p. 531, 586.

f Ibid. 1666, p. 49, 621 ; 1667, p. 101, and others.

% Ibid. 1676, p. 385 ; Gr. PI. B., iii. p. 1366.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 153

ing persons have begun to fish with nets composed of
narrower meshes, and even with trawl-nets (schrobnetteii) " ;
and as by the former proceeding fry offish are killed, while the
latter destroys the spawn, and even the bait on which fish
live, both are prohibited -by the placard just quoted. An
exception to this law was made on January 22nd, 1677,* in
favour of those who should fish for shrimps within the
sand-bars, with a light ground-net (ligte sayingh of corde}.
Bars of movable sand do indeed exist to this day close
under the whole of the North Sea coast. " Sayingh " (now
spelt saayeui], is the name still used for the shrimp-net,
which is indeed a kind of trawl. The sense of the word
corde is explained in the first legislative act in which the
implement is mentioned, viz., a placard dated April iQth,
1583,1 by which it is forbidden to fish with this net in the
river estuaries, and in which it is described as a net kept open
by a beam and burdened with stones or lead, which is
dragged along the bottom of the water behind a fishing
vessel. " Corde," in short, is an equivalent for the now
common word " schrobnet," and a general term for any
trawling apparatus.

The permission to use the shrimp trawl was not the
only mitigation grafted in 1677 upon the law of the
preceding year. It was likewise permitted to use " sole-
nets " (tongewanf] the meshes of which measured "a two-
and-thirty'! being apparently a smaller dimension than
the " eight-and-twenty ' adopted as a minimum size in
16764 But the use of all trawl-nets other than the

* Gr. PL Boek, iii. p. 1367.

f Ibid. i. p. 1274.

% It appears from these denominations that the dimensions of the
meshes were indicated by the number of them which went to some
standard measure. And it may therefore be supposed, although 1

E. 8. M

154 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

"sayingh," just mentioned was again prohibited in 1677,
and a special clause was enacted against the sinking even
of lawful " eight-and-twenty ' nets by ballasting them with
weights whereby they might be used as trawls.

The prohibition against trawling, although enacted at
the fishermen's own request, was very ill observed. On
March 29th, 1678, the States of Holland instructed their
officers to strictly execute the law against all those who
should fish with trawls (cor den of schrobnetten) ; but never-
theless in the summer of that year the delegates from
Haarlem to the States reported about grievous disturbances
occasioned by trawlers at Wijk op Zee. Among the fisher-
men of this village one party stuck to trawling and there-
fore went by the name of " schrobbers," while another
observed the law and were styled " scholders," by reason
of their adhering to the lawful " scholnet," or plaice
net. The trawlers acted upon a principle frequently
followed by trespassers of every kind ; they annoyed
those who kept within the law by carving and destroying
their gear, and occasionally laying violent hands upon
their persons ; and the local magistrates, stated to be
" friends of the trawlers," made matters still worse by
sequestering the "scholders'1' nets under a pretence of their
being sized contrary to the statute, and keeping them
under arrest so long as to occasion their owners a serious
prejudice, although the nets had to be ultimately released,
being found in accordance with the law.* Fishermen of

have found no positive evidence to the fact, that the " eight-and-
twenty " size here alluded to was the same which was in 1683 declared
lawful for seines used in the Zuider Zee, viz. fourteen to half a yard. In
the first quarter of the present century, the " eight-and-twenty ::
measure was three Netherland inches and nine-tenths (see the Laws
of 1820 and 1825, in Part iii. of this essay).
* Res. Hoi 1. 1678, p. 391.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 155

other coast villages were not much better observers of the
statute, and the placards of 1676 and 1677 had to be
re-issued several times in 1679 and following years. On
March i6th, 1680, a petition by the Side fishermen, to be
allowed the use of " cordens "or trawls either of the twenty-
eight or thirty-two size was declined by the States, and a
strict application of the laws against such fishing once more
recommended to all officers concerned.* On September
1 7th, 1687, the placard was once more renewed,! and the
penalties extended to any in whose boats forbidden nets
should have been found, even though they should not have
sailed with them. But even this did not put a stop to the
coast fishers' habit of trawling, and the prohibition had
ultimately to be given up, chiefly because of the impossi-
bility of enforcing it. In March 1689, the " Corders" of
Wijk op Zee represented to the States that trawling went on
in the other villages in spite of the law, as it was not
possible to procure fresh fish by any other process during
war time, when fishermen " of the Fresh," were obliged to
keep within view of the coast. Whereupon the States
ordered their officers on the coast to stop the execution of
the laws against trawling,| and there is no evidence of
their having been renewed under the Republic.

It is stated in some of the above-quoted laws against
trawling, that at the time the fresh fishery " was already
ruined for the greater part." Nothing precise is known as
to its extent in still earlier times ; but its decline certainly
did not stop at the end of the seventeenth century. The
Catholic provinces of the Austrian Netherlands were one
of the principal markets for fresh fish from the Side, which

* Gr. Plac. Bock, iii. 1368.

f Ibid. iv. p. 1363.

| Res. Holl. 1689, p. 230 ; Gr. PI. B. iv. 1365.

M 2

156 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

of course could never be carried far inland in those days of
slow locomotion ; and accordingly, when protective duties
against foreign fish were resorted to in the Austrian
provinces about 1725, the Dutch " neeringe van den versche"
were the principal sufferers. Remonstrances against the
Austrian tariffs were tried several times, but found un-
availing ; and although under the Republic statistical
accounts of the fresh fishery do not appear to have been
kept, the gradual closing of the Southern market may be
safely assumed to have occasioned its lasting decline in the
course of the eighteenth century. The " embargo ' of
1781 of course contributed to hasten the downward move-
ment ; and when the sea was reopened in 1783, only ten
bum-boats or "pinken" are stated to have sailed from
Scheveningen for fresh fish. The trade's utter insignificance
towards the end of the Republic may also be deduced from
the fact that, of all the several branches of North Sea
fishery, it is the only one which never was encouraged by a
bounty. The phenomenon might indeed be accounted for
by a very flourishing state of the Fresh trade in the year
1788, when premiums were lavishly dispensed to all other
fisheries, and all of them were in a prostrate condition.
But if the " verschvaart " had made such a favourable
exception, there is not a doubt but the fact would have
been mentioned on all hands ; whereas the history of this
trade is simply a blank at the period when sea-fisheries in
general were distinguished by an ardent competition for
bounties. Fresh fishery from the " side ): might even be
believed to have come to a complete stand-still at the close of
the republican period, if some mention of it were not made a
few years later, as will be shown in another part of this work.

The fisheries of the Zuider Zee have, as has been said

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 157

above, a history of their own, and one widely different
from that of the several trades of which the North Sea is
the area. As the Zuider Zee is an inlet, separated from the
North Sea by a boundary of isles and shallows, no enemies
used to disturb its fishermen, and the Republic's many wars
never affected them. As regards the nature of their trade and
of the gear and vessels used, they were entirely at variance
with their brethren of the open sea. The most striking
point of resemblance between the fisheries in the two waters
is perhaps the jealousy respecting them between the
inhabitants of the surrounding land. In the case of the
North Sea, this jealousy raged between nations ; in that of
the Zuider Zee, between inhabitants of the Republic's several
provinces. In both cases it led to repeated conflicts,
accords, and treaties. While reading the Zuider Zee history,
of which, as it can be of no very stringent interest
to the foreign reader, I shall give but a very succinct
account, it should be borne in mind that the shore of this
inland sea belongs to several provinces, which under the
Republic were distinct States, having sovereignty rights
of their own, and in this case anxious to use them so as to
ensure the greatest possible part of the Zuider Zee fishing
returns for their own subjects. Something like the " Dom-
inium Maris " question, on a reduced scale, is at the bottom
of the history of Zuider Zee fishery under the Republic of
the United Provinces, the gaps of whose union were
peculiarly apparent in this very matter.

Salmon and sturgeon appear in old times to have been
abundant along the Zuider Zee shore and about the mouths
of the rivers descending into it ; * where, however, they have

Several towns on the Zuider Zee still carry salmon in their
scutcheons. A present of salmon from one of them to Duke Albert of
Bavaria is recorded as early as 1389.

158 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

been now for a long time extinct, or very nearly so. Flounder
and turbot were always, as they are to this day, prominent
among the produce of the Zuider Zee, and gave their name
to the vessels most in use there (hotter s, from bot, i.e.,
flounder). Herring fishery was also exercised in the said
water from time immemorial ; but Zuider Zee herring never
was branded, nor its fishery subjected to working rules,
whereas the main object of legislation on Zuider Zee fisheries
has for centuries been to prevent the destruction of salmon,
sturgeon, and flounder, by regulations as to the width of the
nets to be used. This object was pursued some time before
the Republic was born. On January 8th, 1 546, the Emperor
Charles the Fifth, by a publication, fixed the minimum size
of the meshes, at " five common seamen's thumbs." The
towns of Holland, whose fishermen had from early times
used to fish in the Zuider Zee with narrow nets, obtained the
repeal of this edict on November I2th, 1547, when there
was substituted for it a -prohibition against dragging nets
through the water, by which proceeding, according to the
said law, fish are smothered ere they be full grown. It was
likewise forbidden by this edict to land smothered unripe
fish and sell them as food for cattle or pigs ; and all fish
not quite full-grown were prescribed to be thrown over-
board as soon as caught Fishermen from Holland con-
tinued to assert their rights to unlimited fishery in spite of
the law, whereas those of Gelderland and Overyssel insisted
on its observation, and moreover claimed for themselves the
exclusive right to fish within a certain distance from their
shore ; and both subjects became a matter of protracted
disputes between the several provinces.* A provisional edict
of the year 1555, fixed the minimum width of the nets to be

* A paper on the subject has been contributed to Nyhoff's Bydra-
gen voor Vaderl. Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, 1864, p. 309.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 159

used at two common seamen's thumbs, and some limits were
measured out in the next year, within which fishermen
from Holland should not be allowed to approach the
Gelderland and Overyssel shores. But they of Holland
continued to overstep both boundaries of lawful fishing, and
their fishing vessels of a peculiar description call " water-
scJiepen"''* in which they used to carry arms and ammuni-
tion, and commit acts of violence and piracy upon the fishers
of the other provinces, were the terror of the Zuider Zee.
Nor did they amend their conduct when a sentence, or
arrest, by the Grand Council of Malines, dated April 29th,
1559, definitively determined both the fishery limits of
each province, and the minimum width of the nets to be
used.

The Union of Utrecht by no means put an end to the
protracted disputes and petty warfare between fishermen
from the several provinces which acceded to it. Reciprocal
complaints about fishing with unlawful nets, and within the
established limits, were frequently laid before the States of
those provinces. Gelderland and Overyssel having been
occupied by the enemy in 1672, it was seriously considered
in the States of Holland to exact from them, as a condition
for their re-admission into the Union, a promise never to
trouble Holland fishermen in the unrestricted fishery in
the Zuider Zee in future, f The disputes ran so high in the
next years, that Holland and Gelderland imprisoned several
of each other's fishermen for unlawful fishing, and a conven-

I have not been able to ascertain to what peculiarity these vessels,
of which no mention is made in after years, owe their rather singular
name of " water ships." None of the authors nor any of the laws
upon the subject explain their nature. I suppose them to have been
well-boats,
f Secret Res. Holl. February 65, March 24, 1674.

160 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

tion was at last agreed to between delegates from both
provinces, on December i/th, 1682, in virtue of which the
men detained were released on either side, and a set of
rules for Zuider Zee fishery was established on March 2ist,
1683, to be enforced as a law in both provinces.*

The principal contents of this regulation were as follows :-

No silken nets whatever to be used, and the nets of yarn
not to be of a less depth than three feet measured between
the floats at the top and the lead used to steady them ; the
nets' meshes not to be narrower than twelve to the yard.f

All setting of nets (a practice very common especially
along the Zuider Zee shores, by reason of their extreme
shallowness), to be prohibited in the first three months of
the year ; and all set nets to be placed seaward perpendi-
cular to the shore line, and not parallel to the shore, and
their ends marked by poles driven into the bottom, for
sailing vessels to avoid damaging them ; the maximum
length of these nets to be two hundred fathoms.

Fishers using either set nets of the above description, or
fykes and weirs, to keep a convenient berth and not place
their contrivances closer to each other than at intervals of
one hundred fathoms at the least.

All fish caught unripe and unfit for consumption to be
thrown overboard, whether dead or alive, and on no pre-
tence carried ashore and sold, bartered or otherwise turned
to account as food for pigs, ducks, or other animals.

The use of seines (zegens) to be prohibited in the months
of April and May, and the meshes of such nets at all times
to be of the size of fourteen to half a yard.

This regulation by treaty, issued as a law for Hollands
fishermen by the States of Holland on April loth, 1683, by

* Gr. Plac. Bock iv. p. 1358-9.

f " dan van twaelf overgangen in een elle"

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 161

X

no means set the fishermen's minds at rest. On September
24th of the same year the prohibition to use silken nets
was repealed as regarded set-nets fixed to poles, and used
on the coasts of Holland only,* at the urgent request
of the fishermen of Monnickendam and some neigh-
bouring localities. Petitions to be allowed to fish with
narrower nets than the sizes prescribed were examined by
the States in 1685 ;f and Holland took upon herself to
supersede till June 1st, 1688, the enforcement of the general
prohibition against nets narrower than twelve meshes to
the yard.J In 1698, conditions of a similar nature of those
of 1683 were agreed between Holland and Overyssel ; and
it is recorded that on January 2ist, 1699, forty fishermen
from Amsterdam, being ready to sail on the Zuider Zee in
" water ships " were s\vorn by the Burgomasters of their
city to observe the above regulations. In the next year,
however, the State of Overyssel remonstrated with those
of Holland about unlawful fishing by Hollands subjects,§
and in 1707, Holland in her turn complained of violence
committed upon fishermen from Hoorn, by others
from Vollenhoven in Overyssel. In 1728, Friesland,
having likewise an interest in the Zuider Zee fishery,
remonstrated with Holland about inhabitants of the latter
province fishing for plaice before the fifteenth of April,
against a law of Friesland which never was binding for
Hollands subjects. || Though only now and then mentioned
in the States' registers, such disputes as these may be
presumed to have occurred as long as the Republic existed ;

* Gr. Place. Boek, iv. 1361.
f Res. Holl. 1685, p. 88.
% Ibid. 1688, p. 265.
§ Ibid. 1700, p. 386.
|| Ibid. 1728, p. 430.

/
uj L I E

1 62 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

for it was impossible to prevent them so long as every one
of the provinces surrounding the Zuider Zee was entitled to
legislate on fishery on its own hand, and the statutes of one
were not binding for the others, except in so far as they
had been agreed upon by treaty, as in the case between
Holland and Gelderland.

The last legislative act on record relating to Zuider Zee
fishery other than for herring, was not conventional, but
issued by Holland at the request of her own subjects. The
set-net fishermen of Marken (a small island close under the
Hollands shore) in 1785 petitioned the States for protection
against destruction of their weirs, traps, &c., by nets
dragged through the water at a reckless speed, either
between two vessels or behind one.* The matter was con-
sidered with the slowness and pedantic verbosity habitual
in the later years of the Republic, and ended in a prohibi-
tion dated December 1 5th, 1786, "against the most
pernicious drag-fishery between two vessels (or betters]
coupled together," and against drag-fishery at night, even if
only one vessel were used. It was also prohibited by this
Act, to tow a grapnel behind fishing vessels ; and from the
latter clause, as well as from the deliberations relative to
the law, it appears that drag-fishery was sometimes carried
on with a view not only to catch fish, but also to destroy
the set-gear of concurrents.!

Herring fishery appears to have been in the Zuider Zee
as ancient a trade as that of plaice and sturgeon ; but very

* These nets, by the description given of them, are evidently the
very narrow anchovy nets (wonderkuiV) against the use of which
measures have recently been taken (see Part iii., ch. iv.). I have not
however, found any distinct mention made of anchovy fishery in
Zuider Zee under the Republic.

f Res. Holl. 1785, p. 5119 ; 1786, p. 2406 ; Gr. Plb, ix. 1312.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 163

little is known about the former, except that its produce,
being herring of a small size and often lean (yele /taring)
was never cured, but either sold fresh as "pan-herring? or
smoked, the latter being the more habitual method. The
only legislative act relative to the Zuider Zee herring fishery
is a placard of Holland dated May 3ist, 1752,* by which
the Zuider Zee fishermen of the province were enjoined to
bring all their herring to market in one of the fortified
towns of Holland and West Friesland, and not to sell, or
otherwise transfer any herring at sea. The object of this
enactment (which appears to have been but a renovation of
old laws fallen into disuse) was to uphold the smoking
establishments of Holland, and prevent herring caught by
inhabitants of that province from being landed in one of the
ports of Gelderland and Overyssel. The law was mitigated
by another dated May 9th, i/55,t by which it was declared
lawful for two or three fishers to sail in company, and have
their fish brought ashore by one of them ; and they were
moreover during the week preceding Easter dispensed
from the prohibition to sell herring at sea. The former
clause is indicative of something like " sale-huntingr " on a

o o

scale reduced in proportion to the small distances between
the ports and the fishing area. Zuider Zee vessels indeed did
not lose much time in sailing home to their ports of Edam,
Monnickendam, &c. ; but their time was often peculiarly
precious, as the Zuider Zee has at all times been subject to
fitful invasions by herring shoals so dense as almost to fill
up the sea. It is stated that in 1549 herrings were caught
off Enkhuizen by simply scooping them out of the water

Gr. Plb. viii., 1255.

f Ibidvni., 1259. An interpretation of this Act was issued in 1765*
(Gr. PI. B. ix., 1301).

1 64 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

in baskctfuls, and that in 1665, some skippers of the same
town landed eight hundred lasts, or eight millions of
herrings in one month.*

CHAPTER V.

"DOMINIUM MARIS."

THE right to fish all over the open sea has always been
to the Dutch Republic a matter of importance proportioned
to that of her sea-fisheries. This right is now universally
acknowledged to belong to all and sundry ; but notions on
international law were different some centuries ago, when
the Sovereignty of the seas, or of some portion of them,
was claimed by more nations than one. The Netherlands
never set up any such claim, and by the number of their
merchant and fishing shipping were always very closely
interested in debating it, and maintaining the " Mare Libe-
rum," theory, the very name of which reminds of its immor-
tal Dutch exposer and defender, Hugo Grotius. As all
pretensions to " Dominium Maris," were of a nature in the
very first place to affect the sea-fisheries' most vital interest,
this history, or that period of it which coincides with the
international debate on the question, would not be complete
without a brief account of the several phases of the quarrel,
as carried on between the Netherlands and their two rivals
in fishery, Great Britain and Denmark. The disputes with
the former power are by far the more important, and have
been made the subject of a profound historical investigation
by Mr. J. Muller, Fzn., in his important work 'Mare
Clausum.'t The compass of these pages of course affords

* See p. 20 of the Report by the Committee on Sea-fisheries, 1854.
f Edited by Fr. Muller, Amsterdam, 1872.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 165

no space for any but a short survey of the question, and
forbids entering upon its merits properly said, or treating
its scientific side as a point of history and international
law. The following is a very concise account of its actual
bearings upon the Dutch sea-fisheries, i.e. of the effect
taken upon them, at some periods, by such acts of foreign
Governments as were based upon pretensions to a fishing
monopoly in some portions of the sea.

It has been stated in Part I of this work, that as early
as the year 1295, King Edward the First forbade his subjects
to molest the Dutch, Zealanders and Prisons, while fishing
off Yarmouth ; a fact peculiarly significant, as Edward the
First was the first British monarch who styled himself
sovereign of the sea. In 1439 a treaty concerning the
rights of fishermen was agreed to between King Henry the
Sixth and Isabel of Portugal as representing her husband,
Philip Duke of Burgundy, then reigning Count of Holland.
This treaty, stipulating that the fishermen of both parties
should be free to " paisiblement aler par tout sur Mer, pour
PescJder et Gaignier leur vivre, sans EnipescJiement ou Des-
tourber de rune Partie ne de FAnltre" originally covered
only the natives of Brabant and Flanders on this side of the
Channel. Having been renewed more than once, it was
finally extended on the 24th of November, 1467, to the
natives of " toutz ler aultres Paiis et seigneuries" of the then
reigning Duke of Burgundy, thereby including the Dutch
and Zealand fishermen, and for the first time consecrating
by international compact their right to fish all over the sea,
" 'sans qu*il leur soit Besoigne sur ceo requirer ne opteiner
ascune Licence Congie on Sauf conducted The treaty was
again renewed at Lille, on July I2th, 1478, in the same
terms as regards fisheries ; and was finally superseded by
the " Grand Intercourse," or treaty concluded at London

I
1 66 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

on the 24th of February 1496, which likewise stipulated,
in Latin bad but explicit, the entire freedom of fisheries on
either side. " Conventum, concordatum et conclusion est"
says the document, " quod Piscatores utriusque Partis
Partium praedictarum (cujuscunque conditionis existant)
potcrunt iibique Tre, Navigare per Mare, secure Piscari
absque aliqno Impedimenta Licentia sen salvo Conducing
This treaty continued in force for more than a century and
a half.

The protection of the Sovereigns of Scotland was from
very early times no less valuable than that of England
to the Dutch fishermen, who as far back as the earliest
stage of their history appear to have worked the more
northerly parts of the North Sea and the Scottish coasts.
A privilege granted to them by the King of Scotland is
mentioned in the year 1341 j'and a treaty concluded at
Binche on February iQth, 1540, between the Emperor
Charles the Fifth (then Sovereign of the Low Countries) and
James the Fifth of Scotland, stipulates that the fishermen of
both nations shall be reciprocally protected against pirates
and indemnified for damage received in time of peace at
the hands of subjects of either state.

The second treaty of Binche, dated December I5th, 1550,
explicitly stated " circa Piscationem ac libernm usum Maris,
ea quae per Tractatum anno 1 540 . . . inita conclusa ac convent a
fnerint debite ac sincere observari debebunt" In virtue of this
treaty, which was once more confirmed in 1594, and of the
London treaty of 1496, the freedom and reciprocal protec-
tion of sea-fisheries was a settled point of international
law between Great Britain and Holland, towards the close
of the 1 6th century.

But at this period the Low Countries, hitherto an obscure
province of a continental Empire, not only astonished the

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 167

world by their declaration of independence of the
Spanish dominion (1581), but entered upon a career of
matchless prosperity, in spite at first of the most disastrous
circumstances. Even while involved in the long and
destructive war, which long before its end brought about the
avowal and consecration of their independence by their
late sovereign, their unfettered energies, spurred by self-
given freedom, were strenuously directed towards economi-
cal progress, and their fisheries began to increase rapidly.
A new State had sprung up in Europe, and \vas at once
counted with and envied. Such rivalry as had from times
immemorial existed between the British and Dutch fisher-
men, grew with the young Republic, and from the very
beginning of its existence took the shape of an animosity
between it and the British Empire, which centred in long-
rankling disputes about the freedom or dominion of the
North Sea.

Robert Hitchcock's extremely curious plan for the
organization of British fisheries, which appeared in 1580,*
is the first document in which this rivalry is tacitly avowed.
The author proposes British herring-boats to be rigged on
the pattern of " Flemishe Busses " and the fish caught by
them to be cured in the Flemish manner (Beukelstfs).
The competition of the Dutch herring fleet, then evaluated
by Selden at four or five hundred sails, was considered by

: A Pollitique Platt for the honour of the Prince, the great Profit of the
Publique State, relief of the poore, preservation of the riche, reformation
of the Roges and Idle persones, and the wealthe of thousandes that
knowes not how to live. Written for a New Yeres gifte to Englande
and the inhabitantes thereof.'' It appears that there is now but one
copy extant of this pamphlet, preserved in the British Museum. The
author of these pages quotes it from Mr. Muller, who in his above-
quoted work, ' Mare Clausum] quotes it from extracts transmitted by
a friend.

168 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Hitchcock to be the chief obstacle to his plan, but he did
not consider it insurmountable, the fishing area being
situated "within the Queene's Majesties Seas " and much
closer to the British than the Dutch coast, thereby putting
the Dutch at a considerable disadvantage on the markets
of England and Scotland. Sir Thomas Overbury's
'Observations in his Travels' (written 1609, printed 1626)
likewise contain a warning against the Dutch, and
represent them as being England's natural rivals on the
sea.

Still, under Queen Elizabeth's reign Dutch fishermen

were not molested. Measures tending to alienate so

desirable an ally against Spain were inconsistent with the

politics of this far-sighted monarch. Things took a very

different turn soon after James the First's advent to the

throne. Besides considering himself personally affronted

by Grotius' treatise on Mare Liberum, the contents of

which agreed very ill with the King's passion for his

prerogative, His Majesty felt sorely aggrieved, and by no

means without reason, by the manner in which the Dutch

exercised and overstepped their fishing rights ; not only

ousting the English from the trade by lawful competition

in overwhelming numbers, but occasionally offering them

such violence as has for centuries been usual with such of

the rival fishermen as chanced to be the stronger in a

collision.* Fishery and piracy were then, as indeed they

have been since, concerns closely connected together on all

hands. English subjects were loud in complaining, and the

result was the king's " Proclamation touching Fishing '

(May 1 6th, 1609) by which in consideration of the injury

done to English by foreign fishermen, and in virtue of the

Royal prerogative, foreigners were prohibited from fishing on

* For instances of this see Muller, p. 47.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 169

British coasts and in British seas, unless licensed thereto
by the king's officers, upon payment of the duties in-
cumbent on such license. The great " Mare clausum "
question was by this measure openly started.

It was at first discussed on amicable terms. The Dutch
Ambassador, sent to London avowedly to thank the king
for his good offices in the concluding of the twelve years'
truce with Spain, had a debate upon the point against the
king's counsel learned in the law, on the i6th of May, 1610
They based their remonstrance chiefly upon the liberties
anciently granted to the Dutch, and upon their being the
first in right to the herring fishery by reason of the best
method of herring curage having been invented in the
Netherlands, but were met by the assertion of the king's
dominion over the seas, and would very probably have
been unsuccessful had not the murder of Henry IV. of
France suddenly turned the king's most earnest attention
to the expedience of conciliatory proceedings towards all
those in whom allies were to be found against Spain.
Although fully maintaining his exclusive sovereignty in
the British seas, the king consented to supersede the
Proclamation, and the infliction menacing Dutch fishermen
was for the time averted.

A conflict, however, could not long be averted between
two seafaring nations, both anxious to promote their
fisheries in the same seas. Spitzbergen, discovered in 1596
by the Dutch Admiral Jacob van Heemskerk, while in
search of the North-West Passage, and by him appro-
priated in the name of his Sovereigns the States-General,
next became the theatre of private naval war. English and
Dutch fishermen set about working this new shaft at the
same time ; but as stated in chapter II., the first attempts
of the latter were unfruitful, owing mainly to the plunder-

F; 8. N

1 70 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

ing of two whalers from Amsterdam off Spitzbergen, in the
summer of 1612, by a fleet of English whalers well equipped
for warlike proceedings. The small Dutch fleet sailed home
despoiled both of fish caught and oil made, and of the
instruments to catch and make more. The " Mare clau-
sum " controversy, just quieted in the British seas, sprung
up in a fresh and very critical shape beyond the
Arctic circle ; for the whaling seas were included in the
alleged " Dominium Maris >: of Great Britain. And this
time the king was not to be moved, though Winwood, late
ambassador of England at the Hague, and just then called
to the Secretaryship of State, interceded for the Dutch
claims on behalf of the States, who on their part addressed
to the king a memorandum, " Replicques fondees a
1'encontre des propositions et pretentions des Anglais,
d'avoir le commandement sur la Pescherie de File Spits-
berge ou Terre Neufve," composed by the renowned Dutch
cosmographer Plancius. There was nothing for it but to
oppose violence to violence. A Dutch company was
formed in 1614 (see chapter II.), and sent eighteen vessels
north, under cover of three men-of-war. A truce was the
consequence, and for the year 1614 the waters of Spitzbergen
were divided between the parties who had come north
ready to fight for them. The same armed peace again
prevailed in 1615 and 1616, when the whaling fleets of both
States came out under convoy, and seem to have fished
in peace, keeping each other in respect. Diplomatic inter-
ference, in which the celebrated Grotius acted as a com-
missioner on the part of the States-General, and extensive
memorializing on both sides, meanwhile led to no solution
of the difference, as James I. inflexibly maintained his
claim to Dominium Maris, and vouchsafed no answer to
the Dutch Ambassador's remonstrances. Although peace

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. \1\

was maintained between the two Courts, war between the
British and Dutch whalers under the northern lights was,
of course, inevitable under these circumstances. In 1617,
the States having granted an insufficient convoy to their
whaling fleet, the establishment built by them at Spitzbergen
was destroyed by the English. Forcible retaliation was
taken by the Dutch in the next year, when open warfare
seems to have prevailed in the north all the summer,
occasioning, on the 3rd of October, 1618, a sharp and
menacing remonstrance to the States-General from the
British Ambassador, Sir Dudley Carleton, whose " Lettres
Memoires et Negociations" (edited in English and trans-
lated into French) are a source of much information upon
the fishery differences between the two nations in the years
1616-20.

Nor, in the meantime, did peace reign in the North Sea.
The works of Sir Walter Raleigh * and " Gentleman " f
strongly contributed to keep the spirit of rivalry awake, by
giving the British public highly exaggerated notions of the
profits and prosperity derived by the Dutch from the her-
ring fishery, and stimulating England to try and evict those
competitors, whether by free competition or by legislatory
checks. Welwood's books of juridical controversy f at
the same time directed the public attention afresh towards
England's alleged monopoly of fishing in the British waters.
King James I. did not long remain deaf to exhorta-
tions so congenial to his own notions. In August, 1616,
without any previous renewal of the publication of 1609,

* Observations touching Trade and Commerce with the Hollanders
(published about 1610).

t England's Way to Win Wealth (published 1614).

% Abridgment of all Sea Lawes (published 1613) ; De dnminio
Mar is (published 1616).

N 2

172 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FIS PI FRIES.

the king's officers by his orders demanded of Dutch fisher-
men a tax or retribution of one angelot, or a barrel of
herring and twelve cod-fish for every vessel fishing in the
British seas. The tax was paid by most skippers until two
of the convoying men-of-war's captains interceded and
reported matters home. Bitter remonstrances from the
States to the king ensued, but the tax was appointed to be
levied again in 1617. This time, however, the officer en-
trusted with the duty met with a flat refusal, in the name
of all the Dutch fishermen, at the hands of the captain of
one of the convoying ships. Having so far executed his
orders, the British officer was about to leave the Dutch
herring fleet, when Captain John Albertsz, of the convoying
vessel from Enkhuizen, one of those who had parleyed with
the English officer in the preceding year, alleged orders to
arrest him, and carried him to Holland. Two Dutch
captains were instantly taken by the English, and kept as
hostages. The States and Stadtholder hastened to utterly
disavow Captain Albertsz' rash act, turn him out of office,
and release the captured English officer. Still King James's
wrath required further satisfaction, and the Dutch hostages
were not returned until one of the guilty Dutch commanders,
Tlieff (Albertsz being retained by sickness), had been sent
to England and had been rebuked by the king in person
with such asperity as might be expected in such a cause.

Scarcely had the quarrel been thus adjusted upon the
offender's back, when complaints of ill-treatment by the
Dutch were heard from some Scotch fishermen. A fresh in-
terpellation from the British Ambassador at the Hague gave
rise to an examination of sundry fishing skippers, which
of course led to no result. The States, however, emitted
a sharp edict against ill-treatment of Scotch fishermen,*

* Gr. PL Boek) i. p. 707.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 173

charging all Dutch seamen, whether serving in herring
busses or convoying men-of-war, to refrain from violence
towards the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, and keep
" true friendship, neighbourship and good correspondence "
with them, on pain of being "punished in the body as
pirates and men of violence."

Matters, then, were scarcely on an amicable footing in
the North Sea, when, in the year 1619, a Dutch Embassy
went to London to treat, among other matters, of the
Greenland and Spitzbergen fishery question. The herring
fishery was not mentioned in their instructions, a circum-
stance sufficient in itself to ensure them a cold reception ;
and as regards the Arctic affairs they were met with an asser-
tion of the king's unlimited sovereignty over Spitzbergen,
which left small hope of coming to a definitive agreement.
The king indeed in a verbal audience consented to let the
Dutch fish off Spitzbergen for three years, but the restitution
of goods and chattels unlawfully taken by both parties
remained an unsettled question, and in point of rights
" Mare clausum " as regards Spitzbergen was maintained as
firmly as ever.

Another Dutch Embassy came to London in Janaury,
1621, with directions to negotiate on various matters of
importance then pending ; and although unprovided with
precise instructions regarding the fishery question, they had
that question broached to them by the British Government.
The States at the time were anxious to keep this delicate
point out of discussion and leave it in statu quo ; but the
king required an end to it, and the ambassadors were obliged
to promise the speedy opening of negotiations on the subject,
with a view to a definitive settlement of the claims of both
nations. The fact that the individual claims of several
Scotch herring-fishers for damage sustained on the hands

174 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

of the Dutch were in the meantime secretly settled by
order of the States, stands as a proof of their anxiety at the
time to conciliate England as far as it might be done
without serious injury to Dutch interests.

The fresh Dutch Embassy, which sailed for England on
December 8th, 1621, carried instructions which, as regards
the matter of fisheries, amounted to an order to tergiversate
as much as feasible. The king treated them to such
language as might be expected from an aged and querulous
invalid feeling wronged and aggrieved in one of his
favourite pretensions ; and in consequence of the tergiver-
sating policy adopted, the Greenland and the herring
fishery questions as well as the British claims for damages
were as unsettled as ever when the ambassadors left
England in February, 1623.

The States, who at the time had good reasons of general
policy to avoid any rupture with England, towards the
opening of the herring season issued orders for Dutch
herring boats to refrain from approaching too near the
British coast,* as, indeed, it had been tacitly understood
for years that they were to keep out of sight of that
coast The damages question, however, remained un-
settled, and the Dutch fished off Greenland and Spitzbergcn,
as well as in the North Sea, by the king's tacit ac-
quiescence and without any agreement as to their rights to
either. The demise of James I. and the Anglo-Dutch
Alliance of 1625 made it possible to continue matters in
this state without any serious collision, although the
ancient rivalry between the nations continued, and petty
claims and disputes occurred even in this period, in the
causes of which there is reason to believe the misconduct of
Dutch fishermen had a fair share. The publication or

* Res. St. Gen. June I2th, 1623.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 175

"placard" against violence to the Scotch was renewed
twice in this period of quiet, in satisfaction to British
complaints.

Charles I.'s politics involved the strengthening of Eng-
land's navy and the most strenuous measures to uplift
her fisheries. The establishment of an Act on herring
fishery, on the pattern of the Dutch laws upon the subject,
and the chartering of a company for the herring fishery in
1632, are decisive instances of this tendency. But as yet
the competition of Dutch herring fishermen, whose trade at
the time had obtained immense development, was a serious
obstacle to its progress in England, and the company
founded there had but a short duration, and nothing like
success.

It was not in Charles I.'s character to suffer this state of
things for a long time. Selden's work on " Mare clausum,"
intended as a refutation of Grotius' " Mare liberum," was
published in December, 1635, by the king's express order.
The work instantly received general attention, the more so
because, being dedicated to the king and approved by
Council, it bore a semi-official character. Holland, where
Selden's work was very soon reprinted, very soon also was
visited with its effects. On April 5th, 1636, the king
notified to the Dutch Ambassador his intention to subject
all fishing in the alleged British seas to his royal license
and recognizance in the shape of a special tax ; and not-
withstanding the States' immediate protest, a proclamation
renewing the one issued by James L, and drawn in high-
sounding terms, was issued on May 3Oth, 1636.* The king,
indeed, in an audience granted to the Dutch Ambassador

* This proclamation is printed as an appendix to Mr. Midler's
work before-quoted, and translated in Aitzema's Matters of State and
^ ii. p. 306.

176 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

on the 27th of July, represented the measure as being of a
peaceful nature and intended to benefit the Dutch fisher-
men by the protection of England against their enemies,
the Dunkirk privateers. But at the same time twelve
British ships of war sailed from the Downs to the Dutch
herring fleet's fishing grounds ; and though most of the
fleet had already left, the rest were made to take the
license and pay the recognition demanded of them, which
indeed amounted to but two shillings per last for the year,
and was paid by the fishermen without hesitation. The
British Admiral, the Earl of Northumberland, nevertheless
took the commander of a Dutch convoying vessel prisoner,
and the Dutch Ambassador Joachimi, sent in haste to
England in order to obtain redress, was met with a more
than ever decided assertion of the king's right to exact last-
money from any who should fish in the alleged British seas.
The Dutch fishermen's readiness to pay the amount
demanded of them had, as Joachimi observed to the States,
greatly compromised matters.

Dutch fishermen complained loudly to the States of the
proceedings in which some of them had acquiesced readily
enough ; and in August, 1636, a fleet of fifty-seven Dutch
ships of war sailed under admiral van Dorp, with instructions
to give the herring busses efficient protection, " against the
Spaniards and all others inclined to molest them" Van
Dorp was late at his rendezvous, where he found a British
squadron had already arrived, and levied the tax from
most of the Dutch fishing vessels ; and having no orders
how to act in such a case, his presence was useless, and
his position awkward. The admirals of both nations, having
met in presence of the Dutch herring fleet, reciprocally
asked each other why they were there ? and each answered,
" to protect the fishermen." Both squadrons soon after-

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 177

wards left the spot for other business, and the net result of
the season's proceedings was the carrying off of some
twenty thousand florins as license-money by the British
admiral, and the establishment in England of a general,
though unfounded, notion that the Dutch States had tacitly
acquiesced in the tax for the future, and acknowledged the
sovereignty of England in the North Sea. The notion was
so far from being exact that the Dutch admiral van Dorp
was punished for his insufficient protection of the fleet by
having his demission pressed upon him, in the following
year, in such terms as moved him to instantly retire from
office.

Although far from acquiescing, the States were still
anxious to evade a definitive settlement of the sea-
sovereignty question. When, in October, 1636, they
negotiated an alliance with England against Spain, the
king's promise to leave the Dutch fishermen unmolested
as long as the proposed alliance should last, was asked for
as a set-off against certain concessions on the Dutch side,
without anything being said on the principle of " Mare
liberum ): or " clausum." Pending the very intricate and
delicate negotiations on the Anglo-French alliance, in
which the whole of European politics were at issue,
Charles had reason to pacify the Dutch Republic, and
accordingly left her fishermen in quiet during the herring
season of the year 1637 ; and the States on their side
managed to keep the question out of view, though they
never once departed from their alleged right of free-
fishing. A learned treatise in refutation of Selden's " Mare
clausum " was about this time composed by the States
order, by one Dirk Graswinckel ; but it was thought
advisable not to publish it, and Grotius himself, then in
Swedish service after his disgrace and escape from his

i;8 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

mother country, had good reason not to meddle even with
the merely scientific side of the matter any more, because,
as he wrote to his brother in 1636, " Ego, cum Suecia
multum teneat orae maritimae, quid aliud praestare possum
quam silentium ? ' The policy of " not waking sleeping
dogs ' was in those days prevalent on all hands, and a
summer's unmolested fishing was the result for the Dutch
herring busses.

The naval battle of the Downs (October 2ist, 1639), in
which the Dutch fleet under Tromp routed that of Spain
within the so-called " King's chambers," and in spite of
Charles the I.'s inclining towards Spain, was of wide con-
sequence even for the fishery interest. The engagement
constituted a most flagrant breach of Charles's alleged
sovereignty of the sea ; but at the same time it showed to
what a pitch the Republic's naval power had in the mean-
time ascended. The British pretences to sea-kingdom
were virtually at an end after the affront of the Downs,
which never was resented openly. The king having on
October loth, 1639, pressed the States to accede to the
Franco-British alliance, under promise that their freedom
to fish in the straits should ensue from such accession,
their answer was : " they did not intend to stipulate that
right from any one," being, indeed, in tranquil possession
of it. Striking instances of outrageous treatment from
Dutch fishermen to British subjects occurred at this
period.* Feeling themselves masters of the sea, they
indulged in acts of piracy, which Charles, then sorely

* Such acts were committed even before the battle of the Downs.
On the 26th of May, 1638, the States- General examined the matter of a
captain from Enkhuizen who appears to have gone ashore on a
piratical expedition, and plundered and sacked the house of one
Robert Sherret, a merchant of Ireland.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 179

intent on home affairs, was not at leisure to resent. The
events of 1640 utterly broke the king's power to make
himself respected abroad, and the impending fall of the
House of Stuart put an end, for a long period, to open
contestation between the two nations as regards the right
to fishery in the North Sea. Under Cromwell, other and
still more important questions than that of the free sea
fishery were at issue between the two then greatest naval
powers of Europe ; and their next collisions were the
beginning of that series of naval wars, the effects of which
upon the Dutch sea fisheries have already been described
in former chapters. Nor does the " Dominium Man's "
question, as between Great Britain and the Dutch
Republic, appear to have told upon the actual state of
the fishery in later years, though it continued for some
time to influence the diplomatical relations between the
two countries, especially in 1661, when British influence
considerably retarded the conclusion of a treaty between
France and the Republic, by which the former power
engaged to protect the latter's fishermen.

Besides England, Denmark has at several periods pre-
tended to " Dominium Maris," in the shape of a fishing
monopoly within a certain range from the shores of Green-
land, Iceland, and Spitzbergen. The Danish claims never
had anything like the importance of the British ; for,
besides being preferred by a power much less formidable,
they bore exclusively upon two minor branches of sea
fishery, viz. the whale and the cod-fish business. Still, as
Denmark more than once actually interfered with Dutch
fishery in virtue of these claims, they are entitled to a
brief mention in these pages.

The first instance I have found of controversies on

i8o THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

fisheries with Denmark dates from the year 1615, just
after the first successes of the Arctic Company. On
February iSth of the said year the King of Denmark
wrote to the States-General about the Dutch whaling
expeditions, and claimed for himself the exclusive right to
allow his subjects to whale off Greenland, to the exclusion
of all foreigners unless provided with a Danish licence.
The reason given was, that " the waters in question are off
the northerly shores of our Empire." Some contribution
from Dutch whalers had already been pretended to by
a Danish ship of war in the season of 1615, but had
then been refused by the former on the plea that they
knew of no title to the exaction. The British claims
to the whaling monopoly off Spitzbergen probably moved
Denmark to a similar measure relative to Greenland.
But the States-General, in their answer to the Royal Dane,
politely but peremptorily declined the latter claim as well
as the former ; and Denmark preparing for violent inter-
ference with the Dutch whalers, the States accommodated
the latter with artillery and ammunition, besides granting
them such convoy as kept the Danes in respect*

Next, in 1635, the Danish Sovereign preferred similar
pretensions to a fishing monopoly off Iceland. A letter
from the King remonstrating against the Dutch fishing
off the shores of that island was laid by the States-General
before those of Holland, who took the advice of the Arctic
Company upon it. The latter were just then engaged
in difficulties about the renovation of their charter, and
owing, perhaps, to this circumstance, although the King
of Denmark renewed his protestations, and even employed
a Dutch merchant residing at Copenhagen to remind
the States of them, he got no answer for two years. A

* Res. St. Gen., April 13th,, 28th ; May nth, I2th, and June 2nd, 1616.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 181

memorial was addressed to Denmark in 1637 to refute
their claims to a whaling monopoly off Iceland, and as
these claims are not mentioned again in the States'
Resolutions of the next years, they appear to have been
suffered to drop, as had the Greenland difficulties in 1616.
Still, pretensions of the said nature were not given up
by Denmark. In 1639 Dutch whalers were menaced
and annoyed by Danish men-of-war, in virtue of a law
issued against all who should fish off Spitzbergen without
a Danish passport ; and once more a " well-reasoned
memorial ' from the States appears to have settled
matters. It would indeed have been indifferent policy for
Denmark to push them too far against a power whose
navy had just then beaten Spain and kept England at
bay in the famous battle of the Downs. I have found
no further mention of fishery difficulties with Denmark
till a century later, when the Danish claims for the first
time gave rise to actual violence, the first motive for
which, however, was taken not from a fishing but from a
trading monopoly.

It has been recorded in another chapter that Dutch
whalers used in the eighteenth century to apply themselves,
besides the exercise of their industry properly said, to
traffic with the natives of the Arctic countries. This trade
first occasioned a collision between Denmark and Holland
in the year 1739, in a bay near Disco Island, Greenland.
A Dutch whaler anchored there, and doing business with
the natives, was arrested and captured by a Danish man-
of-war, and four more Dutch vessels, equally trading with
the inhabitants, soon after endured a regular bombardment
by three of the King of Denmark's ships, whose com-
mander, having captured the vessels and crews, launched
the latter off to sea in open boats, and brought the ships

182 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

to Denmark as prizes. The Dutch sailors only escaped
death from starvation by their happily falling in with
some of their countrymen's vessels after a few days'
navigation, who carried them home and reported what had
happened, The Commissioners of the Greenland fishery
of course lost no time in petitioning the States for redress ;
and the proprietors of the captured Dutch vessels mean-
while resorted to retaliation by arresting a Danish vessel
then lying at Amsterdam. This at once called forth a
protest from the Danish Ambassador Griis (or Grys), who,
while demanding the release of the arrested ship, stated
the alleged cause of the proceedings against the Dutch
in Greenland to be a monopoly of trade granted to a
Danish subject on certain parts of that coast, including
the bay near Disco where the above-mentioned facts had
occurred. The Republic was then no longer as formidable
a naval power as a century before, and the States saw
fit on this occasion to use the utmost forbearance. They
showed to the Danish diplomatist that the arrest laid
on one of his country's merchant vessels was a matter
of civil litigation, and therefore could not occasion an
intervention by the political authorities ; but at the same
time they prevailed upon the magistrates of Amsterdam
and the parties concerned to release the Danish vessel,
a measure dictated by comitas gentium, which, as the
States did not fail to represent to the Danish Ambassador,
they expected to be responded to by the release of the four
captured Dutch vessels. Denmark, far from consenting to
such an amicable termination of the difference, gave it con-
siderable extension by falling upon the Dutch cod-fishing
fleet, then assembled round Iceland to the number of about
one hundred vessels. After some chasing and annoying
of this fleet, Danish men-of-war ultimately captured four

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 183

of the hookers ; but while being brought to Denmark
one of them succeeded in effecting her escape, and carried
to Holland, as prisoners, a Danish midshipman and three
common seamen who had been put on board to bring
the prize into port. The quarrel, which had at first
revolved upon an alleged monopoly of trade ashore, thus
became a fishery question ; and from the diplomatic
correspondence which was at once opened on the matter
it appeared that Denmark based her action on a pretended
exclusive right of Danish subjects to all fisJiery and navi-
gation within four miles of the coasts of all Danish pos-
sessions in the Arctic seas. Whether or not it may have
been true, as was stated in a petition to the States by " the
common shipowners of the cod fishery about Iceland," that
while chasing and capturing Dutch fishermen the Danes
had left those of France and England unmolested, here was
" Dominium Maris " come to life again, and the matter there-
fore called for the Republic's utmost vigilance and energy.
A series of remonstrances were accordingly presented to
the Danish Government by the Dutch Ambassador at
Copenhagen in the course of the years 1740 and 1741.
As regards the means of actual compulsion, Holland indeed
spoiled her case at the very outset, by reiterating the
extreme forbearance used towards the Danish vessel
arrested at Amsterdam in 1739. Upon the Danish Ambas-
sador's request the States in 1740 ordered the Admiralty of
Amsterdam to set the captive Danish sailors at liberty,
whereas the captured Dutch ships had been declared by
the Danish magistrates to be lawful prizes, and eventually
sold in public auction at Copenhagen. The point of law
meanwhile gave rise to extensive memorializing on both
sides. It was alleged by Denmark that all foreign vessels
were prohibited from approaching within four miles of the

1 84 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Iceland coast, by a law issued in 1733, in confirmation of
a- privilege granted in 1682 to a Danish trading company;
and that the Dutch cod fishers made unlawful trading,
contrary to this act, their principal business, to the ruin of
the Danish traffic on the Iceland shores. To this, the
Dutch Ambassador opposed the non-acquaintance of his
Government with the law and privilege in question, and the
fact that Dutch vessels had, up to the year 1/39, constantly
been allowed to fish and trade unmolested on the coasts of
both Greenland and Iceland. The right to both was averred
to belong to the Dutch in virtue of certain ancient treaties,
one of which, dated 1447, established the rights of the
Dutch to free navigation " usque ad Boreae oras." In this,
as in former disputes of the same nature with England,
the historical side of the question was strenuously discussed,
without leading to acquiescence on either side. The
Dutch pretensions were advocated with considerable energy
by Mauricius, then Dutch Ambassador at Hamburg, who
though not called upon by his diplomatical duties per-
sonally to act in the matter, made the rights of both parties
the subject of very profound and ample historical investiga-
tion, the results of which, in the shape of a series of
memorials, he sent to the States-General, who drew from them
the materials for the notes and remonstrances they ordered
their minister at Copenhagen, Coymans, to present to the
Danish Government* Far from bringing about an agree-

* Mauricius' several Memorials on the subject, together forming a
goodly folio volume, have been printed, and a copy of them is extant
in the Royal Netherlands Library. The volume gives astonishing
evidence to the mass of labour bestowed by this learned diplomatist
upon a matter alien to his own professional duties at Hamburg, from
which town the whole of the documents are dated. For the course of
facts and negotiations see Res. Holland, 1739, 1740, 1741 ; Res. St. Gen.
of the same years ; the secret Resolutions of Holland, 1740, 1742, and

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 185

ment this diplomatic debate only led to the question at
issue assuming more and more serious proportions ; and
finall}/, when remonstrances on both sides had gone on for
more than a year, a distinct pretension to " la domination de
la Mer du Nord " as the source and origin of the right to
exclude foreign vessels from the coasts of islands in the said
sea, was set on foot by the Danish Government in August
1741. The States-General immediately ordered their am-
bassador to deny this pretension in the most energetic
terms, " because other potentates might follow the example
of Denmark, to the inestimable prejudice of these countries'
trade and traffic in general." Denmark at the same time
sent a squadron north to enforce her claims, and the Dutch
Whaling Commissioners obtained convoy from the States.
A warlike conflict between the two naval Powers seemed
imminent, but was ultimately averted by the intercession,
in favour of the Republic, of the British and French
Ministers at Copenhagen. " Mare liberum " was the base
of their joint remonstrance, in which it is worthy of note
that a British diplomatist should have been employed, in
opposition to another naval Power's pretension to " Maris
dominium." The matter was subsequently adjusted by
an understanding that Dutch vessels should not trade
within the precincts of the Danish provinces in the Arctic
seas ; and a placard against such trade was issued by the
States-General on April I5th, 1762.* The limit of four
miles from the shores of these provinces appears to have
been afterwards interpreted by Denmark, not as a prohibition

the periodical called Europische Mercurius, 1741, vol. i. p. 313.
Wagenaar ( Vad. Hist. xix. p. 279) gives but a very incomplete account
of the matter, and plainly was not acquainted with its true bearings,
having never read the Mauricius papers.
' Res. HolL 1762, p. 508.

E. 8. O

186 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

to fish within that region, but as a precaution against
foreign fishing vessels going ashore for trading purposes,
and the commanders of Danish men-of-war in the Northern
Seas constantly had orders not to molest such fishermen as
should occasionally be found within the said limit, provided
they should not show any disposition to trade.*

PART III.

SEA FISHERIES SINCE THE END OF THE DUTCH

REPUBLIC.

CHAPTER I.

1795-1813.

THE Revolution of 1794-5 transformed the Republic of
the United Netherlands into a Batavian republic, at first
based upon the principle of the former United Netherlands,
and some time afterwards remodelled upon the pattern of
the French Republic. A gradual reform of ancient rotten
institutions attended these events ; but the rules and rulers
of sea fisheries survived the wreck of the rest.

The " College of the Grand Fishery ' was indeed
abolished in 1795 ; but a similar body was at the same
time appointed, under the more modern and French
sounding title of " Committee for the Affairs of the Grand
Fishery," by a decree of the provisional legislative body
dated May I2th. The members of the new Board appear
to have been freshmen in their business ; for the committee
was unable to make the necessary provisions before the

* Res. Holl. 1761, p. 974 ; 1762, pp. 314, 650 ; 1774, p. 494.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 187

busses' sailing day (June 24th), and some herring shipowners
were, at their request, appointed by the representatives of
Holland to arrange matters, under the title of a " Provisional
Committee for the Direction of the Grand Fishery."

Besides taking the necessary steps towards the timely
sailing of the fleet, this provisional Board tried to make out
the financial status of the ancient college's administration.
They found this an arduous task ; for the college's accounts
were scarcely in a creditable condition. Their secretary
was dead ; their chief clerk declined to give up the more
important papers to the new committee ; and the latter,
in such accounts as were delivered up to them, found many
instances of maladministration. Considerable sums had
been spent in banquets, the inevitable appendix of every
meeting of a Dutch Government Board in former times.
Herrings for the customary presents to certain authorities
had been bought from some privileged shipowners at the
very highest prices ; the towns of the south quarter
represented in the college had rendered no accounts, and
their " buss convoyer," or " hospital ship," to equip which
was one of the college's principal duties, had been taken by
the French two years before, and not replaced. Commis-
sioners from the " Committees of Public Welfare, Marine
and Finance," had to intervene in order to make the
refractory college clerk give up such part of his books as
he had chosen to secrete. In a word, it was shown that
the college's administration had latterly been anything
but an exception to the general rottenness and mass of
abuses prevalent in the old Republic's later years.*

Sea fisheries were scarcely then in a better condition
than the books of their administrators. The war with
France in 1794 had forced part of the herring fleet to
* Vervolg op Wagcnaar, vol. xxxiv. p. 138 syq.

O 2

1 88 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

return into port as early as the first days of July ; and in
September the French had taken the whole of the cod
fishing fleet* To apply for pecuniary aid was therefore
one of the first acts of the new committee ; and the several
immunities previously granted to the herring fishery were
accordingly continued by the government of the new
Republic. As for subsidies, the committee in I795refrained
from applying for them, in consideration of the exhausted
state of the country's exchequer ; but at the same time
directed the attention of Government towards the expedi-
ency of ulteriorly granting the Grand Fishery the same aid
which they had enjoyed under the defunct Republic. \ But
there was little occasion for subsidy in the next years, as
the protracted war with England, which at one time
nearly swept the Dutch colours away from the face of the
seas, stopped all or most fishing expeditions. The main
feature of this history in the years between the overthrow
of the Republic of the United Netherlands and the restora-
tion of 1813 is, that there was some legislation, but very
little fishery. Sailors and vessels belonging to the latter
were often pressed into the country's service ; and a
publication against resisting such requisitions had to be
issued by the Executive Board on July 4th, 1798. A
re-organisation of the committee for the Grand Fishery
took place on November 2Oth of the same year, but as yet
only the title of Provisional Committee was given them,
and there is no evidence of the extent of their business
transactions having warranted another name. Their only
act in the last two years of the century is indicative of the
very depressed condition, if not the utter stand-still, of the

* Nieuwe Jaarboeken, a° 1794, p. 1218; Gevers, de magno sive
halecum piscatu, p. 61 sqq.

f Gevers, de magno sive halecum piscatu, p. 63.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 189

North Sea herring fishery. Some export trade in herring
was then kept up by the unlawful processes of re-packing
imported foreign herring and cured " pan-herring," caught
in the Zuider Zee ; a sure proof that the Grand, or North
Sea Fishery could not supply the market But, although
obliged by the troublous times to refrain from their trade,
the Grand Fishery would not allow others, who acted under
more favourable circumstances, to interfere with it. Several
herring dealers in July 1799 applied to Government for a
prohibition against the re-packing of foreign herring, and a
strict application of the herring laws of the former Republic,
which had never been repealed, and were expressly main-
tained in force by publication of November 2Oth, 1798 ;
and the Committee of the Grand Fishery of course seconded
the application. In consequence, on May 3Oth, 1800, a
publication was issued to the effect that all herring im-
ported from abroad should be re-exported in the same
barrels, without undergoing any manipulation whatever ;
and that no " pan-herring " caught in the Zuider Zee should
be cured or laid in barrels as pickle-herring. The con-
siderations upon which this edict is based are a remarkable
instance of the spirit of monopoly surviving the trade, and
excluding competition even when competitors had the
market all to themselves. Zuider Zee herring, says the
publication, cannot be packed so as to acquire the taste of
the Grand Fishery's produce ; the former is never cured on
board, but always ashore, and while being carried home
uncured is crushed into a jelly,* by the motion of the
vessel ; and it is generally caught in spring, when it can be
sold at very low prices, so as to seriously depress those of
early cured-herring from the North Sea, and injure the
reputation of Batavian brand-herring abroad. The same
* " A Is in hare pap wordt gaar gekookt"

190 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

contradictory statements in which the Grand Fishery were
found out while insisting upon their curing monopoly
against the North Sea coast fishermen in 1751* were now
repeated by them against those of the Zuider Zee. Letting
alone the improbability of herring getting " crushed into
a jelly," during a transport home which upon the Zuider Zee
must have generally been of but a few hours' duration, how
could herring so crushed be cured with a result so satis-
factory as by its competition to endanger the Grand
Fishery ? As a fact, Zuider Zee cured-herring was certainly
of worse quality than Dutch, or, as it was styled at the
time, Batavian brand cured on board in the North Sea ;
but the former was taken by the markets abroad, where it
certainly was more profitable to sell Zuider Zee herring
than to sell none at all.

The Grand^ Fishery's stand-still at the time is proved,
if not by any positive testimonies, by the fact that even
the coast fishery had come to a dead stop. If Dutch bum-
boats could not fish under the Dutch coast in 1799 because
of the English cruisers, Dutch busses certainly could not
venture into their fishing areas off Shetland and Yarmouth.
And as regards the former, the forced stoppage of their
trade in the season of 1799 is established by several
petitions preferred by the municipality of Katwijk, suing
for a subsidy to maintain their poor, "because in the
present circumstances no fishery whatever can take place
in the North Sea." They applied for a weekly bounty of
fl.4O for each bum-boat and fl.8 for each of the smaller
or shrimping boats, instead of which the first Chamber
decreed to allow the village a subsidy of fl.2OOO down,
towards the maintenance of their poor. But the second
Chamber declined to ratify the edict ; and the " poor fishers

* See part ii. chap. iv.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 191

of the Side," of whose often very miserable condition we
have had evidence in a former part of this work, had to go
without any relief from Government. It might have been
found advisable under such circumstances to let Zuider Zee
fishermen at least have the full benefit of the exceptionally
sheltered position of their fishing water. But, as shown
above, the spirit of monopoly bore them down and kept
them within the old legislative trammels, even when they
were virtually the only branch of sea fishery still in action.

In the midst of this general stand-still of the business
the legislative bodies gave birth to a very prolix and
detailed fishery law, viz., the Publication of July 28th, 1801 ;
the preparation of which, although it was mainly a repetition
of existing regulations, had lasted since the summer of 1800.
This law has been in vigour for a very few years only, and
during the fisheries' greatest decay. It is nevertheless
important in the history of Dutch fishery legislation for
more reasons than one. In the first place, it is a thorough
proof that the Revolution had brought no change whatever
into the fishers' and fish dealers' notions. Secondly, the
law is, so to say, a crystallisation of the various statutes
and rules which emanated on the subject under the republic
of the United Netherlands, and reflects the whole of the
herring legislation from its beginning downwards ; while
in its turn it has been the model for Acts of later date.
Thirdly, the law of July 28th, 1801, contains many clauses
apparently taken from bye-laws made by the ancient
College of the Grand Fishery, of which I have not found
the text in any official publication of earlier date.

The greater part of this herring law of 1801 is a
faithful, and in many clauses a literal reproduction of the
placards on the Grand Fishery of 1582 and following
years, the contents of which have been exposed at some

1 92 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

length in Part II. of the present essay. The " Committee
for the Grand Fishery ' was definitely organized by this
law, and their competency was much the same as that
of the college of old. They were to deliver licences
(acten van consent) to the masters of all herring busses and
sale-hunters, and of such cod-fishing vessels as should
carry herring nets ; to swear in the masters, and two of
the crews of all the said vessels to observance of the law ;
to provide "hospital ships" (the nature of which will be
shown hereafter) ; to issue instructions to the captains of
the same, levy last-money, and advise Government on all
matters of fishery legislation. The working rules relative
to the opening and close of the herring season (June 24th
— Dec. ult.) : — to the curing, sorting, packing and further
handling of herring on board ; the prohibition to carry
herring to a foreign port, or transfer it at sea to any but
licensed sale-hunters, or to any one after July I5th ; the
interdiction from selling salt and fishing implements to
foreigners, or from taking service on foreign fishing vessels ;
the police regulations for fishermen at sea, and the rules
relative to the hiring and payment of sailors, and the
terms between them and the busses' masters and owners ;
to the salt to be used, the packing of herring, and branding
of barrels ashore — these several rules were all re-edited to
nearly the same effect, and partly in the very same terms,
as in the several placards in vigour under the Republic of
the United Provinces. Laws of many dates, and scattered
over many volumes of the Grand Placard Book, were now
assembled into one statute, in virtue of the principle of
codification brought into use as one of the far-spreading
consequences of the French Revolution.

Of the clauses now sanctioned for the first time by the
law of the realm, aad most probably taken from former

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 193

College bye-laws, the following are the most interest-
ing :—

No herring-buss to put to sea without a complete
1 fleet " of forty nets at the least (Art. 2).

No buss to sail home during sale-hunting time (i.e.
between June 24th and July I5th), or come into port before
July 1 9th, unless with a complete cargo, i.e. with the whole
of her barrels packed full of herring treated according to law
(Art. 15). This is the first legal sanction of the monopoly
of sale-hunting, of which more shall be said in a following
chapter. The institution may have existed before, as
a College bye-law, but not before 1753, as it is not men-
tioned in v. d. Lely's * Recueil.'

Herring-nets to be subject to control, as well as herring
barrels. A complete set of regulations relative to the
nets to be used in the cured-herring fishery was enacted in
1801 (Arts. 67-73).*

The sizes of both nets and meshes, and the quality of the
hemp to be used in them, were prescribed in detail.
Previous to delivery to the owner, every herring-net was
to be submitted to inspection by a male or female
" counter " (teller of telster\ i.e. a sworn official entitled to
verify and certify to the size and number of the meshes
and the dimensions of the net ; and the very hemp intended
to be spun into yarn for herring-nets was to be previously

* The style of these articles is in some parts so antiquated and
different from the usual wording of laws in the first years of the
present century, as to make it particularly probable that they were
modelled upon some bye-law of the former College's making, and of
a much older date. An " order " relative to herring-net making,
dated 1579 and arrested by " the four towns " then incorporated in
the College, is mentioned on p. 15 of v. d. Lely's Recueil, without
further reference to its contents.

194 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES,

inspected by a " keurmeester " or assayer. Other materials
than Dutch hemp were prohibited from being used in her-
ring-nets. No nets were to be used unless marked by the
" counter " with a leaden seal bearing the name and arms
of the town, and the official's own initials.

The most important innovations contained in the law of
1801 are, however, the clauses relative to the rights of the
several branches of North Sea Fishery ; about which
rights, as has been shown in Part II., differences had
formerly arisen. The several monopolies, the limits of
which had in the course of the eighteenth century been
for the greater part established by College bye-laws, were
now, for the first time, sundered and defined by ordinary
legislation.

The Grand Fishery having the monopoly of curing, was
restricted to that business, and forbidden to use the
process called steuren* i.e. to salt herring in baskets
ungutted, for the purpose of ulterior curage by smoke.
The busses' steersmen were allowed to preserve herring
in this fashion in two cases only ; viz., when all the
barrels on board should have been filled with cured herring,
in consequence of an exceptionally felicitous catch, and
when it should be impossible, by reason of foul weather and
high sea, to use the proper method of curing (kakeii), which
required considerable attention from the whole of the ship's
hands simultaneously. If any herring had been salted in
the former manner by reason of either of the said circum-
stances, a peculiar oath to the fact was to be taken by the
vessel's steersmen and two of her crew, immediately upon
entering port (Art 19).

The monopoly of the " steurharing " business being

* See part ii. chap. iv.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 195

thus assured to the fresh fishery, the latter were likewise
subjected to a complete set of rules. They were, in the
first place, strictly forbidden to cure (kaken) any herring
either on board or ashore, under any pretence or for any
purpose whatever (Art. 93). For the better enforcement
of this prohibition, which as will be remembered existed
under the former Republic as a bye-law of the Herring
College's making,* steersmen of the fresh-herring fishery
were prohibited from sailing before September I4th, or from
casting their nets before September 2Oth of each year
(Art. 91). They were, as formerly, obliged before sailing to
take out a peculiar licence under the seal of the Grand
Fishery Committee, and take oath to observe the laws and
regulations relative to their trade (Arts. 88, 89). They were
subject to last-money to the amount of fl. 3 per twelve
thousand' herrings, the same amount being due for every
last, of fourteen barrels, of cured-herring brought into port
by the herring busses (Arts. 17, 99). To ensure the
recovery of this tax, which, as formerly, was levied by the
committee's officers for the benefit of their treasury, the
steersmen of all fresh-herring smacks were bound to have
their cargoes of " steurharing " examined and counted by
municipal officials, who made the necessary declarations
to the committee's last-money collectors. The steers-
men of the Grand Fishery were subject to no such
obligations, for they had to deliver up their barrels of
cured herring (or pickle-herring] to the assayer, whose
examination was sufficient control over their declaration
for last-money to be paid.

In the third place, the North Sea cod-fishermen's attri-
butions as regards herring-fishery were established in
detail by the law of 1801 (Arts. 21, 22). They were, as

* See part ii. chap. iv.

1 96 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

formerly, permitted to catch herring for bait at all
seasons; but if sailing before the I5th of July were not
allowed to have more than eight herring-nets on board, and
ten if sailing at a later date. In the former case, they were
prohibited from curing or preserving any herring whatever
unless for immediate use as bait for cod-fish ; and all sale,
barter, or transfer of salted herring was strictly interdicted
to them. If sailed after the I5th of July, they were
allowed to cure the remnant of their herring left after
providing the necessary bait ; but such herring was not to
be sold unless in open barrels, and qualified as " mixed "
(pngezonderden) herring, subject to previous inspection by
the assayer, who was to destroy the herring thus brought
into port if found unfit for consumption. The object of
these rules was to secure the Grand Fishery the unre-
stricted monopoly of curing till the I5th of July, i.e. the
day on which the last " sale-hunter ): was to leave the
herring fleet and sail home ; and even after the said date
to prevent the cod-fishery from offering the cured-herring
business any serious concurrence.

Such are the principal contents of the Herring Law of
1801. It was, as has been shown, a codification of the
rules in vigour under the Republic of the United Nether-
lands, whether established by the legislator of the realm or
by the Herring College's ill-defined but seldom-questioned
authority.

Besides the law itself, which is composed of no less than
109 clauses, and a series of forms of oath annexed to it in
imitation of the Placard of 1656,* the publication of
July 28th, 1801, contains two more documents requiring
peculiar mention, viz., an instruction for the members of
the " Grand Fishery Committee of the Batavian Republic,"

* See part ii. chap. i.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 197

and a form of commission for the commanders of their
buss-convoyers, or hospital ships.

The former instruction, issued in lieu of the provisional
organisation of the year 1798, contains the following
principal clauses :

The committee is to superintend the whole business of
the Grand Fishery (and indeed, as appears from the terms
of the law just mentioned, much of that of the fresh-herring
trade) under the supreme supervision of Government
(then the " Uitvoerend Bewind " or executive board of the
Batavian Republic). The committee is to be composed of
nine members, all of whom are to be privately concerned
in the herring-fishery, and appointed, subject to approba-
tion by Government, by the managing owners (boekhouders)
of herring busses in the towns and villages most concerned,
viz., four by Vlaardingen,* two by Maassluis, two by
Enkhuizen, and one by de Rijp. If the Grand Fishery be
ulteriorly exercised or extended in other towns, such towns
shall be entitled to appoint one further member of the
committee if fifteen busses be equipped there ; and if the
number of such busses exceed forty, they shall be entitled
to apply to Government for their further representation
in the committee. The latter body's place of meeting,
formerly Delft, is now fixed at the Hague. They are
entitled to appoint their several officers and last-money
collectors, and to regulate the latter's salaries and caution-
moneys under Government approbation. They shall
annually elect their chairman, and hold their first and

* This town was not a prominent " herring town " in the earlier
times of the old Republic, and was repeatedly declined admission to
the College of the Grand Fishery. Vlaardingen's greatness in the
trade seems to date from the latter half of the iSth century ; it has
been foremost in it ever since.

198 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

second meetings on the first Mondays in March and May,
having previously conferred with the shipowners in the
several towns and on the sea-coast, and taken their
instructions as to the subjects to be considered for the
several interests of the cured and fresh-herring fisheries.
They shall annually render an account of their financial
administration to a delegate from Government, in presence
of such shipowners as shall choose to attend their meeting
designated for the purpose ; and their account is to be
ultimately submitted to the Commissioners of the National
Accounts (or supreme Government Board of Control) for
liquidation. The said administration involved, as receipts,
the last-money mentioned in the above law, and Govern-
ment subsidies ; as expenditure, the equipment, manning,
and victualling of hospital-ships, the salaries of committee
officers, and other general expenses. The committee's mem-
bers were entitled to nothing beyond travelling expenses
under a certain tariff. They were under oath to Govern-
ment strictly and honestly to fulfil their several duties.

The form of commissions for commander of hospital-
ships annexed to the law of 1801 throws much light upon
the convoying institutions of the time. The hospital-ship,
also called " buss convoyer," appears to be the ultimate
result of a gradual transformation of the " direction-ships,"
anciently sent by the college after the herring fleet to
protect them against enemies, and to enforce the rules of
fishery police upon them.*

The "hospital-ships " of 1801, if they were still armed

* " Hospital ships" were sent out with the herring fleet under the
old republic, in time of peace, when convoy properly said was un-
necessary; v. d. Lely's Recueil mentions the cost of two " hospital-
ships " in 1714 and following years, without stating their precise
nature at the time.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 199

convoying vessels like the " direction ships ' of old, were
mainly intended for peaceful purposes. Their captains'
instructions indeed contained an injunction "to use good
seamanship and soldiership" but the rest of their vessels'
attributes, as apparent from the same document, are such
as no man-of-war could carry out without very serious
prejudice to the latter function. They were to be floating
lazarets, marine stores, and \vharves for the busses'
convenience, whom they were bound to assist with
surgeons and carpenters, spare rigging, and all such
materials as they should require. They were to relieve
the busses of their sick, and provide them with able
seamen instead, and in general see that no buss should be
obliged to sail home prematurely by reason of avary or
lack of hands. In some cases the captain was instructed
to act in concert with the commander " of the other
hospital-ship ; " whence it is evident that no more than two

•

used as a rule to be sent after the fleet ; and both of them
were constantly to sail round the herring fleet, and carry
signals to enable busses in distress to find them out.

A short while after the establishment of the law of 1801,
and the definitive organisation of the Committee of the
Grand Fishery, the preliminaries of London were signed ;
and in the next spring the short-lived Peace of Amiens
opened the sea for peaceful pursuits. Sea-fishery was
instantly recommenced, and of course its beginnings were
attended with such financial difficulties as shipowners had
in former years been accustomed to overcome by the
aid of bounties. Accordingly, to sue for premiums to
herring-busses was one of the first acts of the now es-
tablished committee ; and besides, they applied for the
subsidy which the provisional committee had not enjoyed
during the stagnation of herring-fishery. A subsidy of

200 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

fl. 3000 was granted them on January I5th, 1802, and on May
2 ist the sum was increased to fl. 12,800, by the addition of the
ordinary subsidies, which had been kept back in the pre-
ceding years. Besides the subsidies, which as formerly were
intended to cover general College expenditure, a premium
of fl./oo for each buss to sail in that year was allowed by
the Legislative Body on April 2/th, somewhat to the
committee's disappointment, as the sums applied for by
them were fl.Soo for 1802, and fl.5oo for the next ten years.
The other branches of sea-fishery likewise applied for
premiums to recommence their business. The Commis-
sioners of the Greenland fishery * had the highest preten-
sions of all, and sued for £.3000 as a premium for each
whaler carrying forty men and seven boats, besides fl.5OOO
as an indemnification for each of twenty-nine whalers which
had been sent north in 1798, and all taken by the English.
As, however, the Treasury could afford no such largess,
they had to be content with fl.2OOO for each whaling ship
equipped and sailed in 1802, besides the " indemnization " t
formerly held out by the Placard of October 3rd, 1788,$ to
the amount of fl-5O for each quarter of train oil wanting to a
hundred in each cargo. The commissioners of the small, or
Iceland cod-fishery at Vlaardingen and Maassluis § were
likewise accommodated with bounties to the amount of fl.7OO
for each vessel, and the fresh-herring fishery of the Side
had fl.2OO held out to them as a premium for each bum-
boat. || One hundred and sixty-eight busses sailed in this
memorable year of peace, 1802; and it may be readily

* See part ii. chap. ii.

f " Premie van dedommagement?

% See part ii. chap. ii.

§ See part ii. chap. iii.

|| Notulen van het Staatsbeivind, Dec. 1801 — June, 1^02, passim.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 201

assumed that, as a consequence of the re-establishment of
the premium system for all the several branches, the
revival of sea-fisheries was general, and shared by the
other branches besides the Grand Fishery. At any rate,
such a revival of the fisheries and the trades dependent on
them was counted upon as certain after the peace of
Amiens, as is proved by a publication dated April 22nd,
renewing the prohibition issued by the States-General in
1778,* against exporting well-boats for cod-fishery.

As an instance of the spirit of enterprise infused into
those concerned in sea-fisheries in the year 1802, the institu-
tion of an African whaling society may be cited. A report
had spread that whales were very plentiful about the Cape
of Good Hope, so that, although they were of a small size
and yielded train of an inferior quality, a renewal of the
ancient Greenland Company's first successes might be hoped
for. Accordingly a corporation styling itself " South Sea
Whaling Company " was started in 1802, and subscriptions to
it soon reached the considerable figure of fl.79O,ooo. They
obtained a Government charter of monopoly to last twenty
years. Government (then the Executive Board called
" Staatsbewind " ) indeed judged all monopolies " hateful
and contrary to that equality " of all citizens, which formed
one of the fundamental principles of the Batavian
Republic ; but they undertook to reconcile monopoly and
" equality ' by an ingenious wording of the charter. As a
precaution against their superseding the ancient Greenland
whalery, the new company were obliged by their charter
to take a one-eighth share in every vessel sailing to Green-
land, if the owners of such a vessel should demand it, and to
a maximum of one-fourth of the company's paid up capital.f

* See part ii. chap. iii.

f Vervolg op Wagenaar, vol. xlv. pp. 54, 327.

E. 8. P

202 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

The rupture of the peace of Amiens in the next year
stopped these hopeful beginnings. The blow was the
heavier, as considerable preparations for sea-fishery had
been made in the first months of the year, under the con-
tinued stimulus of premiums, which were granted again
in 1803, to the amount of fl./oo and fl.5oo, for the next
eleven years, for busses and hookers employed in the
cured-herring and cod-fisheries. To prevent the utter loss
of the capital invested in vessels and equipment by the
time war had recommenced, the Committee for the Grand
Fishery asked Government to apply for passports from
England ; but far from acceding to the petition, the
" Staatsbewind >: on June 6th ordered the Committee to
prevent the sailing of busses. Several shipowners next
applied for permission to sail under the colours of neutral
Powers, but were likewise forbidden to carry out their
purpose. Coast fishermen were subjected to particularly
rigorous measures. Napoleon's grand project of a descent
on the British shores was then so far ripened as to make
him anxious for the preservation of a store of flat-bottomed
vessels in the hands of his ally and subordinate the
Batavian Republic ; whence England was, with excellent
reasons, peculiarly anxious to capture and destroy Dutch
fishing craft from the coast Many smacks were taken in
the beginning of the war ; and so great was the terror
spread by these events, that an order against the sailing of
bum-boats from the side was soon followed by another,
purporting that all such boats should be secured out of the
enemy's sight behind the downs. It is, and probably was
always customary to haul the " pink en " or bum-boats up
the beach, close under the outer declivity of the sand-
downs, either for repair or during the short interval
between the herring and hook-fishery seasons, so high as to

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 203

be beyond the highest tide. But I am not aware of
another instance of their having been hauled completely
across the first range of downs, and the operation must
certainly have been a very difficult one. Government,
however, set much store by the order being strictly
executed. It was feared that, if the smacks were left
ashore so as to be visible from the sea, they might be
destroyed by British artillery, or burnt in some successful
landing razzia ; and such an event would not only have
been a severe infliction upon shipowners, but also have
brought down upon the Batavian Government the dis-
pleasure of their powerful ally in the south, who wanted
the boats to be preserved for his ulterior military views
The coast fishermen of Scheveningen, Katwijk and Noord-
wijk opposed the measure, and baulked its execution for
some time, but it was ultimately carried out all over the
coast, and as regards Scheveningen was enforced by the
intervention of the municipal authorities of the Hague.
As an instance of the extreme reluctancy of shipowners to
subject their bum-boats to the operation prescribed, some
fishermen of Noordwijk tried to evade the order on the plea
that their boats were no longer subject to the Batavian law,
having been sold to Prussian subjects.*

And now there was virtually an end of Dutch sea-fishery
for some years. Herring shipowners in the course of the
year 1803 tried, but in vain, to obtain a premium as an
indemnification for having equipped their vessels to no
purpose,! and some of them ultimately sought to cover part
of their outlays by fishing for cod on the Dogger bank, and
occasionally trying a cast for herring, towards which end

* Vervolg op Wagenaar, p. 249, sqq. Notulen van hct Staats-
bewtnd, June-Dec. 1803, Jan. 1804, passim.
f Notulen Staatsbe-wind 1803, passim.

P 2

204 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

they obtained from the Legislative Body a dispensation of
the law of iSoi as regards the restrictions put upon herring-
fishery by cod-fishing vessels.* The premiums decreed in
1802 were in the next years paid for the very few ships
which ventured to sail ; but the dread of British cruisers
was generally stronger than the hope of a bounty. Matters
became still worse under King Louis' reign, when Holland
was virtually a province of France, and the Emperor, as
omnipotent there as in the lands under his own direct
government, kept the fishing fleet constantly in readiness
as instruments for the one great plan he never could put
into execution, viz., the descent on the British shores. A
<' Dutch Herring Company " was formed at London in 1809,
for the purpose of cultivating the Dutch method of curage ;
and employed some captive Dutch herring-fishers, without,
however, obtaining a durable success. The period when
Holland was actually annexed to France (1810-1813) is
remarkable in the history of Dutch sea-fisheries, not, of
course, because of anything like prosperity for them, but
because during this short period the Dutch fishery-laws were
cancelled. As a consequence of this, coast fishermen, who
alone could sail now and then with hope of escaping the
British cruisers, used their new-gotten freedom to cure fresh-
herring caught off the Dutch coast ; and so good was the
produce of their curage that dealers from Vlaardingen and
Maassluis, whose busses could not sail to their accustomed
rendezvous off the British shores, did not disdain to buy cured
herring from the coast and sell it under their brands. The
only instance of French sea-fishery legislation is an Imperial
Decree of April 25th, i8i2t by which the herring, cod, and
fresh-fisheries were permitted, but under such rules as to

; Notulen Staatsbewind, May 22nd, 25th, 1803 ; April 22nd, 1805.
t Bulletin de Lois de V Empire Francais, 4m e s^rie, vol. xvi. p. 373.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 205

the duration of their absence from home, their obligation
never to enter any port but their own, and always to rally
there at an appointed signal, and the inspection of their
vessels and men, as kept them constantly under the hand
of the military and naval authorities, to be gathered at a
moment's notice. It was the Emperor's object, not to
secure for his subjects such freedom of sea-fishery as was
not precluded by his disastrous wars, but merely to use
their ships as instruments for the ever-proposed expedition
against England. The fishery boards of the country were
swept away, and the Decree of 1812 substituted for them
a College of "prucFhommes pfaheurs" in each fishery port,
whose main duty was to supervise the regulations relative

*

to the well-known French " inscription maritime" The
chiefs of the Imperial Navy were by this law made the
supreme ordainers of all fishermen's conduct, and the vessels
employed in sea-fishery were considered in no other light
than that of ferry-boats, to be kept handy eventually to
land a French army across the Channel. And yet the
whole of this military organization was set up under a
pretence of consummate benevolence and liberality towards
the fishing interests; for the I2th article of the above
quoted Imperial Decree expressly stated that it was made,
" vonlant degager ceux de nos snjets qni sadonnent a la
pecJie de toutes les entraves qui peuvent gener leur Industrie^
et les edairer des lemons de V experience ! '

206 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

CHAPTER II.

PROTECTION AT A CULMINATING POINT.

ON November 3Oth, 1813, the Prince of Orange crossed
from England to take the hereditary government of the ex-
Batavian Republic. On December 1st, he was proclaimed
Sovereign Prince of the Netherlands at Amsterdam ; and
one of his very first acts of economical legislation was to
cancel all fishery laws of French origin and re-instate the
herring law of iSoi.*

The old system of fishery regulation and protection was
further rebuilt in the next years. Premiums were held out
to encourage a fresh beginning of the several fisheries, to
the amount of fl.5OO for every cure-herring buss equipped,
for every vessel employed on cod-fishery in the North Sea
during the winter months, and for every voyage made by a
vessel in the Iceland cod-fishery ; of fl.2OO for a fresh herring
bum-boat, and £.4000 for each of the first twelve whalers
to sail in the next years, besides, as regards the latter, the
"indemnification bounty" of fl.5O for each quarter of train
wanting to a hundred, under the same conditions as to
equipment, strength of crew, and duration of voyage, which
had been enacted in 1788 and i8o2.f In virtue of the
latter premium, a whaler was entitled, if returning " clean,"
i.e. without any cargo, to no less a sum than £.9000 as a
bounty. The permission to send a few sale-hunters direct
from the fleet to Germany, was also granted once more in

* Decree of January icth, 1814 (Staatsbl. No. 6).
f Staatsblad 1815, Nos. 2, 27; 1816, No. 6 ; 1817, No. 3; 1818
Nos. 13, 42, 43. Bijvoegsel op het Staatsblad, 1818, p. 892.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 207

1815 ;* and although this grant had been constantly made
in the last years of the ancient Republic, the fiction of its
exceptional character was upheld even now, and the
permission was given for one year only, and renewed after-
wards. The old exemption from excise duty on salt was
likewise restored, for the benefit of all herring and cod
fishery, by the law on salt excise duty of September 1 5th,
i8i6;| and a Decree of May 3Oth, iSi/J besides estab-
lishing peculiar facilities for the enjoyment of this
immunity, in the shape of credit for excise duty not
subject to the common bonded warehouse rules, held out a
special premium of fl.3 per last of salt cod-fish brought into
port, and a general bounty on exportation of salt cod or
herring. Another decree, dated July 3ist, i8i7,§ estab-
lished facilities of a similar" nature for unrefined salt used
free of excise duty by the North Sea coast fresh herring
(or steurharing] fishery. In a word, no efforts were spared
to promote a speedy rising of the national fisheries ; and
as the sea was now free, and national labour anxious to
take avail of the withdrawal of the fetters imposed by
foreign domination, the herring-fishery, and its corollary the
North Sea cod-fishery, soon reached something approach-
ing their status of the latter part of the former century.

Whaling was likewise attempted afresh, under the stimulus
of the very important premium offered ; but the attempts
were timidly made, generally in old and wretched vessels,
and the trade never regained anything like a rank worth
mentioning among the Dutch sea-fisheries in the present
century. A whaling company (limited) was chartered at

* Staatsblad, 1815, No. 34.

f Ibid. 1816, No. 36.

$ Bijvoegsel tot het Staatsblad, 1817, p. 220.

§ Ibid. p. 236.

208 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

Harlingen in 1824,* the King being one of the principal
participators. A similar company was formed at Rotter-
dam about the same time. Notwithstanding the very con-
siderable amount of premiums awarded, I have not found
any evidence of these whaling attempts having been success-
ful ; indeed the" Nederlandsche Hermes" of December 1826
distinctly states the contrary, and whaling was the only
branch of Dutch sea-fishery which did not perceptibly
survive the ruin of the ancient Republic.

Not content with restoring every detail of the ancient
system of fishing regulation and protection, the Govern-
ment of the Kingdom of the Netherlands soon began
to out- Herod Herod, and add fresh fishery restric-
tions and monopolies to those made in former times. A
minimum charter for herring busses allowed to cure
and entitled to the premium of fl.5oo was established,
by a Decree of June 1.6th, 1815 ;t twenty-four lasts and
thirteen men being prescribed as the minimum size and
crew for such vessels. The same Decree contained a
clause by which the Grand Fishery College's virtual
power was very much extended, and it became indeed a
matter of some difficulty to assign its exact limits. All
laws whatever emanated on fisheries in former years,
and aiming at the maintenance of the credit of Dutch
herring were declared to continue in vigour, unless ex-
pressly repealed ; and the publication of May 3Oth, 1800,
against curing Zuider Zee "pankerring" and importing
foreign herring unless for re-exportation in the same

* Bijvoegsel op het Staatsblad, p. 612.

f Staatsblad No. 39. Although virtually a modification of the law
of 1 80 1, the enactment was disguised in the shape of a simple regula-
tion prohibiting the College of the Grand Fishery from issuing licences
for vessels not responding to it.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 209

barrels, was expressly renewed. By this enactment the
whole of the ancient herring legislation of the United Pro-
vinces was virtually re-established, although the essence
of it had already been, so to say, crystallized in the law of
i So I. It was not easy to apply the tangled mass of the old
Republic's fishery laws to the modern kingdom, or indeed
to make out what part of the countless Resolutions of the
States-General and the States of Holland, on the subject,
was still lawfully in vigour, and what part repealed. There
was now, in short, too much general legislation on sea-
fisheries ; and a simplification was found necessary. To
promote this end, without detriment to the principles of the
existing laws, the King, on February 2Oth, 1818, laid a Bill
before the States-General, the leading idea of which was to
leave all detailed working rules to the provincial authorities,
under Government approbation, and have only general
precepts laid down in the law of the realm. This law,
promulgated on March I2th, 1818, (Staatsblad No 15) was
the last general statute regulating sea-fisheries in the
Netherlands. It contained the leading principles of the
system on which fishery protection was built, and its
several clauses have been an object of much debate down
to the final overthrow of the system in 1857. For these
reasons I have found it expedient to add a translation of the
full text of the law of 1818, as Appendix D. to these pages.
The law, as will be found upon perusal of the said
Appendix, repeated the outlines of the system in vigour
ever since the beginning of the ancient Republic, and de-
scribed in Part II. Chapter I., of the present essay. It
moreover contained one important novelty, viz., the utter
prohibition from importing any foreign herring whatever,
whether for transit or for home consumption. Both under
the Republic and by the law of i8oi,it had been permitted

2io THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

to import foreign herring for re-exportation in the same
barrels, un-opened and unbrandcd ; and the general Customs
tariff of 1816 admitted such herring for home consumption,
although subject to a heavy duty. Fish dealers in 1818
were, for the first time, utterly deprived of a branch of
their business for the better preservation of the Grand
Fishery's monopoly.

The law was not established without serious opposition.
The importing prohibition just mentioned was, in the first
place, the subject of a warm remonstrance in the Second
Chamber, on the part of no less a personage than Count
Hogendorp,* who found sufficient motive in Art. 6 to
vote against the Bill, although favourably inclined towards
it in general.f But the main brunt of antagonism was
borne by the sixteenth clause of the law, by which the
Grand Fishery's monopoly of curing herring after Beukelsz'
ancient method was once more consecrated, to the exclu-
sion of the fishermen of both the North Sea and Zuider Zee
shores. This monopoly, which we have seen established in
the eighteenth century by the potent Commissioners of the
Grand Fishery, and maintained by the laws of 1800 and
1 80 1, had already been expressly re-enforced by a special
law dated November 25th, 1814 (Staatsblad No. 108). Of
all the several items of protection to which the Grand
Fishery had learned to cling for two centuries and more,
they held this curing privilege the most precious. Fresh-
herring fishermen, on the other hand, still considered their

* One of the illustrious men who led the revolt against the French
authorities, some time before the arrival of the allied forces. This
great and wise statesman has, throughout his career as such, ad-
vocated the principle of Free Trade.

f }^QgQi\AorpjBijdragen\.A.Huisk. van Staat, ii. p. 249. The entire
debate upon the Bill is to be found in Mr. Noordziek's collection of
States-General Records, 1817-18. p. 288.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 211

exclusion as the main cause of their trade's insignificance,
and took occasion from the general revision of the fishery
statutes ordained in 1818 to strenuously claim the right to
cure their herring. Their petition,* besides the arguments
used by their fathers in 1751,! had now some still more
stringent reasons as a base. Under the French Government
in 1812 and 1813, fishermen from the Side were allowed
to cure ; and as they of the Grand Fishery could not venture
into their ordinary fishing waters, herring caught and cured
by the despised bum-boats closer to the continental shore
was carried to Maassluis and Vlaardingen, and those towns
were then anxious enough to export it under the Grand
Fishery brand.

The petition from the coast villages (viz., Scheveningen,
Katwijk, Noordwijk, Egmond aan Zee and Zantvoort, the
rest having meanwhile given up fishing), was this time
echoed higher up than its predecessor in 1751 'had been.
Four sections out of the five into which the Second Chamber,
or Lower House of the legislative body, was then divided
for the preliminary examination of Bills brought in, desired
more ample elucidation respecting the curing monopoly.^
Government answered them with assertions either un-
founded or not to the point. Firstly, it was said, the early
herring which really constitutes the renown of the Dutch
brands abroad is caught off the Shetlands, whither no keel-
less boat can sail ; a statement in flat contradiction to
the- representations of the coast fishermen, who in their
petition alleged the early herring caught off Shetland to be,

* Published as Appendix XIX. to the Report of the Committee on
Sea-Fisheries, 1854.

f See part ii.

% See the Report of the Central Section, in Bijvoe^sel tot het
Staatsblad, 1818, p. 1006.

212 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

as a fact, unfit for exportation. Next, said the Minister in
defence of the Bill, it is a requisite for first-rate cured-herring
that the fish be cured quite fresh, whence buss-fishermen
are enjoined to throw overboard in the morning all such
herring of yesterday's capture as they have been unable to
cure in the night ; and bum-boats, being much less strongly
manned, could not carry out this point of the law with
sufficient precision. To this argument it might have been
objected that if bum-boats carried fewer hands, they also
shot fewer nets, and had less fish to cure in one night.
Subsequent events have fully proved that herring can be
cured in bum-boats with entire success. Thirdly, Govern-
ment argued that it had been enacted in 1801, that no vessel
should sail home in the early part of the season unless with
a full cargo ; and the smaller vessels, having sooner com-
pleted theirs, could have the immense privilege of the early
market all to themselves if allowed to cure. The true
reason for maintaining the monopoly, to wit, the preponder-
ance of the Grand Fishery interest, peeped through this
last argument ; and in preferring it, Government omitted to
take into account the institution of sale-hunting, by which
the first cured-herring was annually brought into port much
earlier than a bum-boat could ever hope to make the shore
with a complete cargo. Another pretended danger of
allowing bum-boat fishers to cure, viz., that of their divulg-
ing the professional secret of curage in the ports of Great
Britain, and Yarmouth especially, which they used to visit,
was indeed altogether visionary. Keeled busses as well as
bum-boats were in the habit of holding communication
with the British shore ; and the danger of the former's
crews promulgating abroad the mysteries of Dutch curage
was much the greater. Bum-boats from the coast were all
manned exclusively by Dutchmen ; whereas the greater

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 213

part of the busses' crews was, at the time now spoken of,
composed of foreigners, Germans especially, whom nothing
prevented from teaching their countrymen, or other
foreigners, the process on which they were employed
during the summer. If Dutch curage was not generally
practised abroad, it was because other methods were used
in foreign countries with such success as made English,
Germans, Swedes, Danes and Norsemen the victorious
competitors of the Dutch in the great herring markets, as
early as the beginning of the present century.

The point at issue being so far elucidated on both sides
in the Parliament papers, the oral discussion could not of
course bring any fresh arguments into the field. Still it did
not lack interest. The speech of Mr. Kemper, who employed
himself most strenuously in defence of both the curing
monopoly and the importing prohibition, is a fair specimen
of the peculiar logic customary to protectionism. The
first-named measure, according to Mr. Kemper, was in
reality not a monopoly at all. Bum-boat owners were
left perfectly at liberty to exchange their vessels for keeled
busses, and take their share in the profits of curage. And
so they certainly were, as far as the words of the law were
concerned. But no keeled vessel could sail from, or anchor
in safety at a convenient distance off one of the villages
on the Dutch sea coast ; so in order to adopt the orator's
advice, shipowners from the coast would have had to
transfer their establishments to the riverside towns, and
abandon the capital primarily sunk in their business,
besides the many other expenses and disadvantages always
attendant upon shifting the seat of an industry from one
place to another. As coast-fishermen pithily said in their
petition, their liberty to equip busses was equivalent to a
merchant's liberty to sell certain wares, under an obligation

214 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

to pack those wares in bales too big to be got through his
warehouse doors.

Yet another point of the Bill was forcibly illustrated
in the course of the debate, viz., the King's faculty to
allow dispensations from the prohibition to cure issued
against coast fishermen. This clause was never meant for
anything but a decoy to win the opposition over. The
parliamentary system was at the time in its infancy in the
Netherlands. There was no ministerial responsibility ; and
to oppose a Bill emanating from the King himself was some-
thing awful, on which many members of the House did not
care to venture so long as they could somehow keep their
consciences at rest in acquiescing. To provide a sedative
to this effect was therefore a means to shut up importunate
mouths. One member distinctly stated his intention to vote
for the law in the hope that the King would use his faculty
to establish exceptions ; whereas, as he justly observed, the
Bill's rejection would be the continuance of the laws of 1800
and 1 80 1, by which the monopoly was sanctioned without
any perspective of relaxation. It is probable that many
members tacitly embraced the same course ; and it certainly
was a clever piece of parliamentary tactics to make such
members vote the continuation of a monopoly obnoxious
to their views, by asking them to empower Government to
overthrow its own handiwork and system. But such an
overthrow was no part of the King's intentions. The
Minister's speech in defence of the Bill has unfortunately
been lost ; but it is more than probable that Mr. Kemper
fully expressed the Government's views upon the subject,
by stating that he did not look forward to any breach in
the monopoly, and would rather have abandoned the reserva-
tion clause. This was straightforward speaking ; and the
law having been voted by a majority of fifty-one to sixteen,
coast fishermen had not many illusions left. Of the several

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 215

provincial regulations on herring-fishery subsequently issued
under the Royal approbation, not one permitted coast-
fishermen to cure until long after King William the First
had ceased to reign ; and the privilege was thus maintained,
which prevented them from making above fl.io or fl.12 for
a quantity of herring, to which their concurrents imparted
by curage a value of fl.5O and sometimes more.

The details of the system, as regulated under the law
of March I2th, 1818, fully responded to the legislators'
rigorously conservative spirit in fishery matters. No change
was at first made in those details. For four years and a
half, in virtue of a Royal decree dated June 9th, 1818
(Staatsblad, No. 27), the working rules laid down in the
law of 1801 were continued in vigour, while a new set was
under consideration with the Provincial authorities, now
appointed legislators, under the royal approval, for all such
working details as were rather vaguely defined by the
law of 1818 as "internal police'1 of the herring-fishery.
" Provincial authorities," of course, meant those of the
province of Holland, now, as in former centuries, the only
one where herring-fishery was exercised on a considerable
scale. On December 3 1st, 1822, the royal approbation was
given to a set of rules drawn up by the Provincial States of
Holland, relative to herring-fishery in their province.*

Two Regulations were made in 1822 ; one on the Grand
and one on the Fresh-herring Fishery. They were mainly a
repetition, in a more prolix wording, of such details of the
law of 1 80 1 as had not been transferred to the law of
March I2th, 1818. Very little was added to the virtual
contents of the statute ; and that little tended to make the
rules even more stringent than before. A minimum size
for herring busses had been determined in 1815 ; the
provincial regulation added that such busses should carry
* Bijvoegsel op het Staatsblad, 1822, pp. 1018 sqq., 1358 sqq.

216 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

square sails (razeileii). The law of 1801 had ordered every
buss to carry forty nets ; the regulation of 1822 added the
size of those nets for each voyage. The former statute pro-
hibited cure-herring fishermen from salting herring in baskets
ungutted (steuren\ unless in urgent cases, when it should
be impossible to cure the fish ; the latter made away with
the exception, and prescribed all herring caught in a buss
to be either cured (kaken) immediately or* thrown over-
board. Besides these, and a few more tightenings of the
old fetters, the Regulations of 1822 offer one important
new feature, viz., the institution of two distinct boards for
the cure-herring, and fresh-herring fisheries. The former
was to sit at the Hague and exercise exactly the dominion
formerly held over the cured-herring business by the
Committee for the Grand Fishery. The latter board was
to meet at Katwijk, as the most centrally situated among
the North Sea coast villages, and hold sway over the smoke-
herring concern. As a novelty, the whole of the coast
fisheries, including those for pan-herring and fresh fish in
both the North Sea and Zuider Zee, and even shrimping,
were brought under the supervision of the College as-
sembling at Katwijk, who were enjoined to keep their eye
upon these several branches of the trade, and from time to
time to draw up the necessary regulations regarding them
for the Provincial States' approval. Last-money was to be
levied by both colleges under similar provisions as made
in 1 80 1 for the committee's sole benefit ; and the forms of
oath, instructions for steersmen, and hospital-ship captains,
&c., &c., ordained in 1801, were renewed in pretty much
the same words.

Another novelty of some importance in the Grand
Fishery Regulation of 1822 is, that it first gives a legal
definition of the several qualities of Dutch cured-herring,
viz.,/?///, maatjes, ijlen, and kuitziek (Jtomziefc). The former

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 217

and latter terms had indeed been used from very early
times downward, the former meaning herring full of spawn
or milt, and the latter fish about to shoot the same, and
consequently unfit to be preserved for a long time
" Ylen" is a common word for lean, or empty, and was
applied to herring, in its literal sense, down from old times.
The word maatjes first occurs, without any positive state-
ment as to its meaning, in the I4th clause of the Herring
Placard of 1656. The Regulation of 1822 defines this very
important description of cured-herring as containing neither
milt nor spawn, but much fat, and " maatjes " herring is
stated to be a great delicacy, but not very durable. The
" maatjes" and "ylen " qualities were formerly certified on
board by the skipper, by means of " girdings " or circles
drawn round the barrels. Positive brands for them, to be
given of course ashore by the brander, are first prescribed
in the Regulation of 1822, besides the old brands stating
the season of catch and described in Part II., Chap. I.

Besides the aforesaid regulations, a Royal Decree of
April 4th, 1824 (Staatsblad, No. 28), extended the clause
of 1818, forbidding Dutchmen to fish "between the rocks
of Scotland, Hitland, and Norway." They were now pro-
hibited from fishing, or even without urgent reasons from
approaching, within two hours (twenty making a degree) of
the British shores. The main object of this statute appears
to have been to stop Dutchmen smuggling on the British
coast ; but as cure-herring fishery off " Hitland," Fairhill,
and Yarmouth, and all fresh-herring fishery, were expressly
dispensed from the rule, it is not easy to see what can have
been its real force at the outset. It was carried into full
effect, and the exceptions were withdrawn, by a new
regulation on cure-herring fishery enacted by the Provincial
States of Holland in 1826, and approved by Royal Decree

E. 8. Q

218 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

of June 5th, 1827,* which regulation did not otherwise
materially alter the existing rules.

The edifice of legislation on herring fishery was now
more complete than ever. Its base, construction, and
general outlines still responded to the Placards of 1582 ;
and the only material alterations wrought since then were
such novellae as had been, in the course of two centuries
and a half, invented by the ingenuity of many generations
of fishermen, the better to secure their several monopolies
against home and foreign competition. As regards the
former, the rules now as formerly proved efficient enough.
As for the latter, no laws or monopolies had in former
days shielded Dutch fishermen from the effects of war, or
of elevated tariffs and active concurrency abroad ; nor
could they now, under profound and continual peace and
industrial activity, make the Grand Fishery regain anything
of its splendour of a hundred and fifty years ago.

But the spirit of monopoly had not yet done its utmost.
The narrow-minded greed of parties interested had still
more stringent measures of Protection in store. Before
speaking of these it will be necessary to relate how the
herring fishery fared between 1814 and the time of which
I am now speaking.

About one hundred busses sailed in 1814; and as
herring prices were very high in the next two years, and
premiums, as has been shown, were lavishly given,
enormous gains were made. The returns of one season
sometimes amounted to fl. 10,000 per vessel, besides the
bounty.f An organization of the sale-hunting busi-
ness was agreed upon during this period of success, in

* Staatscourant, 1827, No. 278 (Bijvoegs'el).

f See a Memorial on a Herring Association, written in 1828.
(Notulen Holland^ 1829, p. 211.)

THE HISTORY OP DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 219

virtue of which cure-herring shipowners annually clubbed
to equip sale-hunters, and each buss, while at sea, sold her
early herring to these for a price fixed beforehand. The
much higher prices made in the home market for this
"hunted herring" (Jaag-haring) were then divided among
the participators in the " Hunting Association " (Jagery-
vereeniging), according to the number of barrels sold to
the hunters by each buss ; and a managing Committee of
shipowners regulated the sale and expedition of the early
herring so as to prevent an overstocking of the market
and a downfall of prices early in the season,* Under the
very favourable circumstances mentioned just now the
number of the vessels of course increased fast, and reached
1 60 in 1817. A series of exceptionally bad years, during
which the catch was very scanty, and most busses " sailed
money overboard," notwithstanding tolerable prices, re~
duced the number of busses to 145 in 1821. In the said
year a shipowning company established at Emden trans-
ferred its fleet of twenty-five busses to Enkhuizen and
carried the total of the Dutch fleet up to 170. Fishing
returns in 1821 were once more plentiful ; but prices went
down to an extremely low level, mainly on account of the
competition of Scotch herring in the foreign markets ; and
several firms were in jeopardy. At this juncture, a herring
dealer from Amsterdam, in the spring of 1822, proposed a
measure which, being adopted by the principal shipowners
of the towns on the Maas, led to some amelioration of
prices. They agreed not to sell herring under fl,i7 a
barrel before October i5th, whereas fl.io had been paid in
the preceding year. This was a considerable extension of

: After steam navigation had come in, the Dutch Government
annually supplied a steamer to the Hunting Association to act as the
first " sale-hunter."

Q 3 «

220 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

the principle on which the Hunting Association used to
act ; for the former did not meddle with prices after the
close of hunting time, generally July 1 5th, and left com-
petition in the market entirely free at all times beyond the
first three weeks of the season. The measure was repeated
in 1823, and by it prices on the Dutch market were indeed
kept at fl. 17 or upwards, but three hundred lasts* of
herring remained unsold in the winter of 1823, and had to
be thrown on the market for fl.8 in the next spring, before
the opening of the season 1824. A " Herring Company
of Amsterdam ' (" Amsterdamsche Haringreedery ") was
created and chartered in the said year, in the hope of
exploiting the fixity of prices caused in the two preceding
years by the general association of shipowners. But such
an association was not again formed, as its results had
upon the whole proved unsatisfactory, and some doubts
had arisen as to the faithful observation of the contract by
many of the participators. Meanwhile prices went down
again ; and in 1825, although the bounty of fl.5OO was
carried to fl.75O, most shipowners sustained severe losses,
which in that and the next three years were shared
by the Amsterdam Company, based on an unfulfilled ex-
pectation. The cause of these losses might have been
manifest to any unprejudiced observer. Scotch, German,
and Norse herring was now prevalent in most of the
European markets. Herring had become an article of
common nourishment in some countries, by reason of its
cheapness, the result of vastly increased international com-
petition. In order to sell a fair quantity of herring it was
now necessary to catch it at little expense and sell it

* The " JsLst" of herring at this time and afterwards was a quantity
of 14 barrels ; the barrel contained on an average 800 herrings. In
former centuries the " last" averaged from 12 to 14 barrels.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 221

cheap ; and the Dutch herring laws, instead of pointing out
the way to cheap production, were based on the bicen-
tennial principle that Dutch cured herring was to be, not
an article of daily food, but a delicious, and of course
expensive, luxury. The legislation had been built up in a
time when the Dutch were, if not the only, at least by very
far the greatest herring-fishers of the world, and enabled
by the absence of serious competition to put their own
prices upon their own brands. Thus the notions of Herring
and Monopoly had for centuries been closely interwowen
in the Dutchman's mind ; and he was not able to disen-
tangle those notions, even when foreigners began to go far
ahead of Holland in competition upon the herring markets.
Other countries at the same time retaliated on Holland for
her former ascendency and present exclusive policy, by
closing their markets against Dutch herring by heavy
customs duties. This state of things had not been realised
in the course of the eighteenth century ; whence the con-
tinued downfall of the Dutch herring fisheries, in spite of
premiums and regulations without number. It was not
realised in the first part of the present century ; whence
the impossibility of keeping up competition abroad. Nor
could home consumption, being curtailed by prices arti-
ficially high, sustain the business even under a prohibition
of foreign herring. Herring Protection, more than two
centuries old, had been bringing down its own punishment
for one century or more ; and yet nobody saw the evi-
dent effects of the great social law against which they had
been striving in vain.

As a very conclusive instance of this blindness, the
" A msterdamsche Haringreedery" before mentioned in 1828
presented a petition to the King, which, though not fully
carried out, led to a very masterpiece of monopolising

222 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

policy. They asked that, by the abolition of clause 46 of
the Herring Regulations for the province of Holland, it
should be made lawful for every buss to transfer herring to
every other, during the whole of the season ; and that the
whole of the fishery should then be formed into one
Association, whose committee should at all times determine
a minimum price for the last of herrings, and regulate the
sale so as to keep up that price. The accession of all
shipowners to this association, and their submission to its
rules, they required to be enforced by depriving all out-
siders of the premium of 500 florins, and dividing the sums
which would have been due to them as premiums between
the members of the Association, whose premiums might
thereby exceed the former amount.

The arguments preferred for this plan by those who
moved it were the following. As things were under the
Provincial Regulation of 1827, herring might only be
transferred to the licensed sale-hunters between June 24th,
or the opening of the season, and July I5th ; and the large
supply of herring during this " hunting-time " (jaagtyd) was
apt, in spite of the monopoly of " hunted herring " in the
home markets secured by the prohibition against busses
sailing home unless with a full cargo, to drive prices down
to a level insufficient for that precious delicacy, the noble
early Dutch cured herring. After the close of " hunting
time," i.e. when it was nc longer permitted to transfer
herring from one ship to another, a scarcity of herring
frequently set in, for it was manifestly contrary to the ship-
owners' interest to have their ships home, and stop fishing
for a couple of weeks, unless the necessity of bringing in
a complete cargo compelled them to do so. Thus, in
consequence of the " hunting " monopoly and its restricted
time of operation, many lasts of prime herring remained

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 223

afloat and lost their freshness, while foreign orders upon
the Dutch market could not be executed for lack of
adequate supplies. Prices unnaturally low were thus
succeeded by prices unnaturally high, or rather by a
grievous understocking of the market. As a fact, this
arrangement was certainly a monument of stolidity in
economical legislation. But the remedy proposed by the
men of Amsterdam was little better. They wanted, indeed,
to have herring-hunting free throughout the season, but
only in order to have all the herring brought in confided to
the care of one central committee, who should limit the
sale so as never to severely depress the market. They
wanted, in a word, to monopolise into one single hand the
whole of a trade already monopolised for the benefit of
those few who could afford keeled and square-rigged
vessels. While the law limited the cure-herring fishery to
comparatively few ships, they wanted to limit the market-
able production of those ships to such quantities as should
suit the convenience of a body of narrow-minded ship-
owners and dealers, anxious, not to sell much fish, but only
to make a high figure for such fish as they could manage
to sell. The main end of the plan was, not to extend, but
to restrict tJie business.

There has been a vast amount of written and oral
discussion of this plan. The permanent Committee of the
Provincial States,* before whom the matter was laid, called
a meeting of parties concerned at Lisse, and had heaps of
memorials presented to them, both before and after that
meeting. The College of the Grand Fishery for Holland
was then, as in former times, divided into two Chambers
or " Departments," one for Amsterdam and the towns in
North Holland, and one for the towns on the Maas ; and

* Gedeputeerde Staten.

224 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

of these Departments the former sided for the plan
proposed by the " A msterdamsche Haringreedery" and the
latter opposed it in the most strenuous terms. Of all the
clamouring parties in the debate, this latter official Board
was the only one which showed discernment, by starting
from the premise that "not high prices, but abundant
capture, were the means to restore the Grand Fishery."
But even they were anything but faithful to their principle,
and indeed disavowed it wofully in some of their sub-
sequent reasonings. One of their objections to the plan of
Amsterdam was, that if the " hunting ' monopoly were
removed, and all and sundry left free to carry home herring
at any time, prices, now in some measure kept up till
July 1 5th by the Hunting Association (Jagery- Vereeniging),
would be frightfully depressed from the very beginning of
each season.

Volumes of memorials were, as said before, written for
and against the Amsterdam plan.* The numeric majority
was against it ; for the whole of the shipowners' companies
and herring firms on the Maas of course took the side of
the southern department of the College. Still the argument
of Amsterdam prevailed in part. Having to suggest a
decision to the King, the Provincial States determined upon
a plan for conciliating the views of both parties, which
was perhaps the worst solution they could possibly have
•contrived. By their advice, the King in 1829! maintained
the 46th clause of the Regulation, but authorised the
Provincial States to postpone the closing of the " hunting "

* The whole of the documents are preserved in the record-books
(Notulen] of the Provincial States of Holland, 1828, p. 102, segg., and
1829, p. 180, seqq. They form about a hundied pages of folio print.

t Decree of May 5th, 1829 (Bijvoegsel op het Staatsblad, vol. xvi.
p. 14).

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 225

season till a later date than July 1 5th. On the other hand,
the new monopoly sued for by Amsterdam was granted by
this Decree, and premiums were withheld (although without
accretion to others) from all such herring shipowners as
should decline to accede to a universal Association, since
famous under the name of " Vereeniging der Zoutharing-
reederijen" The constitutive rules for this Association
were shortly afterwards drawn up by a committee of dealers
and shipowners, and approved by the Provincial States.*
Four local Boards, residing at Vlaardingen, Maassluis,
Amsterdam and Enkhuizen, were appointed by the herring
shipowners, each buss conferring a vote on her owner.
These boards were to buy up all branded herring brought
in by the partners, and sell it out again ; the prices for both
purchase and sale being fixed, from day to day, by a
central Board residing at Vlaardingen, " to the furtherance
of the shipowners' interest, by preventing unnecessary
depression of prices, and on the other hand, moderating
them so as to leave no herring unnecessarily unsold." The
Board, though a wholesale and monopolist dealer, was not
to export directly, but sell to second-hand inland dealers
only ; and all herring left unsold on April ist of any year
was to be sold in auction at any price, and the returns
recovered before May ist. As herring kept till April ist
of the year succeeding its capture is comparatively worth-
less, this fresh monopoly was equivalent to throwing away
part of the herring caught, in order to enhance the price of
the rest. The measure was just the reverse of what ought
to have been done. The only chance of upholding the
herring business, even under the laws which bound it down,
lay in altogether removing the preposterous " hunting '
monopoly and restriction, and leaving the supply of the
* Bijvoegsel op het Staatsblad, vol. xvi, p. 16.

226 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

article to regulate itself; whereas Government now pro-
ceeded to cap the measure by having the sale monopolised
and restricted likewise. The regulation and protection
system, as applied to herring fishery, was now screwed up
to its very acme. A cure-herring fisherman was not much
beyond a machine as regards the management of his
business. He was accurately prescribed how, in what
vessels, with what nets, when, and where to fish ; how to
prepare his fish ; how, when, and in what vessels to convey
it home ; and he was obliged to let others decide for him
whether, when, and at what prices it was to be sold. He
had not the slightest liberty of action ; a knowledge of his
business, of prices, markets, &c., was unnecessary for him ;
and he would have been fined large sums had he tried to
improve his business by any technical innovation. Anybody
could, so to say, be a herring shipowner, if he had a know-
ledge of the several regulations of which the above chapters
contain a brief, and far from detailed, account. It is a
marvel that a trade should have lingered so long, in which
all vitality and spirit of enterprise was so utterly extin-
guished by regulations ; the more so as the avowed object
of some of these regulations was, not to extend, but to
restrict the business. Of this baleful policy of directly and
openly keeping back part of the supply of an article in
order to enhance its market price, the history of the
Netherlands in former centuries can show more instances
than one ; but I doubt whether in the present century
there is an example of such a thing applied to food.

As regards the principle, the Dutch fish monopolies were
decidedly worse than the British Corn Laws ; and the rea-
son why the latter affected the general welfare much more
seriously is merely that they were applied to an article
without which no one could do. Nor was the revival of

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 227

Government regulation under the reign of King William
the First limited to the herring fisheries. Coast fishery for
plaice, flounder, sole, &c., shared the general reinforcement
of old rules, and close attention to their observation. Laws
against trawling, for the protection of fish-life under the
Dutch coast had, as related in a former part of this work,
been enacted in 1676 and relinquished in 1689, as un-
necessary vexations. A statute of this nature was once
more set up by Royal decree dated January I2th, 1820.*
Trawling was not prohibited altogether by this edict ; but
it was forbidden to trawl within view of the coast in
November, December, and January, and at any time to use
trawls or any other nets narrower than the " eight-and-
twenty ' size of old, i.e. a width of three (Netherlands)
inches and nine-tenths, or about one inch (English) and
a-half, for each mesh. Another decree of November I5th,
1825, | prescribed that the reglet, or spatule (spaait] deter-
mining the meshes' width of nets for the coast fishery
should be made of copper, and subject to assay. The use
of trawls for fishing herring along the coast was altogether
prohibited by this Edict of 1825 ; but, at the same time, the
general prohibition of all trawling was limited to the period
between November I5th and February I5th. The latter
date was afterwards shifted to February ist by Decree of
August 29th, 1837 (Staatsblad No. 56). It is worthy of
note that the Decree of 1825 was only enacted for the
province of Holland, whose States held it to be necessary ;
whereas the provinces of Antwerp, Zealand, and Occidental
Flanders,J whose inhabitants, like those of Holland, exer-

* Staatsblad, No. 2.

f Staatsblad, No. 75.

4! It should be remembered that, from 1815 till 1830, the provinces
now forming the kingdom of Belgium were part of the kingdom of the
Netherlands.

228 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

•
ciscd coast fishery on the North Sea shores, declined to

have them enforced within their precincts. The States
of these three provinces were so anxious to maintain their
fishers' liberty in the choice of their gear that they bought
it by the loss of a considerable advantage. A premium of
fl.25O was held out, by the^ Decree of 1825, to every boat
from the province of Holland (bumboats included) which
should fish in the North Sea with hooks and lines,* without
interruption, between November I5th and February i5th
of any subsequent year. As this premium was not limited
to any definite number of years, it afforded considerable
encouragement to the coast-fishery of Holland ; and yet
the southern provinces chose to forego this benefit in order
to maintain their right to use the trawl.

The premium awarded in 1825 to hook-and-line-fishery
during winter was by no means a superfluous bounty.
Hook-and-line fishery was, upon the whole, a good substi-
tute for winter trawling. Plaice, turbot, &c., besides cod
and haddock, were caught on the hooks ; whence, though
trawling was the more convenient, and it would appear the
cheaper of the two methods, the other offered better chances
of a fair return. But this was not the only consideration.
Trawling was till then the coast-fishers' chief, if not their
only, source of livelihood in winter, after the close of the
smoke-herring business ; and, being forbidden to use the
trawl, they were, in common equity, entitled to some
equivalent to keep them from starving. I have shown in
former chapters that severe penury used to prevail in the
coast villages during winter ; and the premium for hook-
and-line fishery during prohibited trawling time was, at the
outset, a preventive measure against over-burdening of the
Poor Boards. It soon wrought a considerable increase of

* " Beug- of hoekwant?

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 229

the hook-fishery by bumboats in winter, and even in
autumn and summer, and subsequently occasioned a
curious incident in the race for premiums characteristic of
Dutch sea-fisheries between 1775 and 1850. Fresh-herring
or " steurharing ): fishermen, who had only fl.2oo a year as
a premium, began to desert their business for the more
favoured hook-fishery ; and the owners of herring smokeries
in the coast villages complained of a scarcity of herring
supplies to their establishments. The premium for " steur-
haring >: fishery was therefore augmented to fl.3OO per
boat, by Decree of July nth 1835, No. 72 ; whereupon a
shifting in the opposite direction took place, and hook-
fishers from the coast turned fresh-herring fishers to such
an extent that the municipality of the Hague complained
of their market being under-stocked with fresh haddock
and plaice. A sliding scale of premiums was now adopted ;
and it was enacted by Decree of November 6th, 1840
(Staatsblad No. 71), that such of the two rival fisheries as
should have the greater number of boats engaged in it in
any year should in the next be entitled to the premium of
fl.25O, and the other to the full bounty of fl.3OO.

Besides the prohibition from trawling in the winter months,
another measure for the preservation of fish-life along the
coasts was taken in 1842. It will be remembered that the
use, within the sand-bars, of the shrimp trawl, known in the
Placards of the seventeenth century by the name of
" sayngh " had been permitted at all times by those enact-
ments, while they prohibited trawling at greater depth and
distance. The several laws and Decrees of 1820 and fol-
lowing years had likewise left the use of the " saayem " (as
the implement was now styled) unrestricted. But it was
now discovered that, although the spawn of plaice, &c., was
supposed to be deposited on the bottom at some distance

230 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

from the coast, immense shoals of fry of such fish, quite
unfit for consumption, sometimes approached so near the
shore as to be caught in the shrimpers' nets, when they were
either thrown away or used as pigs' food or manure. It was
deemed advisable, as a supplement to the law on trawling,
to prevent such waste of the fisherman's future stock ; and
towards this end it was enacted that, whenever a shrimper
should find more than one-eighth of the contents of his
" saayem " to consist of fry, or unripe fish, he should report
the fact to the member of the Coast Fishery College or to
the municipal officer nearest at hand ; when all use of the
shrimp-trawl should instantly be prohibited in the locality
for eight days.* An estimate of the utility of this measure
cannot be formed, for the prohibition was not applied above
a few times, and the statute was repealed in 1857. But
there is little or no probability of it having, till then, been
faithfully observed. It was of course impossible to efficiently
control the shrimpers' nets ; and they were interested, if
finding a quantity of fry of fish in those nets, in concealing
the fact in order to avoid a compulsory holiday of a week
or more.

1 CHAPTER III.

THE END OF PROTECTION.

THE present narrative has now come to a turning-point,
viz. the period when the ancient system of sea-fishery
legislation was abandoned, as inadequate to the regime
of modern production and exchange. Before entering
upon the details of the system's overthrow, it may be
useful to resume its plan and outlines in a very few words.

* Royal Decree, January 7th, 1842 (Staatsblad No. 2)

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 23

There were no less than three monopolies in the Grand
Fishery, or business of fishing for herring to be gutted and
salted on board as soon as caught (kaken} ; to wit :

Firstly, the faking and curing monopoly, restricting the
business to those who owned keeled and square-rigged
vessels ; forbidding them to fish unless between June 24th
and January 1st, or carry fish elsewhere than into Dutch
ports ; and subjecting fish, barrels, and fishing implements
to obligatory and strict assay.

Secondly, the carrying monopoly, restricting the liberty
to buy cure-herring at sea and carry it home to the earlier
part of the season, and virtually monopolising the supply
of herring, during that part of the season, in the hands
of the body called " Vereeniging van de Haringjagery"
by an enactment prohibiting fishing busses from sailing
home during " hunting time," unless with a full cargo.

Thirdly, the selling monopoly, empowering a wholesale-
dealing corporation called " Vereeniging van Zoutharing-
reederyen" during the whole of the season to determine
the quantity of cure-herring to be thrown on the market,
and the price to be put upon it. In order to enforce
adhesion to the rules established by this corporation,
premiums were only granted to such buss-owners as were
partners in it.

To make up for the first-named monopoly, the owners of
vessels excluded from it were invested with a monopoly of
the curing process called " steuren? i.e. salting herring
ungutted, preparatory to curage by smoke. But they were
prohibited from fishing for herring and preparing it in this way
until the beginning of autumn, when the other branch, or
" Grand Fishery," was no longer exercised on a large scale.

All herring fishery, including the cured, the smoked, and
the fresh, or " pan-herring " business, was protected by a

232 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

prohibition from importing any herring caught by foreigners,
or by Customs duties amounting to such a prohibition.

All sea-fisheries, including, besides those just named,
those of whale, cod, flounder, plaice, &c., were encouraged
by bounties more or less considerable.

It will be noticed that this system, whatever its faults,
was in its kind a well-ordained and finished organization.
Its main parts completed each other so that no single stone
of the building could be removed without endangering the
whole. The curing monopoly of the Grand Fishery, and
the smoking monopoly of the coast fishery, made the
prohibition from importing herring an absolute necessity, it
being impossible to let foreigners import articles which
some or most natives were forbidden to produce. Again,
the importing prohibition necessitated obligatory assay of
brand-herring ; for it would have been impossible to
prevent foreign cured-herring from being imported if
Dutch fishermen had bought it at sea, which they would
have done, in spite of the legal prohibition, if obligatory
assays at home had not made detection highly probable.
Next, Dutch fisheries being thus prevented, by a complete
set of legislative trammels, from following their natural
course of development and effectually facing the over-
whelming competition of English, Germans, and Norsemen,
they could not of course go without direct government
assistance, and would have altogether ceased to exist if
their losses had not been covered by premiums.

Finally, as the whole of the system was pointed towards
the main object of maintaining Dutch cured-Jierring as a fine
and expensive delicacy, and as this object was still aimed at
when the delicacy ceased to be in great demand abroad,
there could of course be but one chance of selling Dutch
herring at high figures, and that chance lay in restricting

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 233

the supplies. Thus, no considerable item could be missed
out of the system ; and if the public's eye should once be
thoroughly opened to the evils of one part, it must of a
necessity open to the wrongs of the whole.

We have now to consider the effects of the system of
which a sketch is given above, in the short period between
its reaching the highest degree of perfection, and its final
break-down. For a summary view of those effects, I beg to
refer the reader to the statistical tables contained in Ap-
pendices E, F, G, H, and I. The leading fact at once
apparent from the first three of these, is : that the Grand
Fishery, to wJwse interests the oilier branches of herring-fishery
were sacrificed, languished and decreased under extreme pro-
tection and regulation ; iv he re as the smoke-herring fishery,
being free in its oivn sphere of action, increased rapidly,
although the law precluded its produce from being prepared
to advantage,

Next, it will be seen from Table G, that from 1845
downward, the greater part of the herring caught by Dutch-
men, was prevented from being cured, or prepared to advantage,
in order to keep up the prices of the lesser part.

Exports of herring of course followed a course analogous
to that of production. Cured-herring exports remained
stationary, being prevented from increasing, firstly, by the
artificial dearth of the article and the lower prices of
foreign herring, and secondly by the elevated customs
tariffs against Dutch fish in most foreign countries, the
inevitable consequence of the prohibitive measures against
foreign herring in Holland. Smoked-herring, or " bucking?
being a cheap article, and fit for a poor man's food, was
better able to withstand these duties, and its exports
actually increased, though not in proportion to its pro-

E. 8. R

234 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

eduction.* As regards the operations of the Salt-herring
Shipowners' Association, or " Vereeniging van Zoutharing-
reederijen ' before alluded to, this corporation did in two
ways contribute to keep Dutch brand-herring at high
prices. Firstly, it limited the supply in the markets 'as
soon as a tendency to fall became manifest Secondly,
it greatly enhanced the cost of production of the article
as delivered to dealers. The association's expenses of
management, warehousing, &c., were excessively high, so
as often to swallow up the whole of the premium, and
make it the shipowner's interest to forego the bounty and
keep free of the association. Most shipowners indeed kept
within the latter, but mainly, it would appear, because the
association in course of time acted not only as their sole
client but their banker, and embarked in credit operations
entirely alien to its primitive sphere of action. f

Of the other branches of sea-fishery little need be said
during the period now under consideration. Whaling was
extinct, or very nearly so, and when mentioned at all in
the writings of the period, is spoken of as a trade lost to
the country. The somewhat reckless enterprise of the
African Whaling Company had been wrecked long ago,
during the English war. Of the several whaling companies
started within a few years from the renewal of premiums in
1815, the greater part liquidated shortly afterwards. One
corporation, of which King William I., a strenuous pro-
moter of all national industries, was a shareholder,
continued to work two old whaling vessels until a much

* Vide Appendix xxii. and xxiii. to the Report of the Committee on
Sea-Fisheries, 1854. I have refrained from reproducing these, and
other interesting statistical documents, in order not unnecessarily to
extend the volume of this work.

f Report of the Committee on Sea-Fisheries, 1854, p. 199.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 235

later period ; but the results were very unsatisfactory, and
the vessels took out of the country's pocket in premiums
some four-fifths of the total value they brought into it in
blubber and whalebone. Such was the effect of the
" indemnification ' bounty before mentioned, which was
paid to whalers, not for the fish they caught, but for those
they failed to catch.*

Iceland cod-fishery also continued in a state of extreme
insignificance,! having never recovered the effects of the
prohibitive duties on salt cod and haddock levied in foreign
countries, in the latter part of the eighteenth century.J
Hook-fishery in the North Sea continued to be of im-
portance, as a complement of the several herring-fisheries.

This branch of sea-fisheries, as to which I have not
succeeded in finding sufficient information at earlier periods,
at the time now spoken of bore something of an universal
character. It was exercised in herring-busses or " hookers,"
in sloops, and in bum-boats. Herring-fishers of all de-
scriptions made hooking their business at times when
nature provided no herring, or law forbade to catch it.
Most or all herring-busses used to go for cod and plaice in
spring, and continue the business till the end of May or
the first days of June, when the time came to prepare for
the first herring voyage. The lines used in this early
hook-fishery were made out of a peculiar kind of hemp
named kol ; whence this branch of hook-fishery was
commonly called kolvaart, and a hooking voyage arranged
so as to be back in time to equip the vessel for the cure-
herring season took the name of kolreis. Besides, some

* See Minister Thorbecke's speech on premiums in the Second
Chamber, on December 2ist, 1850.
f See Appendix H.
% See part ii. chap. iii.

R 2

236 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

herring-ships fished for cod in winter, using a gear of
somewhat different description called beng ; whence the
business was called beugvaart. Hook-fishery was thus a
resource for all herring-fishers to keep their capital con-
stantly in activity ; and the concern was the more
profitable, as several kinds of fish (cod, haddock, plaice,
&c.) were caught on the hooks, and an abundance of one
sometimes made up for a scarcity of another. I have not
found any separate and complete accounts of hook-fishery
by busses during the period now spoken of* But whatever
its actual importance, it certainly served to keep busses
afloat at times when market restrictions could not squeeze
a profit out of the herring returns, nor premiums cover
herring losses ; and it will be observed that this precious
resource in all seasons and for all fishermen was solely due
to the fact that, beyond a few restrictions as to herring
caught by cod-fishers, which have been spoken of above,
there was no legislation on hook-fishery. And even these
restrictions served to show the futility of the herring laws.
Hook-fishers were allowed to cure herring caught by them
after the i$th of July ; but in order to prevent any danger-
ous competition for the Grand Fishery, they were enjoined
to pack their herring as " mixed " (pngezonderd\ sell it in
open barrels, and have it branded with a peculiar mark.f
In spite of these several disadvantages, and, so to speak,
marks of infamy, it is fully proved that herring of this

* The importance of winter hook-fishery on the Dogger bank (bcng-
vaarf) is shown by Appendix I.

f The mark consisted in the word " kerf." North sea hook-fishers
were called kervers (or, in former centuries, carvers), from the
customary carving of haddock and flat-fish ; whence herring cured by
them, although it was not apparently submitted to any other carving
than consistent with the common method of curage, used to be called
kerfharing"

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 237

description brought to market by coast-fishermen from
Katwijk did, about 1850, fetch the same prices as regular
brand-herring sold at the same time.* It could not be
better proved that the vaunted superiority of herring caught
by busses over herring caught by bum-boats, and the
latter's unfitness for any curage unless by smoke, were
either fictions or rules fraught with many exceptions ; a
fact as to which the experience of later years has not left
the shadow of a doubt

Of fresh-fishery I have not found any peculiar account
during the period now spoken of. It was, indeed, no
longer a separate business, being exercised by bum-boats
of the North Sea coast, concurrently with hook and smoke-
herring fishery, and especially at seasons when the latter
was not permitted ; and all the year round, by a multitude
of small craft of various descriptions, in river-mouths of
Holland and Zealand, and in the Zuider Zee The trawl
was the fresh-fisher's favourite implement in the North Sea
during the months when its use was not prohibited. The
capture of anchovy, of which I have found scarcely any
positive mention made in earlier times, became an industry
of some importance in the first half of the present century,
when the Zuider Zee was especially its area, and it was
commonly carried on with a net of conic shape, and of
course very narrow, dragged between two ships ; probably
the same practice which we have seen prohibited in the
latter part of the iSth century. Anchovy-fishery has
always been subject to strong vicissitudes, and often gave
rise to reckless speculation on future fishing returns. Thus,
the annual quantity of anchovies brought to market at
Monnickendarii between 1847 and 1853 averaged about

* Report of the Committee on Sea-Fisheries, 1854, p. 90.

238 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

forty million ; but it was sixty-eight million in 1851, and
little more than one million in the next year.

I have now briefly to narrate why and how the system of
sea-fishery regulation and protection was relinquished.
. The main cause of this most important reform was the
fact that rational notions on political economy began to
prevail in the Netherlands in the second quarter of the
present century, especially after the secession of the Belgian
provinces in 1830. It was between 1830 and 1850 that
Free Trade was decidedly adopted as the base of the king-
dom's commercial policy ; and to its adherents nothing
could be more objectionable than sea-fishery protection in
its actual form. The evils of monopoly, and the folly of
paying bounties out of the public funds to encourage an
industry while keeping it down by rules, began now to be
fully realised, and public opinion, led by able writers in
periodicals, gradually turned away from the system. It did
indeed continue after most other items of protection had
been abandoned ; and the main reason of this is, that the
public at large were still kept in a state of excitement by
wonderful accounts of the herring fishery's ancient great-
ness, and taught to believe that this greatness had been
attained by similar protective measures as were now in
force ; whereas I have shown that the principal, and most
stringent of those measures were invented long after the
fisheries' decay had begun. But this was not known at the
time now spoken of. Whenever the subject was broached,
writers and speakers in the fishery interest used to declaim
out of Semcyns' and Raleigh's tales of wonder, and to take
it for granted that those splendours, in which they still
believed implicitly, were owing to our ancestors having
done as we did now. The curious cry of " Try not to be
wiser than thy fathers" was never raised with a more bois-

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 239

terous obstinacy than it was in matters of sea-fishery, as
soon as modern ideas began to prevail in the question.

Considerable light was thrown on the subject in 1842,
when Belgium increased its import duties on foreign fish,
to the prejudice of Dutch sea-fisheries ; and fishing ship-
owners loudly clamoured for more efficient protection. The
public mind was then strongly turned towards the question
of fishery protection ; and it became apparent that it was
impossible to allow the several fisjieries more protection than
they enjoyed ; while at the same time that naked fact, that
the brandies most strongly protected declined in spite of pro-
tection, was urged on the public's notice. The measures
proposed by the writers in the fishery interest were to
augment premiums, which expedient the Treasury interest
forbade to adopt, and to retaliate on Belgium by elevating
the duties, not on their fish, which was prohibited as it was,
but on sundry other articles imported from the former
southern provinces. The duties in Belgium were reduced
some years afterwards. But, in the meantime, the brisk
interchange of pamphlets and leading articles occasioned in
1842 by the Belgian protective measure, had the result of
bringing the subject of sea-fishery legislation in its full
extent before the Dutch public's eye.

A breach in the system, however, was not made till 1846;
and it was not then a wound in a vital part It was
reported by the Grand Fishery Committee in Holland, that
in 1845 herring entirely ripe had been caught by Scotch
fishermen some time before the consecrated opening of the
Dutch cure-herring fishery, so that the produce of the latter
was late in the market, much to the shipowners' and
dealers' detriment. A Bill was brought in, and passed
without opposition, by which Government was empowered
to anticipate the opening date of the Grand Fishery by a

240 THE HISTORY OP DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

period not exceeding a fortnight, i.e. fix it at any day
between June loth and 24th. The power was granted for
two years, but renewed for three more in 1848 ; and
the anticipation term was extended to twenty-three
days in 1851 and 1854. Under these laws, the date on
which the first casting of herring-nets should be permitted
was fixed by Government on June loth in the years
1846-50, and on June 1st in the years 1851-55.* The
measure was not attended by any decided success. The
first experiments of early fishing were indeed successful ;
but in nearly all the following years the results were un-
satisfactory, and most shipowners returned to the observa-
tion of the ancient St. John's Day rule, finding the returns
of early fishing did not cover the additional expenses
necessitated by it, or compensate the disadvantage of
having to quit the spring hook-fishery, or kolvaart, at an
early date, whereas that business was generally most pro-
fitable in the latter part of May. The advisability of early
fishing for cure-herring was a point of pretty constant
debate in the course of the above-named years ; shipowners
generally advising to observe St. John's Day rule, in spite
of the concurrence by early Scotch herring, and dealers
urging early voyages because of that concurrence. Now
dealers, although represented both in the College for the
Grand Fishery and in the Salt-herring Shipowners' Asso-
ciation, were in a minority in both Boards ; and conse-
quently the College, after a few years' trial, advised against

* Laws of May Qth, 1846 (Stbl. No. 35) ; May i8th, 1848 (Stbl. No.
21) ; May 2nd, 1851 (Stbl. No. 23) ; and April loth, 1854 (Stbl. No.
21). Decrees executive of these several laws, of May I2th, 1846
(Stbl. No. 41) ; May iQth, 1848 (Stbl. No. 24) ; May 8th, 1851 (Stbl.
No. 51) ; May 3rd, 1852 (Stbl. No. 21) ; April 28th, 1853 (Stbl. No.
24), and April 22nd, 1854 (Stbl. No. 70).

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 241

continuation of the early fishing system, recommended by
them in 1846. The main cause of opposition to early
fishing was the Herring-hunting Association's contrary in-
terest. This corporation, or rather annual covenant between
shipowners, generally found it inconvenient to equip one or
more " hunters " for the sole benefit of the few shipowners
who chose to try an early cast of the nets ; and all ship-
owners were obliged to be partners in the association and
act upon its rules, in order to have some of their fish brought
into market early and sold at the high prices prevalent
during the first days of the season. As a fact, the liberty
to fish before St. John's Day, though in itself desirable
because good herring was sometimes caught at an earlier
date, could only be of real use if the sale-hunting monopoly
were abolished, and any buss allowed to transfer fish to any
other, or sail home at any date with or without a full cargo.
Thence the discussion of the laws for early fishing served
to throw some light on the evils of the hunting monopoly,
and are therefore of importance in the history of the regu-
lation system, although the lawful opening date of the fish-
eries was not in itself one of its constitutive elements pro-
perly said, and could be altered without necessarily affecting
the rest. Wherefore the measure of 1 846 was not, properly
speaking, the beginning of the system's destruction.

Premiums were the vital point in which the system was
attacked. It has already been shown that, as sea-fisheries
were regulated, bounties to them were necessary and
equitable ; and that, on the other hand, the fallacies of the
bounty system were by this time found out in Holland,
not only by political economists, but by the greater part of
the enlightened and disinterested public. Fishery bounties
threw a peculiarly strong light on the inherent defects of the
system : for the trade declined in spite of them, and had,

242 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

indeed, been in constant decline since bounties had first
been given. Accordingly, when in the course of the years
1830-50 Parliament began seriously to oppose protection,
the annual budget debates usually brought on a discussion
on fishery premiums. The latter were especially the object
of pretty general censure in the course of the debates on
the budget for 1850, when their gradual abolition was de-
manded in unequivocal terms. Sea-fishery bounties at this
period occasioned an average annual expenditure of about
two hundred thousand florins, or some £17,000 sterling, a
large sum for so small a State, especially as it was now felt
to be poured into a Danaid's vat ; and Government, besides
being opposed to premiums as a principle, was of course
anxious to reduce or if possible to stop this drain upon the
Exchequer. The Department for home affairs, under which
matters relative to national industry at the time resorted,
was then headed by no less a statesman than the great Mr.
Thorbecke ; and he saw clearly that bounties must be
stopped, and fishery laws must ultimately follow. A
reversed order of repeal might have been preferable, but a
good deal of inquiry had yet to be gone through before
determining how far the fishery law reform was to go. The
subject was darl: and delicate, and it was not easy to pro-
cure information upon it unless from fishermen, who one
and all clung to the wisdom of their fathers and to the
country's money, and did their best to oppose or retard
reform. Meanwhile, to save money by simplifying institu-
tions (bezuiniging door vereenvoudiging) was at the time the
popular cry in home politics, and the treasury interest was
imperative against the continuation of premiums. Their
abolition (by degrees of course) was therefore resolved upon ;
and all sea-fishery bounties were reduced by one-tenth by
royal decree of February 27th, 1851 (Staatscourant No. 52),

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 243

under express statement that the step was taken prepara-
tory to the entire abolition of premiums. The stone was
now set rolling ; and it was generally understood that the
whole of sea-fishery legislation was at issue.

The measure of course elicited strong opposition. The
whole of the fishing interest, from this moment downward,
clamoured against a step which, as they represented it,
deprived their tottering trade of its sole support ; but failed
to see and to appreciate the equivalent of liberty for boun-
ties, \vhich was being prepared for them. Parliament had
approved the measure before it was taken. The budget
estimate of sea-fishery bounties for 1851 had been lowered
by about one-tenth, in accordance with the intentions of
Government, and upon previous recommendations by a
majority in the Second Chamber. During the debates on
the budget, in a memorable night sitting on December 21 st,
1850,* a Conservative member, Mr. Wintgens, who in the
next years gave much of his attention to fishery matters,
moved an amendment to carry the estimate up again to
fl. 1 72,000, or the sum granted in the preceding year. The
honourable gentleman declared himself, as protectionists
without number have done since, an adherent of free trade
in principle, and, 'as such, averse to bounties as a rule ; but
he claimed circumspection in the rule's application, and this
circumspection, in his opinion, was inconsistent even with
a 10 per cent, reduction of premiums. A protracted debate
ensued, in which the whole of the arguments for premiums,
such as they were, were brought out. The importance of
the Grand Fishery, even in its then reduced state, and the
folly of letting it go to ruin, were exposed at a length the
more remarkable, as the debate opened at one and lasted
till past three in the morning, an occurrence extremely rare
* Handelingen v. d. Staten-Geitefaal, 1850-1, p. 461, sqq.

244 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

in Dutch parliamentary habits. But no one succeeded in
proving, or indeed attempted on logical and historical
grounds to prove the point at issue, viz. that bounties could
save tJie fisJieries ; and the fact that British herring-fishery
had increased rapidly since the discontinuance of bounties
in 1830, was the only truly relevant and conclusive argu-
ment preferred in the course of the debate. The result of
the night's proceedings was the rejection of Mr. Wintgens'
amendment by forty-five votes against sixteen ; in other
words, a sentence of death passed on premiums, and im-
plicitly on the fishery legislation system in general.

A very important point was now gained ; and a reform
leading to the ultimate establishment of free fishery was
but a matter of time. Government made no secret of its
preoccupation to examine into the subject of fishery law
repeal, and on several occasions, declared in Parliament
that the matter was under its constant consideration. It
was now to be considered how far, and how fast, the
reform was to go. A considerable majority in the Second
Chamber of the States-General (or House of Repre-
sentatives) from 1851 downward lost no occasion to de-
mand immediate and complete repeal of all fishery laws
and regulations ; but as yet the many evident and latent
difficulties of the subject forbade such a course. Existing
laws were extremely complicated, sundry interests were
involved in the matter ; and although in a rational state
of things those interests might have been in perfect
harmony, monopoly laws had since centuries brought
them into collision. Some points, such as the propriety of
laws for the protection of fish-life, were overhung
with positive uncertainty ; all were darkened by con-
tending one-sided representations from the various parties
concerned, each of whom, as usual in cases of this nature,

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 245

nervously clung to its own prima facie interest ; and yet
Government could scarcely hear any but parties concerned,
as no one else was supposed to be a judge of a matter so
dependent on personal experience. Cure-herring fishers,
for instance, insisted on their monopoly, which smoke-
herring fishers wanted to be overthrown ; the case was
exactly the reverse as regarded the smoke-herring or
" steurharing ' monopoly; and whom could the Minister
consult, unless either cure or smoke-herring shipowners ?
Three Fishery Boards were then in existence : one for
the Grand Fishery, one for the fresh-herring and coast
fisheries, and one for the Iceland cod-fishery ; and on the
several monopolies, the cod-fishers' permission to cure, and
the distribution or abolition of premiums, no two of these,
when consulted by the Home Department, were of one
mind. The whole of the questions involved in the fishery
laws were therefore peculiarly hard to elucidate ; and the
inquiry preparatory to further measures took some years
to lead to a result. And yet Government was at first
resolved to rely solely on such information as could be
collected by the customary canals of office. Mr. Wintgens,
the member of Parliament quoted above, in October 1852
proposed an Inquiry into the whole of the subject by
parliamentary committee, an institution then just introduced
into Dutch constitutional law. There was much opposition
to the plan ; the more so, as a suspicion prevailed that its
mover's intention was to have bounties re-established, or at
least to counteract their gradual suppression. Mr. Wint-
gens strongly denied the charge ; but he nevertheless
withdrew his proposition at the Minister's request, who
declared that a Government inquiry was then proceeding
and about to be terminated.

Political events entirely alien to the fishery questions

246 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

occasioned Mr. Thorbeckc's Cabinet to withdraw from
office in the spring of 1853, before the inquiry had led to
satisfactory results. Before this, however, the great
statesman had taken further steps in the path npon which
we have seen him enter. By decree of January loth, 1852,
the reduction of bounties had been carried, for that year,
to 25 per cent; and it was carried to 50 by decree of
January 5th, 1853. The prohibition from trawling in winter
contained in the decrees of 1825 and 1837, and mentioned
in the preceding chapter, was also withdrawn under
Mr. Thorbecke's administration ; the initial term of pro-
hibited trawling being shifted from November I5th to
December I5th, in November 1852, and the prohibition
removed altogether in January 1853.* The latter measure
consisted in the entire repeal of the decree of November
1 5th, 1825, including the control over the nets used in coast
fishery, and the premiums for hook-and-line-fishery, during
the time when trawling was prohibited. Coast fishery was
now free, both in the choice of its implements and the
regulation of its fishing time ; and the only measure for
the protection of fish life still in vigour was the decree
of 1842, on the use of the shrimp net or saayein.

Minister van Reenen, Mr. Thorbecke's successor in the
Home Department, found the sea-fishery question in this
state on coming into office. Being unacquainted with the
precise bearings and antecedents of the matter, he was not
prepared at once to act in it, and for the moment stopped
the process of repeal, by leaving premiums for 1854 at the
rate of the preceding year, or half the original amountf
The Minister stated his intention to this effect when laying

* Decrees of November 24th, 1852 (Stbl. No. 202), and January
2Qth, 1853 (Stbl. No. 8).

f Royal Decree, January 9th, 1854 (Stbl. No. 9).

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 247

the budget for 1854 before the States-General ; and the
result was a sharp debate on December 3rd, 1853, in the
course of which an amendment to continue the reduction
of bounties was moved, and rejected by a majority of only
one vote.* The Minister's principal reason for leaving
matters in statu quo for the nonce was, that he saw a
rashness in a farther reduction of premiums unless attended
by repeal of the fishery regulation laws, which thorough
measure was not as yet warranted by the information
obtained by Government inquiry. The debate once more
showed the extreme anxiety of a strong majority in the
Second Chamber to go through with the matter, and have
done with the fishery laws ; and this moved Government,
at the outset of the year 1854 to appoint a Royal
Committee to inquire into the question " whether all
sea-fishery laws and regulations could be repealed al-
together, or whether it was desirable to maintain, or re-
enact any part of them."f

Parties immediately concerned in sea-fishery, as may be
readily supposed, had not in the meantime been silent in
the debate. Both the actual reduction of premiums and
the proposed repeal of protective laws, were the object
of violent criticism and passionate appeal by the organs of
the fishery interest. Kemper's advice in favour of the law
of 1818, although given in circumstances long gone by,
and overthrown by forty years' experience, did daily
service in this discussion. The importance of the fisheries
as an ancient branch of genuine national industry, as
having been once the " principal gold-mine of the country,"

* Handelingen van de Tiveede Kamer, 1853-4, p. 288 sqq.

t Royal Decree of February 9th, 1854, No. 57. The Committee's
Report was published 1854, and has been quoted more than once in
the course of this work.

248 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

as a recruiting-school for the navy, &c. &c., was passionately
urged ; and the two main points to be established, viz., the
possibility of upholding the business by maintaining
bounties and laws, and the certainty of destroying it by
repealing both, were taken for granted without examina-
tion. The nation was used to such demonstration. Out-
cries of a similar nature had been raised in succession
against each of the several reforms by which, since the
Belgian revolution of 1830, Free Trade had gradually been
established as a standard principle in Dutch economical
policy. There had been a majority, both in and out of
Parliament, to back those several measures ; and the evils
prophesied as sure to attend them had not been felt. Free
Trade at the time was implicitly believed in, and was
successful. Wherefore on the public at large, and on
Parliament especially, the fishery opposition made little or
no impression.

Nor was Fishery Law Reform entirely stopped during the
first part of Mr. van Reenen's administration. The States
of the several Provinces, actuated by the several fishery
colleges, and subject to Government approbation, were, as
has been shown, legislators in most of the detailed fishery
rules ; and in this quality they took a share, even before
the legislative power of the realm, in the removal of
fishery regulations. The rules concerning fresh, or smoke-
herring fishery first underwent considerable alteration at
the fishers' own request, as preferred by the college for the
fresh-herring and coast fishery. The decree relative to the
subject, dated December 3ist, 1822, had been repealed in
1848, and replaced by two consonant statutes for the
Provinces of North and South Holland, into which the
former province of Holland had been divided in 1840 ; but
as regards their principal contents, these two enactments

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 249

were not at variance with the Statute of 1822.* In 1854
at the request of the States of both provinces, the Regu-
lations were altered on two important heads, by the
abolition of last money, till then levied from all fresh-
herring fishers by the College, and the shifting of the fresh-
herring fishery's opening date from September 2Oth to
August 2Oth of each year.f The latter alteration especially
indicated a slackening of the monopolising spirit, as on
August 2Oth cure-herring fishery was still in full activity
on the Scotch or English coasts, whereas the former
opening date of the fresh-herring business had been
contrived with a view to keep bumboats out of the herring
seas altogether during the height of the cure-herring
season. A month afterwards the States of South Holland,
(in whose province nearly the whole of the Grand Fishery
was then centred) took another and much more decisive
step towards the abolition of the curing monopoly, by
permitting bumboats to cure all herring caught in the
course of any voyage commenced after October loth.
The measure had been strongly urged by the Fresh-herring
and Coast Fishery College in the course of the preceding
year, and was then retarded, not by any unwillingness on
the part of provincial authorities, but by the naked fact of
the request having been preferred too late for sanction by
the Provincial States ordinary summer meeting.^ This
very important breach in the Grand Fishery's curing
monopoly was sanctioned by Royal Decree of Septem-
ber 5th, 1854 (Staatsblad, No. 132), in virtue of the Royal
qualification, established by clause 16 of the law of

* Royal Decrees of August 22nd, 1848 (Staatsblad, Nos. 36, 37)
f Decrees of August 7th, 1854 (Staatsblad, Nos. 109, no).
% See Mr. Gevers van Endegeest's speech on premiums in the
Second Chamber, on December 3rd, 1853.

E. 8. S

250 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

iSiS,* to grant dispensations from the said monopoly. It
will be remembered that the said royal qualification had
contributed to make the law of 1818 acceptable to such
members of Parliament as then objected to monopolies
as a principle. // was now used for the first time, at a
moment when the repeal of the law itself was looked for
on all hands, and in immediate perspective.

On September 29th, 1854, or exactly a fortnight after
the momentous date on which the curing monopoly
was thus broken into, the Royal Committee appointed in
February of the same year laid their Report before the
Home Department. If any doubt remained in an unpre-
judiced mind as to the propriety of doing away with the
whole of the sea-fishery laws, this very remarkable docu-
ment was sufficient to dispel it. It was the result of an
inquiry at once thorough, impartial, and dispassionate ; and
it laid before the public, in a clear and terse resumption,
the whole outlines of the sea-fishery system, its faults, and
its effects. The Committee's members, four in number, had
been selected out of the Permanent Committees of the
Provincial States (Gedeputeerde Staten) of South and
North Holland ; they had, therefore, had ample occasion in
the fulfilment of their daily official duties to acquire well-
founded views on sea-fishery questions. Their secretary,
now Professor Buys, has since achieved an eminent career
in science and political literature. The report was hence-
forward the elementary handbook for any one desirous to
form an opinion in sea-fishery matters. The public at
large, as has been said, was then strongly disposed against
Protection ; but it is more than probable that most were
unacquainted with the exact bearings of the case for and

* Appendix D.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 251

against Protection as applied to fisheries, until they had
read the Committee's Report.

It is needless here to dwell on the contents of the
document, as most of the matter contained in it has been
more amply developed in the preceding pages than in the
Report itself. A special mention, however, ought to be made
of Appendix I to the Report, containing an account of wit-
nesses examined. Nearly all these witnesses were concerned
in fishery or trade in fish ; and their evidence, taking all in
all, was a mass of contradiction. Parties concerned in the
Grand Fishery in 1854 stoutly maintained that obligatory
assay of cured-herring was the only way of warranting its
quality, and fairly did warrant it ; whereas two great dealers
in fish stated in as many words that assay, as then practised,
gave no warrant whatever, and one of them added that, if made
facultative, it might be quite as efficient as when obligatory.
Cured-herring fishers and their representatives denied that
herring caught by bumboats could yield a tolerable article
when cured ; fresh-herring bumboat owners, as well as
herring dealers, were entirely confident as to the contrary,
and if -they did not strongly insist on the removal of the
Grand Fishery's monopoly, it was chiefly because their own
was expected to be withdrawn together with the other.
One dealer averred that the " Vereeniging van Zoutharing-
reederyen " was ruining herring commerce by enforcing
artificial prices and restraining supplies. Another (who
was also a shipowner) stated that, as things were, the
association acted for the best of both fishers and dealers
by regulating the market ; but added that entire liberty
was the only chance for the herring fishery, whereas
delegates from the College of the Grand Fishery strongly
insisted on having existing laws maintained, and one buss-
owner from Enkhuizen went the length of stating, in the

S 2

252 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

face of the most conclusive statistical evidence, that no
decline of the cured-herring fishery had occurred under
those laws for twenty years.

Summing up the results of its inquiry, the Committee
came to a set of conclusions, which may be rendered as
follows : —

The aim of the fishery laws is to have herring sold in
small quantities at high prices. The interest of both fishers
and consumers requires herring to be abundant and cheap.
Therefore the laws ought to be abolished.

And to this end, the Committee laid the draft of a Bill
before Government, the chief purport of which was as
follows : —

Everybody to be free to fish when, how, and where he finds
convenient. Foreign sea-fish to be imported duty free.

Assays of herring to be made facultative. Government
to have assayers and branders at the disposal of all who
shall require their herring to be branded. Assayers to be
appointed by a College for the Netherlands sea-fisheries,
which shall have no other administrative functions whatever,
but be a Consultative Board to Government on sea-fishery
matters, a majority in which shall be composed of men not
personally concerned in the trade.

As exceptions to the general rule of free fishery, the
Committee advised to re-enact the prohibition from trawling
in winter along the coasts, and to maintain the law against
the use of the shrimp-trawl whenever fry of fish should have
been found in it The reason for these exceptions was,
that most of the fishers examined by the Committee be-
lieved in the exhaustibility of the coast waters by the
unrestricted use of ground-nets.

The case had now been heard to satiety. All parties
had pleaded their side of it ; both the public and the

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 253

legislative power were fully enabled to pronounce ; and
a termination of debate was an urgent necessity, as the
state of uncertainty about ulterior measures, combined with
the suppression of premiums while restrictions remained,
for some years reduced the herring fishery at a fast pace
indeed. More than a year, however, was still suffered to
elapse before a final decision was asked from the legislative
power ; and the only steps taken in 1855 were a further re-
duction of both premiums and monopolies, within the range
of Government competency. By Decree of January pth
(Staatscourant, No. 10), the reduction of premiums, which
had been stopped at 50 per cent, in 1854, was carried to 75
per cent. ; and no provision for premiums was made in the
budget for the next year, so that none were paid from 1856
downward. Next, the Grand Fishery's curing monopoly
having been impaired in 1854, by allowing coast-fishermen
to cure herring after October I5th, the coast-fishers'
monopoly was reciprocally broken into in 1855, by allowing
buss-shippers to salt herring for smoking (steuren) after
August 2Oth, or the coast fishery's opening day.* Com-
petition was thus opened, within certain limits, in both
branches of fishery ; and buss and bumboat owners, from
the season of 1855 downward, were each others' competitors
on tolerably fair terms, except so far as the latter continued
to be precluded from curing in summer.

This remnant of the curing monopoly, besides those of
carrying and selling, the prohibition against importing
foreign fish, and the rest of the edifice of sea-fishery protec-
tion, were now to be cancelled. A law was necessary for
this ; for the said institutions were either contained in or
directly based upon the law of 1818.

* Royal Decree of August 2nd, 1855 (Bijvoegsel op het Staatsblad,
P- 347).

254 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

On December 4th and 7th, 1855, Minister van Reenen
brought in two Bills for the final abolition of the system the
development and effects of which have been the principal
subject of the preceding pages.

One of these Bills, treating of sea-fisheries, was a repro-
duction of the draft made out by the Committee more
than a year before. The other, treating of Customs duties
on fish, reduced these duties to an amount equivalent to
10 per cent, on salt and cured-herring and miscellaneous
salt fish (rommeling) of foreign catch, and abolished them
for all other descriptions of fish, whether fresh, salt, dried,
or smoked, including shell-fish. The duty on salt-herring
was fixed at fl. 1*50, or two shillings and sixpence, on
the barrel of 150 pounds. The duty on herring was
simply meant as a transitory measure not to expose the
fishery at once to the full effect of unrestrained foreign
competition. It should be noticed that the absolute pro-
hibition to import any foreign herring contained in the law
of 1818 had in the meantime been slightly mitigated. As
the Customs tariff stood in 1855, cured-herring was still
prohibited, but salt-herring not cured was permitted to be
imported in the months between November and May,
subject to a duty of fl. 3 on the 100 pounds, and "buck-
ing," or smoked-herring, was admitted at all times under a
duty of fl. 0*90 on the thousand.

These two Bills were kept under consideration for a year
and a half, owing to a series of mutations in office actuated
by political motives alien to the subject of this work. As
far as the prevalent opinions in Parliament were concerned
both Bills might have been passed in a few weeks. Free
Trade, as said, strongly prevailed in Parliament ; and as
every system is carried to extremities in the first period of
its triumph, so " doctrinarism " in Free Trade, and the

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 255

uncompromising principle of " laissez faire, laissez passer/'
was predominant with the Liberal side in politics. Thence
the history of the Fishery Bills may properly be contained
in a very few words. Government went a fair length
Free Trade way, and Parliament urged them still farther.

Opposition to the leading idea of the Bills was now con-
fined to the circle of fishery interest, and to those few
publicists who, in the days of which we are speaking,
openly advocated Protection. In Parliament scarcely a
show was made of opposition to Fishery Law Repeal. The
Sections' Report on both the Bills commenced by the
auspicious statement that the principle laid down by
Government had met with nearly universal approbation.
Everything which looked like an exception to that principle
was objected to. Not a few members wanted the fishery
law to consist solely of a clause repealing all existing laws
and decrees on the subject — in other words, they wanted
the facultative assay, the advising College, and the measures
against destruction of fish-life, to be removed out of the
Bill, and all Customs duties on fish to be abolished at once.
Assay of herring, they said, yielded no proper warrant as
to quality, and retarded those expeditions of early herring
by which very high prices were made during the first days
of each season. The trawling and shrimping restrictions
were regarded as unnecessary ; and it was shown upon the
occasion that, as to the period when, and the place and
depth where, spawn of plaice, sole, flounder, &c., arc found
in the sea, the opinions of pisciculturists and fishermen
were then anything but consistent. Some said that spawn
of these fish lay on the bottom, and was therefore destroyed
by the trawl-net ; others averred that it swam in the water,
and did not suffer from a trawling apparatus. According
to some, the period when spawn and fry required undis-

256 THE HISJORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

turbed development lay between November and February ;
others stated that plaice full of spawn had been caught in
May. A conclusive argument against restrictions was
drawn from the fact that they did not exist in the Zuider Zee,
where plaice, flounder, and turbot survived the effect of the
most absolute fishing liberty. It might have been added
that the trawl had been used in the North Sea without a
restriction for centuries ; that its use had only been inter-
rupted or curtailed between 1676-89, and 1825-53 ; and
that exhaustion of the coast waters, or scarcity of fish
positively attributable to over-fishing, had never occurred,
and the year 1856 was particularly beneficent for trawlers
and coast-fishers in general. Besides, foreigners were not
subject to the prohibitive laws, and were free to trawl off the
Dutch coasts in all seasons ; and, as a writer on the subject
not inadequately remarked, " if the sea could indeed be
emptied or fisJied dead (doodgevischt\ it was but fair that
Dutchmen should have their share of the burial feast."
The rule for a temporary prohibition of the use of the
shrimp net, whenever fry of fish should have been found in
such a net, was opposed on similar grounds. It sacrificed
one branch of fishery to another ; and many held that fish
born under the Dutch coast will migrate to other waters
ere it be full-grown, whence to protect such fish in early
life would be to put bread into the mouths of Belgians,
French and Germans, who would have the benefit of the
lives so preserved, although they did not use reciprocity in
the matter. Even a College, or Board of Fisheries, was ob-
jected to, although its proposed attributes were merely to
supervise assays, and advise Government in fishery matters.
The paralysing sway so long held over fishermen by Boards,
Colleges, and Associations of a very different nature
evidently scared some of the more uncompromising Free

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 257

Traders, and made them shun the notion of having a Board
at all.

These men of thorough measures did not, however,
ultimately carry the day. The Fishery Bill was debated on
March 7th, 1857 ; and facultative assay of herring, as well
as an advising College, obtained a majority. On the other
hand, a learned and lengthy speech by a member versed in
natural history settled the fate of restrictions on trawling
and shrimping, and they were removed by amendment.
The law, as ultimately adopted,* simply established the
entire liberty of all sea fishery in the largest sense of the
word, and repealed all prohibitions of the importation of sea-
fish. Next it established facultative assays of herring caught
in Dutch vessels, and instituted a College to appoint assayers
and generally promote the sea-fisheries' interests by advising
Government in matters relative to them. The Bill on
Customs duties on fish underwent some vicissitudes. It was
amended so as at once to abolish all such duties ; and the
amendment was carried in the Lower House by a majority
of one vote. The Upper House, or First Chamber of the
States-General, then rejected the Bill by a slight majority.
Government brought it in once more, in its primitive
wording, in September 1857, when a fresh conflict was
avoided by an amendment reducing duties on salt-herring
and " rommeling " to half the amounts proposed. Their
entire abolition took place two years afterwards.f

Provincial regulations were repealed soon after the new
law was passed, as contrary to its purport ; and a new law
as a base for future administrative rules on the immunity of

* Dated June i3th, 1857 (Staatsblad, No. 86). An error in the text
was removed by law of August I3th, 1857 (Staatsblad, No. 102).

t Laws of Dec. nth, 1857 (Staatsblad, No. 122) and Dec. 23rd,
1859 (Staatsbladt No. 136).

258 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

salt excise was established simultaneously with the new
Customs tariff on fish.* Some control against fraud is of
course inevitable whenever an article subject to excise
duty is exempted from it when consumed for one special
purpose ; and the object of the new regulation was to
make that control as easy as possible for fishermen, as a
compensation for eventual damage by foreign competition
attendant upon the reduced tariff.

A regulation upon assays of herring was made in time
before the opening of the herring season of 1858.! The
new rules were as simple as was consistent with main-
taining the accustomed appearance of Dutch brand-herring.
The old distinctions of " full-maatjes," " ijlen," any of these
either sound or " wrak" were maintained, with a brand for
each. To these was added a new brand for " overnight,"
or herring cured the day after its capture, which process
was now permitted, whereas former regulations forbade
such herring to be cured. A new distinction was likewise
made between herring caught in deep sea, under the North
Sea coast, and in the Zuider Zee ; the latter, two qualities
being now allowed to be cured as well as the one first

o

named. Every barrel of assayed herring was thus to carry
two brands, one stating its description, and the other where
it was caught. The figure of the brand, formerly repre-
senting a lion, was altered into the royal crown ; and it
will be shown in the next chapter what evil consequences
attended that alteration. Assayers were to brand all
herring presented to them, unless the barrel were defective,
or not stamped with the owner's mark and filled from
top to bottom with herring of one single description. Care
was thus taken that there should be a Dutch brand as of

* Law of Dec. nth, 1857 (Staatsblad, No. 123).
f Decree of January nth, 1858 (Staatsblad, No. 2).

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 259

old, to which foreign dealers were used ; but any one who
chose was free to sell or export unbranded herring.

Sea-fishery Reform was now complete, and the trade
allowed entire liberty in every respect. I shall briefly
relate, in a last chapter, what effects were wrought by the
measure.

CHAPTER IV.

REVIVAL.

IT is, I believe, a fact now known on every considerable
fish market that Dutch sea-fisheries have been increasing fast
for the last fifteen years. There is no need of words to
state the fact ; it may be seen at a glance from the fishery
statistics of the last twenty-five years, the leading figures of
which I have compiled from the annual Reports of the
College, or Board of Sea-fisheries, instituted in 1857, and
beg to lay before the reader in Appendices K, L, and M.
It now remains to be shown how the increase, and indeed
the entire revival of the business, was a direct consequence
of fishing liberty substituted for fishery regulation. The
task is an easy one ; for, from 1857 downward, the above-
named Reports contain every particular relative to the
history of Dutch sea-fisheries.

The revival alluded to is nowhere so apparent as in the
herring fisheries ; for a general survey of which, from 1857
downward, I refer the reader to Appendix K. It will be
seen from this table : —

ist. — That bumboat fishers in the coast villages used
their new-gotten right to cure herring on an insignificant
scale for some ten years after they had obtained it.

2ndly. — That the prices fetched by their cured-herring
were, on an average, not much inferior to those of " buss-
herring " cured in keeled vessels.

260 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

ydly- -That they began to cure herring on a much
larger scale in 1866 and subsequent years.

4////j'.--That the whole production of cured-herring, and
the number of ships employed in that production, took a
leap upwards about the same time, and they have since then
been constantly increasing.

^thly. — That a gradual lowering of cured-herring prices
(see the lowest prices in columns 12 and 14) coincides with
the increase of production.

Thus the irrefutable verdict of statistics now corrobo-
rates what one corporation realised in 1829, and what the
Committee on Fisheries in 1854 set down as the funda-
mental idea of reform, viz. that abundant capture, and not
high prices, were the means of restoring the Dutch herring
fisheries ; whereas the ancient system was based on the
opposite theory.

Abundant capture (setting aside, of course, the
vicissitudes of herring seasons) could only be, and was,
obtained by means of improvement in the fishing processes.
The progress of these improvements may be described as
follows : the net of hemp was supplanted by the cotton net,
the use of the cotton . net brought luggers and cutters into
use instead of the old clumsy " hookers " ; and the use of
new nets and ships caused the capture to increase five-fold
in fifteen years. The cotton net therefore gave the
impulse to the thorough revival of the fishery ; and the
cotton net could not have been used under the Grand Fishery
Regulation, 1827, which prescribed all nets to be made of
hemp yarn.

An eminent shipowner, Mr. A. E. Maas, of Scheveningen,
was the first to import cotton herring-nets from Lowestoft,
about 1857 ; and at the outset used those nets in bum-
boats only. The superior catching power of the nets at

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 261

once became apparent. Being much lighter than hemp,
larger fleets could be used, and more water covered ; and
at the same time their depth could be made greater
without the weight causing the upper meshes to contract,
and be of no avail. But, as a set-off to their lightness,
cotton nets were found subject to more wear and tear than
the solid net of the ancestors. Mr. Maas spent some years
in tanning and boiling experiments to make them as
durable as hemp ; and cotton prices being at the time up, in
consequence of the American war, it was not till 1865 that
the use of cotton nets fairly began to spread among herring
ship-owners.

Several causes besides the dearth of cotton meantime
counteracted the effect of the new law. Both shipowners
and dealers had to get accustomed to liberty before
learning how to turn it to account. A body of men
brought up from childhood to strict observation of a set of
rules precluding all innovation whatever, could scarcely be
expected, immediately upon the withdrawal of those rules,
to turn their attention to novelties, and invest money in
experiments, or look abroad for examples, all of which
operations they had been taught to regard as the breaking
of sacred laws. Fetter a man down through life, and when
set free he will be some time in recovering the use of his
limbs. Besides these psychological causes for a continued
stagnation, positive checks at first kept the herring-fishery
down. Years elapsed before an enlightened administration,
advised by a College of competent men, could, under the
salt excise law of 1857, regulate the conditions of freedom
of salt excise for fishermen in such a manner as not to
thwart the development of the several branches of sea-
fishery. The herring seasons of 1857-1861 were in
general unfavourable, and the returns below the average,

262 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

and sometimes bad. Much capital had of late been lost
in the business ; and the state of suspense in which it had
been kept between 1850 and 1857, when bounties were
gradually withdrawn and uncertainty prevailed as to future
fishing liberty, had especially done much to reduce it, and
scare fresh capital away. Extensive markets, such as
those of Northern Germany, Hamburg, Bremen, and
Stettin, which in former centuries were supplied by Dutch
brand-herring exclusively, were now entirely lost ; and
customs tariffs in some countries thwarted an extension of
exports, while Scotch herring was prevalent everywhere,
and very far ahead in the race. The commercial treaty
with Belgium expired on January 1st, 1858 ; and the severe
prejudice caused to Dutch fisheries by the elevation of
tariffs attendant upon the event was by no means counter-
balanced by the abolition of differential duties against
importation of Dutch fish in Russia, which took place in
the next year. But the greatest enemies of Dutch herring
in the markets abroad, it must be owned, were Dutch
dealers. Prices of good Dutch brand-herring were then
still as a rule above those of Scotch ; and no sooner was
importation of herring permitted than some Dutch dealers
hastened to import Scotch herring of anything but the
best quality, and export it repacked, not under the new
Dutch crown-brand, but in old barrels marked with the
abolisJied brand, consisting of the figure of a lion. The
fraud was generally detected too late by foreign buyers,
because the change in the brand had not been efficiently
brought to the knowledge of dealers abroad ; and when
detected and reported on it could not be punished, because
it had been omitted to enact penalties against the use of
abolished brands. Thus the liberty to forego assay was at
first misapplied for purposes of delusion, and the perpetrators

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 263

of the fraud of course were themselves the victims of their
short-sighted artifice. The alteration of assay rules in 1858
contributed to spoil the market. Under the Regulation of
1827 herring was assayed and sorted with tolerable accuracy
immediately upon being landed, and a preliminary mark was
generally put on the barrels to certify the result. The large
barrels, loosely packed as they were on board, where close
and careful packing of herring was an impossibility, were next
sold to wholesale dealers, and by them delivered into the
hands of packers, who transferred the fish to barrels of the
regulation size, shape and construction, and the article was,
by this re-packing, prepared to receive the official brand
for exportation. These packers, who were alone entitled
to transfer herring from the " sea barrel ' (ton zeestuks) into
the brand-barrel, were public officials, and under oath, like
the assayers themselves, whence there was a fair certainty
that the contents of the " sea-barrels " should be transferred
to the exportation barrel without any tampering ; and the
barrels issuing from the packers' hands could be, and were
generally, branded by the assayer with the exportation
brand, without renewed examination of their contents.
Under the Regulation of 1858, which was the first piece of
work prepared by the new College (and owned by them in
their Report for 1859 to have been deficient in several
points) there were no sworn "packers," and the assayers'
own verification was required for the exportation brand as
well as for the first marking of the sea-barrel ; the latter
operation being still a requisite to shield first-hand buyers
against fraud. Now, however diligent the assayers (and as
to their diligence and honesty there are no serious complaints
to my knowledge) it was beyond their power to effectually
and twice control the immense quantities of fish subjected
to them under the spur and hurry of the early " hunting '

264 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

days of the season, when every dealer was anxious to have
thousands of barrels branded and exported at once. The
first assay upon landing was done as usual, and the first
sale of the herring to the inland wholesale dealer was
effected upon its credit ; but for thoroughly performing
the second there was no time left, and the inspection
previous to giving the crown-brand was generally very
superficial, allowing much refuse of the Scotch fisheries to
obtain the Dutch brand, and spoil its renown abroad. A
revision of the branding rules in 1860, and another in 1861,*
intended to introduce an easier mode of control, and pre-
vent foreign herring from obtaining the Dutch brand, failed
to accomplish the purpose. Both the old and new brands
continued to be put on bad foreign herring ; and the fraud
was even turned into open connivance with foreign dealers,
who had " Scotch herring in Dutch fustage," consigned to
them at prices above those of Scotch and under those of
genuine Dutch fish, and in their turn made their clients
pay the latter. Although of course highly prejudicial to
the sale of the genuine article, these dealings could not be
stopped ; and they went on, on a scale more or less exten-
sive as herring prices ruled higher or lower, until the
average prices of Dutch brand gradually came down to a
level with, and even below, those of Scotch crown-brand,
chiefly owing to the frauds described. Then, of course,
there was no longer a profit in selling Scotch herring for
Dutch ; and the only way of making fraudulent gain lay
in obtaining the Dutch " full," or " maatjes," crown-brand
for herring of inferior quality, which practice never could
be stopped entirely until the official brand was finally
abolished altogether. Assayers always did their utmost ;

* Decrees of March 4th, 1860 (Staatsblad, No. 11) and February
24th, 1 86 1 (Staatsblad, No. 13).

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 265

but their control was not now more efficient than it was in
former centuries, when we have seen foreign dealers fre-
quently complain of bad herring being sold under Dutch
prime brands.

Such were the principal reasons which in the first ten
years after the legislative reform counteracted actual im-
provement, the progress of which shall now be described.

Cotton nets had been first used in bum-boats, as said

above, about 1857, and were in a keeled vessel in 1861.

In 1865 about one-third of the fleet had some cotton nets

on board, but not a vessel could use many of them ; for on

account of their lightness they did not sufficiently steady

the clumsy " hookers " while lying before the fleet. The

virtue which increased the catching power of the nets

was a defect as regards navigation ; and whenever

a fleet chiefly composed of cotton nets was tried, the

vessel was apt, as soon as part of the nets was got on

board, in rough weather to drift across the rest. The

evil might have been stopped by enlarging the fleets ;

but there is, of course, a limit to the surface of net that can

be managed in one ship of a given size. Experience soon

showed that light vessels were required to get the full avail

out of cotton fleets ; and this seems to have been the reason

why they were at first principally used in bumboats, two

of which, belonging to Mr. Maas, tried the Shetland seas in

1862, being the first Dutch flat-bottomed vessels ever seen

in those waters. But if bum-boats were light, they on the

other hand afforded too little stowage for an abundant

catch. The point to be gained was to have a vessel at

once light enough to manage a cotton fleet in all weathers,

and capacious enough to carry as much herring as could be

caught in such a fleet.

Mr, Maas, now as formerly ahead in fishery innovation,
E. 8. T

266 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

solved this problem in 1866, by sending out a lugger built
upon a model from Boulogne. The vessel had as yet more
hemp than cotton in her fleet ; she had upon the whole
not a favourable catch, and she began to fish three weeks
late, and thence did not share in "hunting'1 prices. In
spite of these disadvantages, she covered her building and
equipping expenses, including two complete fleets in six
voyages, and in the first year yielded a net return of thirty-
seven per cent. The splendid success of this first lugger
in the Dutch fleet, named by her owner the Scheveningeny
after his residence, was the signal of a rapid revolution in
the country's herring-fishery. Four luggers were launched
in 1866 ; and the number increased very rapidly in the next
years. All new ships built were either luggers or cutters ;
and the wharves on the Maas had a busy time of it. The
old " hookers " were sometimes sold off before being worn
out; and the transformation was so rapid that, in 1872-3
and 1875-6, there was actually a decrease in the strength
of the herring fleet,* owing solely to old vessels being sold
off faster than new ones could be built. The following:

o

figures show the progress of this most important reform :

Years.

Hookers and
sloops.

Luggers and
cutteis.

Years.

Hookers and
sloops.

Luggers and
cutters.

1867

85

4

1875

25

90

1868

80

ii

1876

17

92

1869

79

28

1877

19

94

1870

69

Si

1878

18

109

1871

58

64

I879

14

114

1872

44

64f

1880

12

121

1873

34

68

1881

II

127

I874

3i

83

* See Appendix K.

t The stand-still in lugger-building in 1872 is apparent, not real.
Six luggers were in that year transferred to a German herring
company formed at Emden, whose directors prevailed upon a Dutch

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 267

Improvements in other fishing material went hand in
hand with this renovation of the fleet. Sea-fishery ex-
hibitions, as will be remembered, were very frequent about
the time now spoken of; and in each of them the
Netherlands exhibits outshone those of preceding years.
Objects considered and reported upon as novelties at
Amsterdam in 1861, and at Bergen (Norway) in 1865,
proved antiquated in 1867 at the Hague. British cotton
net-yarns created a sensation at the first-named exhibition ;
Dutch cotton yarns, and nets made out of them, the
produce of several inland factories which did a brisk busi-
ness in them, were medalled at the latter. And it is to
be noticed that this strenuous expansion of the whole of
the fishery business was obtained without a single florin
of subsidy. Up to 1861 Government had contributed
towards equipping a " hospital ship," the nature of which
has been explained in a former chapter. The subsidy had
been gradually lessened, and declined by the common
herring shipowners in 1861, since when no " hospital-ship '
was sent out.

The organization of the herring shipowning business in

shipowner to sell them the whole of his ships and materials, and take
the direction of their business. Any one inclined to pursue patriotism
into superstition may read a warning against selling the nationality of
a ship or a business in this Emden company's fate. Their ships,
managers, and management were Dutch ; they fished in the same
seas and seasons as Dutch ; and yet they never could make catches
or returns like Dutch vessels of exactly the same description. While
Dutch shipowners, being entirely unprotected, were making handsome
dividends, the Emdeners, who have a " protective " customs tariff to
shield, and an immense national market to support them, have for ten
years hardly shown their shareholders the colour of their money, and
were in iSSi still deeply indebted to their Government for subsidial
loans not paid back.

T 2

268 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

the same period likewise underwent a material change.
New vessels of course demanded considerable capital, and
as their catch averaged from forty to one hundred per
cent, above that of the " hookers," capital was invested in
them freely enough. Shipowning companies, limited, sprang
up, and superseded the partnerships of the old type, many
of which liquidated as their hookers were broken up or
sold off. The institution of "sale-hunting" shared the
general reform. The Herring-hunting Association, which,
as said before, was in a previous period formed every year
to carry home early herring from the fleet, had continued
annually since the law of 1857 nad abolished the "hunting '
privilege and restriction, and any shipowner was free to
carry herring home at such a time and in such quantities
as he chose. ' One firm only kept outside from the begin-
ning ; most shipowners found it expedient to be partners
in the association for some of their vessels, in order to
secure the enormous prices of the opening season, or "hunt-
ing time," for some part of their catch ; but the association's
general expenses were so high as gradually to drive out
many vessels ; and owners, while they kept some of theirs
on the association's books, left out an increasing per-
centage. The association's mode of operating was also
materially altered. It had, till now, kept up the old
traditions. Partners bound themselves not to have their
ships home before a date annually fixed by common
consent, unless with an exceptional cargo ; and the fish
brought home before that date in the association's
" hunters ): was sold at certain minimum prices, and kept
on hand if prices in the early season were unfavourable.
The latter practice was now abandoned, and the whole
stock sold in auction for the partners' account as soon as
landed. Thus the institution of " hunting " became what

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 269

it should have been from the beginning : an annual
contract of carriage for common account between ship-
owners, and lost the monopolising character it had adopted
in the height of the regulation period.

As for innovations in fishing properly said, the main
feature of the period now spoken of, is the mixing up of
the two branches formerly known as grand and small
fishery. Fresh herring or " steurharing " began to be
brought home in luggers, whose crews thereby managed to
turn to account portions of their catch which there was no
time to cure, and sometimes, when the catch in the ordinary
herring waters was not favourable, went into seas where no
keeled vessels were permitted to go by the law of 1818, and
made the capture of fresh-herring their business for the
time. On the other hand, the pickling of herring in coast
bumboats increased exceedingly fast in the years suc-
ceeding 1870 ; so that both the curing and the fresh herring
monopoly of old were now not only abolished by law, but
had actually fallen into entire disuse among fishermen, and
there was no longer a grand fishery in keeled, and a small
fishery in flat vessels. The latter fished for herring as early,
and in the same waters, as luggers and cutters, which in
their turn sometimes invaded the continental shore waters,
and did bumboats' work. A glance at the figures in
Appendix K will show that not a vestige was ever felt of
the dread consequences which we have, in former parts of
this work, seen both parties predict as sure to attend such
mutual competition. There was indeed a decline in pickle-
herring prices, partly occasioned, as has been shown, by
dealers tampering with the brand ; but the average prices
of fresh-herring and " bucking " at the same time showed a
tendency to rise, owing to the widening of the market for
the latter ; and in both branches of the business, the liberty

270 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

to choose a fishing place, a fishing gear, and a curing pro-
cess according to the state of the season and the market,
amply made up for increased competition.

The brand, and the more and more apparent impossibi-
lity of preventing abuse of it, still continued to thwart
progress. I shall conclude this account of Dutch herring-
fishery by briefly relating how this last monument of
Government interference with it came to be abolished like
the rest.

From lugger fishery, as stated just now, there ensued a
promiscuousness of the herring-fishery's produce. Besides
deep-sea herring as of old, luggers in 1867, and subse-
quently, brought home fish caught off the continental coasts,
which in quality was decidedly inferior. Now, the branding
regulations of 1860 and 1861 had ordained distinct brands,
certifying herring to have been caught either in the high
seas (V. Z. V., or high-sea catch brand), under the coast
(K. V., or coast-catch brand) or in the Zuider Zee. The
latter brand was never or very seldom given, as Zuider Zee
herring of late years has ultimately proved unfit for curage ;
but lugger skippers were in the habit, although they often
fished under the coast, of declaring all their cured-herring
as high-sea catch. They generally obtained the V. Z. V.
brand for inferior fish, as an efficient control never could be
carried into execution. Bumboat owners, on the other
hand, not only cured herring on a large scale, but actually
sometimes cured it ashore, contrary to all ancient notions
and prescriptions ; and fish thus cured, though certainly
much inferior to fish cured on the day of the capture, ob-
tained the same brand as the latter. It became, in short,
an impossibility under the new fishery regimen to certify
where herring had been caught ; and a new regulation
approved by Royal Decree of May nth, 1868 (Staatsblad

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 271

No. 66), accordingly ordained the V. Z. V. or K. V. brands
to certify, not where fish should have been caugJit, but
where it should have been cured^ i.e. whether at sea or
ashore. At the same time, as the promiscuous use of the
several fishing methods led to promiscuous results, the main
stress of the brand certificate was laid, not as formerly on
the place where herring should have been either caught or
prepared, but on its actual quality ; and a new sub-division
was introduced into the three great descriptions of Dutch
brand herring (full, " maatjes," and "ylen"), each of which
was to be furthermore stamped either IA, 2A, or 3 A, accord-
ing to its quality upon test. This arrangement of course
greatly increased the assayers' task and responsibility ; and
as accurate verification of the contents of each barrel
became more utterly impossible in proportion as the yields
of the annual catches increased, it soon became customary
to brand herring as Full IA, Maatjes IA, or ylen IA, as the
case might be, upon little besides the owner's authority. The
circumstance of course by no means increased the brands'
repute abroad. Moreover, the change in the brands proved
an evil in itself, inasmuch as in some foreign markets con-
fusion once more ensued between the old brands and the
new.

To abolish the Government brand was the only \vay out
of these several difficulties, as the Sea- Fishery Board clearly
saw ; but they did not venture to advise the measure unless
Great Britain should cease to brand at the same time.
Foreign correspondents averred herring not bearing an
official mark to be unsaleable so long as Scotch branded
herring should be in the market ; and overtures made by
the Dutch to the British Government about a simultaneous
abolition of brands were received in a very friendly and

272 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

congenial spirit, but ultimately led to nothing, owing to
circumstances which it is unnecessary here to mention.
Dutch brands gradually lost most of their reputation ; and
the loss was the worse, as no unbranded herring was
exported as long as the brand existed, upon the representa-
tions of the dealers' correspondents abroad.* Thus, as a
fact, the brand, after having been for three centuries and a
half held on all hands to be the palladium of Holland's
greatness in the herring market, was now found out to be
the main stumbling-block in the path of its progress.

The quality brands, or IA, 2 A, and 3 A marks, instituted in
1868, were given up in i8/5t on account of the difficulties
just now exposed, and the simple brand in use till 1868,
stating, besides the year of the catch and the place of
curage, the herring's quality as full, " maatjes," or " ylen,"
was reinstated. No change for the better ensued ; and the
Fishery Board, after taking the opinion of many consider-
able herring shipowners and dealers, in their report for
1875 earnestly advised to abolish the brand, without
waiting for England's co-operation. It was high time, in
the Board's opinion, for Government to stop warranting
the quality of an article of which it knew little or nothing,
to the detriment of trade in an important article of expor-
tation. The advice was followed, and a Bill for the
abolition of the official brand laid before Parliament in
June 1877. An intervening political crisis delayed the
measure for about a year ; and when adopted by Parlia-
ment it was too late to put it into operation for the herring-

* Nearly none of the herring cured in bumboats was indeed
branded upon landing, but nearly the whole of the fish was carried to
Vlaardingen to be mixed up with the lugger-herring landed there, and
exported under crown-brand.

f Royal Decree, March 27th, 1875 (Stbl. No. 31).

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 273

season of 1878 ;* and June 1st, 1879, was determined upon
for its execution. From this date downward assayers
appointed by the College have still continued to examine
any pickle-herring presented to them, but the operation
now bears a strictly private commercial character. The
assayer's task is now no other than that of a common
commercial expert ; and he gives no official certificate
whatever. Penalties have this time been enacted against
the use of the abolished brands, and as a consequence no
complaints of this abuse have arisen. Four seasons have
elapsed since the measure was taken ; and its effects have
been decidedly very beneficial. As long as there were
Government brands, dealers but too often sought profit in
obtaining those brands for fish undeserving of them.
Since the brand was abolished they have been obliged, like
dealers in any other article, to get their own trade-marks
respected and sought abroad by strictly attending to the
quality of the goods. The measure was, in fact, nothing
but a final link in the chain of consequent fishery reform,
and a completion of the system adopted in 1857, viz. to
make parties concerned look for profit to nothing but their
own vigilance, industry, and honesty, and stop their ances-
tral habit of leaning upon Government measures taken in
their behalf. The law of 1857 had put a stop to the
herring fishery's utter rottenness ; it was reserved for the
law of 1878 to bring about a state of entire soundness in
its stead.

Of such a thorough soundness the herring business has
indeed since 1879 given the most substantial proofs. By
the aid of very favourable seasons, both fishing returns and
exports have, as shown by Appendix K, increased in the

* Law of May 7th, 1878 (Stbl. No. 37).

274 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

late years at a rate hitherto unknown.* Care has been
taken that the law of 1878 should be known on every
foreign market in time before its coming into vigour ; and
foreign dealers in the season of 1879 were fully aware that
there was no longer a Dutch official crown brand. Far from
showing a diffidence towards herring not bearing that mark,
they may be said to have ceased to mistrust Dutch fish
since the removal of a Government certificate, the fallacy
of which had been proved to satiety. Several markets,
where in the course of the present century Dutch cured
herring had ceased to appear, are now taking the article
with increasing eagerness. Prices, which under the brand
system had fallen below those of Scotch herring, are once
more steadily rising above them, as regards the better
descriptions of the article. The south of Germany is, as
formerly, the greatest market for Dutch pickle-herring, in
spite of the German tariff. Exports to Belgium have
much increased since a new treaty of commerce was
concluded with that power ; the United States have of late
years become a market of importance ; and the North
German markets, upon which we have in former parts of
this work seen Dutch herring predominant, are being, so to
say, re-conquered by the sheer force of the article's worth.
Stettin herring statistics are conclusive evidence to the
fact. No Dutch herring had been seen on that market
for years ; whereas the quantities brought in, and nearly

* The Fishery Report for 1882 has not been published while this is
being written, and will not appear before a couple of months are over.
It should therefore be remembered that the above statements can be
backed by official statistics only as to the years including iSSi. It
can, however, be stated now that the year 1882 has also been a very
favourable one as regards catch, exports, and prices. Dutch herring
fishers and dealers are now quite confident to sell the whole of their
produce at good prices, however fast the supply may increase.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 275

all sold off at the end of each year have in the latter years
been as follows :

Years.

Barrels.

Years.

Barrels.

1875

302

1879

3>663

1876

530

1880

13,584

1877

848

iSSi

5,915

1878

1,446

1882

10,593

I have now, as throughout the present work, treated
matters relative to Dutch herring fishery with particular
care, for the obvious reason that this branch is the one
most closely connected with legislation on fisheries, and
therefore directly responding to the subject given for the
present essay. A few words still remain to be said
of the other branches since 1857; some of which,
although unconnected with legislation, are still of
considerable importance.

The fate of hook-fishery (for cod, flat-fish, &c.) may
be resumed in the simple statement : that it is now
carried on in the North Sea exclusively, and is gradually
being absorbed in, or superseded by, the herring business,
and is chiefly kept going by the capture of fresh fish, not
of cod for salting. Bumboat owners of Scheveningen,
Katwijk and Noordwijk, are gradually abandoning the
hooks, or beugvaart, and occupy the time between herring
seasons chiefly by trawling for fresh fish. In the two
villages of Egmond and Zandvoort, where herring fishery
has become unusual, the trawl is likewise the implement

276 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

most used. Herring ships continue hook-fishery between

herring seasons, i.e. in winter and spring ; but the returns

often amount to a clear loss, and the reason why many

ships are not kept at home between herring seasons is

chiefly to keep their crews together, and have men ready

in June. At the same time, luggers sometimes use the

trawl instead of the hooks and lines in winter and spring ;

whereas a trawl-net and a keeled vessel were formerly held

as objects entirely incompatible. What remains of the

once important " beugvaart " is exercised by vessels of all

descriptions and hailing from many parts of the country ;

and it is therefore difficult to give anything like complete

statistics of the business. The figures contained in

Appendix L, and relative to exports of salt cod, will show

that cod-fishery, the only branch in which no other gear

than hooks can be used, has not shared the increase of

other branches. The maintenance of prohibitive tariffs

on foreign salt-cod in France has contributed much to

keep the salt cod business down. Two more important

causes have of late years likewise checked its progress.

Firstly, a series of circumstances have contributed to keep

the fish called gecp, the usual bait for cod-hooks, at

inconveniently high prices. Secondly, profits are much

greater in fresh fishery than in the salt-cod industry. The

two are indeed much mixed up ; for most of the flat-fish

and haddock brought home from hooking trips to the

North Sea is sold fresh.

Of fresh fishery it is difficult to give accurate statistics,
owing to the same circumstance just stated for hook-
fishery. Vessels of every description and from every
fishing port and coast locality are now employed in this
lucrative business ; and it is carried on with implements
of several descriptions, and in part jointly with fishery for

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 277

cod to be salted. Its actual importance can, like that of
the latter, best be shown by export figures ; which have
been collected in Appendix M. The reasons why exports
of fresh fish should have increased at the very fast rate
shown by this table, may be evident to any one upon the
very slightest reflection. It is, simply, the increase of
railway traffic, and the care now taken by continental
railway directors to provide cheap and fast conveyance for
fish. Fresh fish caught by Dutch vessels may, owing to
the said circumstance, any day be eaten all over Belgium ;
and the importance of the German market on this score is
being keenly realised by Dutch dealers. Packing in ice
is of course increasing at the same rate, as exports of
fresh fish ; and companies exclusively destined to work
this new mine have sprung up of late years, and are in
a flourishing condition. Nieuwediep, particularly well
situated in the centre of the North Sea and Zuider Zee
fresh fisheries, and for years past directly connected with all
Europe by rail, is fast increasing in importance as a fresh
fish market. Ymuiden, the new North Sea port of Amster-
dam, seems by its geographical position to be destined to a
similar importance ; and fresh fishery may be susceptible
of any degree of increase in the towns of Vlaardingen and
Maassluis, when the plan for giving them a direct communi-
cation by rail with Rotterdam, and the rest of the world,
shall have been fully carried out, as it will be soon. Rapid
conveyance is of course the mainspring of the fresh-fish
business ; and it cannot be denied that in this respect, as
applied to the fishery interest, Holland has much to learn
from foreign countries. Still we are now very far from the
days of yore when " de neeringhe van den versche >: was a
despised business, fit for small men without capital, and
yielding a pittance. A shadow, however, seems to impend

278 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

over this flourishing trade ; to wit, complaints of impaired
catch. It is said by some, that the North Sea is showing
signs of exhaustion, possibly by over-trawling.

The latest Fishery Board Reports mention the circum-
stance more than once ; and not a fortnight ere this is
written, bumboat trawlers from Scheveningen reported
that " the sea seemed fished out (doodgevischf)? We have
in former chapters seen similar complaints raised at more
than one period ; and if they were unfounded then, the case
may be different now the number of trawlers of all nations
in the North Sea has very much increased. Trawling
prohibitions, shrimping restrictions, &c, may possibly with-
in a few years become once more the fishery topic of the
day.

Measures of a similar nature, i.e. to prevent the extinc-
tion of fish-life, have since years been the preoccupation of
Government as regards the Zuider Zee. It has been re-
marked in an earlier part of this work, that whatever may
be the probabilities of the North Sea being exhausted, the
inlet called Zuider Zee, being small and very shallow,
is certainly more liable to exhaustion than the wide
main ; and we have seen, in former centuries, men of the
provinces surrounding this gulf engaged in long-winded
disputes, and even in actual contests, to secure the
conservation of a stock of fish. As a fact, in the last
fifteen years the yield of pan-herring and flat-fish from the
Zuider Zee has been declining ;* and complaints of exhaus-

* Some figures relative to Zuider Zee fishery since 1857 have been
collected, into Appendix N. They are anything but complete ; for
pan-herring caught in the said water has during this period been
brought to several other markets besides Monnickendam, and the
fresh-fish returns (plaice, flounder, sole, turbot, eel, &c.) form no part
of the table.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 279

tion of the water have not unfrequently occurred ever since
1857, becoming towards iSSo constant and loud. A
local inquiry instituted by delegates from the Sea Fishery
College in 1878 showed that the peculiar species of small
herrings caught in the Zuider Zee and sold as "pan-herring '
\vere indeed liable to be destroyed by the use of narrow
nets, and that anchovy-fishery with very narrow pocket-
nets, dragged through the water at a great speed, either
between two vessels or between two beams rigged out from
one boat, might be presumed to extirpate herring, as fry of
herring was caught in those nets in great quantities, and
thrown away or sold as manure. Some Zuider Zee fisher-
men, it appears, were actually in the habit of " fishing for
manure " in this manner, when no full-grown fish could be
caught. The pocket-nets alluded to, and especially the net
used between two boats and called wonderkuil from the
astonishing returns of small fish yielded by it, could not
however be prohibited altogether ; for without them it was
not possible to catch anchovy, which article, as shown by
Appendix N, continues to be of much importance in the
Zuider Zee. Anchovy is not a fish resident in the said water,
but visits it in the early summer, generally between May
1 5th and July I5th, when there is no pan-herring fishery
of importance ; and the plain way to conciliate the interests
of both trades was, therefore, to allow the use of the
incriminated pocket-nets between the said dates, and to
prohibit it at all other times. A statute to that effect has
accordingly been established by law of June 2ist, iSSi
(Staatsblad No. 76), which, further to prevent the destruc-
tion of herring, flounder, and smelt, prohibits at any time to
buy or sell, transport, possess, or use fish of those descrip-
tions inferior to certain dimensions. In a word, statutes
analogous to those described in Part III. chapter IV., have

280 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

been called into life again, and arc in vigour at this
moment.

The same law of June 2ist, 1 88 1, in which these statutes
are contained, regulates a few more subjects relative to
fishery, of which brief mention ought to be made in the
present work.

The tenth clause of the law empowers Government to
prohibit the killing of seals in certain parts of the Northern
seas, and during certain seasons. The enactment existed
before, and has only been repeated in the law of 1881 in
order to collect all legislative dispositions relative to fisheries
into on'e single statute ; the unrepealed clauses of the law
of 1857 being likewise repeated in 1881 for the same reason.
The Government's faculty to restrict seal-killing by Dutch-
men was first established by law of Dec. 3ist, 1876 (Staats-
blad No. 289) and executed by Royal Decree of February
1 5th, 1877 (Staatsblad No. 19), by which Dutchmen were
prohibited from killing seals in certain high latitudes before
April 3rd of each year. The measure was enacted upon
the invitation of the British Government ; it was at the time,
and is now, of no importance whatever for the Netherlands,
as the last enterprise of seal and walrus-killing in the
Northern seas had come to an infelicitous termination in
1875, the year before the law, and the business has not
been since resumed. Walrus-killing in latter years only
deserves mention because it has been, so to say, the last
glimpse of the once flourishing trade of whaling. I have
stated in a former chapter that the latter business was kept
up late in the present century by two vessels from Harlingen
under the stimulus of premiums, without which it would
have been given up much earlier. The last whales were
caught by these vessels in 1851 and 1852, each of which
seasons produced one fish ; and they have since made it

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 281

their sole business to knock the seal on the head and kih
the walrus in the Arctic seas, this also having been
given up in 1875, on account of insufficient returns. A few
seals are still annually killed in the Zuider Zee and Zealand
estuaries. But of the bold spirit which caused Dutchmen of
old to look for gain, and find plenty, in the Northern seas, a
spark has survived the utter ruin of Dutch whaling. A
seaman of spirit and experience, Mr. Bottemanne,* in 1869
prevailed upon some capitalists to invest in a whaling enter-
prise, the aim of which was to kill the animals, not by
harpoons thrown from boats, but by the modern contrivance
of the rocket-shell-harpoon shot from a gun on board a
steamer. A company was formed, and fitted out a whaling
vessel of this description, under Mr. Bottemanne as com-
mander. He made his first voyage in 1870, and secured
only one fish, owing to inexperience in the use of the
artillery. In the next year better aim was taken and 26
whales were shot, but half of them lost, mainly oxving to
deficiencies in the lines and gear. The returns of 1872
were still worse ; and the Whaling Company of Rotterdam,
which had chartered the steamer, was forced to liquidate.
Another attempt to create a similar company was made
in 1875, but failed for want of partners ; and whaling,
once the second in importance of the Dutch sea-fisheries,

: Any one who writes a complete history of Dutch sea-fisheries
in the last quarter of a century will have to make very frequent
mention of this remarkable personage. With a sailor's love for salt-
water Mr. Bottemanne combines a scientist's interest for, and extensive
knowledge of, the creatures that live in it. He has been a merchant-
captain and a whaler ; he is now Inspector of the Fisheries in the
Schelde and Zealand Estuaries, and his thorough and practical
ichthyological acquirements have made him the constant adviser, in
matters of salmon fishery, oyster-culture, and similar subjects, of both
the Government and the Sea- Fishery Board.

E. 8. U

282 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

is now quite extinct. Cod-fishery off Iceland, the former
extent of which has been spoken of in the course of the
present work, has shared the same fate. The last voyages
North with the cod-lines were made a few years after 1857,
and all attempts to revive the business have since been in
vain.

Before closing this account of Dutch sea-fisheries I have
to mention a subject in which some of the men employed
in them are viewed in a light not altogether favourable, to
wit, the conduct of Dutch fishing crews towards their
patrons and towards their foreign colleagues. The subject
were perhaps best avoided ; but, as it has occasioned legis-
lative measures, the present work would be incomplete
without a brief statement of its bearings.

It is a painful fact that ever since Dutch sea-fishery has
begun to increase fast, the great demand for able hands
has caused fishing sailors not only to raise their pretensions
as to wages, which is but natural, but also in many cases
to adopt a most unjustifiable behaviour towards their
employers. As trained fishermen became scarce, Dutch-
men and foreigners, ill-acquainted with the business, have
had to be intrusted with vessels and nets, and, what is
worse, with the cure of herring ; and many native able
fishermen, finding the demand for their trained labour to
acquire the proportions of sharp competition between
employers, have resorted to the baleful habit of desertion,
i.e., breaking contracts of service whenever they were
tempted from them by higher bidders, or had earned
enough to indulge in idleness for a time. Wages in Dutch
sea-fisheries uniformly take the shape of a share in the
raw returns, generally averaging about one-third ; and the

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 283

contracts upon which this share is determined are now, as
we have found them in former centuries,* intricate and
apt to give rise to many disputes. Part of the crew's
shares in the returns is under the habitual contracts not
paid in money, but prepaid in fish ; and this of course
promotes the men's tendency to help themselves to all
they can get. It would be highly interesting fully to
investigate the effects of socialism, as embodied in this
system, upon the fishing population, both from a moral
and an economical point of view. As regards the effects
of the sailors' behaviour upon the business, they have for
a series of years been highly deleterious, and have seriously
retarded the several fisheries' progress. Instances of vessels
kept at home in the height of a favourable season by the
crews' desertion have been frequent of late years ; and the
lawlessness prevailing in the connections between fishing
shipowners and men might have ended in the ruin of both
employed and employers, had not the legislative power
intervened, upon the urgent representations of all ship-
owners and of the Board appointed to second their interests.
There is a law on discipline in merchant shipping, dated
1857, on the Netherlands statute-book; but this law has
been pronounced by the supreme judicial authority not to
apply to fishing-vessels. The new Penal Code enacts
penalties against desertion by fishermen ; but this Code,
although now a law of the realm, has not yet been put to
execution, owing to several combined circumstances ; and
a special law upon the subject was therefore enacted on
June 2Oth, iSSi (Staatsblad No. 98). Imprisonment for
from one to thirty days now attends desertion, consisting
in non-fulfilment of contracts of service in Dutch sea-fishing

* Part iii. chapter iii.

U 2

284 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

vessels. The law is as yet of too fresh a date for a fair
judgment of its effects to be formed. In the meantime,
lack of able crews is still a drawback upon Dutch sea-
fisheries ; a circumstance which in itself proves their
expansive vitality.

Desertion till iSSi was not the only offence frequently
laid at the doors of Dutch fishing-crews. We have seen
in earlier parts of this work that a peculiar standard of
notions on private property seems from early times,
downward to have existed among sea-fishermen at large ;
that they appear never to have strictly respected each
other's possessions, and have from time immemorial been
given to acts of petty piracy, which, when carried on
between crews of different nationality, frequently took the
aspect of private warfare. This state of things, inherent
in the nature of both the men and the trade, has of course
become worse in proportion as fishery in the North Sea
developed in the several countries surrounding it. The
available fishing-grounds have of late become very much
crowded by vessels of many descriptions and nationalities,
using herring-nets, trawls, and hook-and-line gear, of
increasing dimensions, every one of which implements is
liable, either by accident or wilful mismanagement, to
injure or destroy others. A man may sometimes be in
the necessity of cutting his neighbours' fleet, and is often
tempted to do it, and to appropriate them afterwards, by
having so formidable an instrument of destruction as a
trawl in the water at the time. To pilfer nets from the
fleet of a vessel lying helpless miles away is often a hard
temptation for a conscience no stronger than a fisherman's
appears but too frequently to be ; and, though most of the
evidence on this head now before me is relative to outrages

o

committed by British fishers upon Dutch, I do not mean

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 285

to say that the latter are as a rule much more scrupulous.
At any rate, mutual remonstrances relative to acts of either
wilful outrage or deliberate piracy have of late years
occasioned much correspondence between the Foreign
Offices of the North Sea fishing states, and between those
of Great Britain and the Netherlands especially ; and,
although in some cases offenders have been detected and

o

punished, the impossibility either to take them in flagranti
or identify them afterwards has generally been the reason
of their escaping. This is not a place for dwelling on so
painful a subject ; neither does the scope of the present
work include an exposition of the Convention concluded
at the Hague on May 6th, 1882, for the future prevention
of similar outrages, and the establishment of an international
police in the North Sea A Bill for the ratification of the
said treaty has been laid before the Netherlands Parliament,
not many weeks before this is being written, and has not
as yet been taken into consideration ; and the subject
therefore cannot as yet be said to belong to the history
of Dutch sea-fisheries, or of legislation respecting them.
The only statute for the prevention of ill-doings by Dutch
fishermen as yet on the Netherlands statue-book, besides
of course the common penal laws, is contained in articles
2-5, 14, and 20 of the above-mentioned law of June 2ist,
1 88 1, which is at present the sea-fishery code of the realm.
The obligation for every Dutch fishing-vessel to carry on
her bows and sails letters and a number, stating her home
port, name, and owner, and never to hide or obliterate
those letters and numbers, is contained in the said law,
together with the necessary penal and administrative
dispositions to ensure the precaution being carried into
effect.

286

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX A.

STATISTICAL ACCOUNT OF THE GRAND OR CURED-HERRING FISHERY

BETWEEN 1750 AND 1794-

Number of busses sailed from each of the following places : —

/j
v*£

in

"Js

c

V

bo

c
<u

N

E
ca

"O

a

"as
rt

fl

<u

£

s

ca

T3

1

a

OS

1

*<LJ

°C

1

c
rt
cd

c «

B Z
Z to
7 «
"'IT

.

c/l

-3

'3

D

•' — i

«

rj

|4

T3

pq

gw

v G

Ifl
|4

en

rt

IH

rt

4J

in

8

C

0)
4J

1)

S

<S

|N

"rt

§ >

<a

QJ

rt

rt '

,x
3

a

<L)

ri
>

!a

13

4-1
O

pd

u

13

2

M

£j

O k

rt A
-^

>

fi,

>

W

<u

Q

?"
N

Q

P4

O

w

Q

Q

O

!s|

H '

§

1750

22

III

56

• •

16

• •

12

13

5

• •

• •

• •

• •

235

27

1751

20

H3

57

. .

17

• •

14

13

5

• •

* •

•

• •

239

26

1752

22

118

55

. .

17

. .

16

12

8

I

• •

• •

• •

249

28

1753

23

III

57

16

• •

17

12

9

I

• •

• •

246

30

1754

22

IOI

58

• •

16

. ,

17

IO

IO

• •

• •

• •

. .

234

31

1755

2O

1 02

58

• •

16

• *

18

IO

10

• *

* .

• •

• •

234

26

1756

2O

99

58

• •

16

B t

17

8

IO

. .

. .

• •

* •

228

24

1757

16

90

59

• •

16

• •

17

8

10

• •

• •

• •

• •

216

24

1753

15

80

56

• •

14

• •

17

5

6

• •

. .

• •

• •

193

17

1759

12

68

44

• •

14

• •

12

6

7

• •

* *

• •

163

15

1760

IO

63

43

• •

14

• •

II

6

7

• •

• •

• •

154

13

I76l

7

59

40

• •

H

. ,

5

5

4

• •

• •

• •

. .

134

15

1762

7

59

39

• •

14

, .

5

6

5

• •

• •

• •

• •

135

15

1763

7

64

40

• •

14

. .

7

7

5

• •

* •

• *

• •

144

15

1764

14

7i

40

. ,

H

• •

9

6

6

• •

. .

• •

1 60

17

1765

15

69

40

. .

14

• •

9

6

7

• •

• •

• •

• *

1 60

17

1766

14

60

40

• •

H

• •

8

2

ii

• •

. .

• •

• *

•i 49

17

1767

14

53

40

• •

16

• •

7

2

ii

. •

. .

• •

. .

148

17

1768

12

61

4i

. .

15

• •

7

2

IO

. .

. .

• •

• •

148

17

1769

12

64

4i

• •

H

• •

7

2

9

. .

. .

• •

149

20

1770

14

62

4i

» .

14

• •

7

3

8

. .

• •

• •

• •

149

20

1771

14

64

4i

• •

14

* •

7

5

7

• •

I

i

• *

153

20

1772

15

68

42

• •

13

• »

7

7

7

• •

• •

i

* •

1 60

23

1773

18

76

44

• •

13

. «

7

7

5

• •

t •

i

• •

171

20

1774

18

74

44

. .

14

, ,

7

6

2

• •

• •

I

• •

166

20

1775

17

66

4i

• •

16

, •

6

6

2

• •

• •

'2

I

158

20

1776

21

84

4i

• •

16

• •

6

6

2

• •

. •

2

I

179

22

1777

23

76

4i

, ,

15

. .

6

4

2

. .

. . .

2

I

170

22

1778

20

7i

4i

, ,

15

• •

6

4

I

. .

. .

2

• •

1 60

18

1779

17

75

4i

# ,

16

, .

6

4

I

• •

2

I

163

21

1780

16

67

40

, .

15

. .

6

4

I

. .

• •

2

• »

151

2O

i7sn

1782]

No business done on account of the war.

178^

60

A1

17

1 20

• •

* /uo

1784

25

74

TO

43

m u

1 /

18

• •

3

2

I

• •

• •

• •

• a

166

15

1785

23

74

45

4

18

• •

3

2

I

* ?

. •

• •

• •

170

15

1786

24

77

44

5

17

. .

4

2

I

• .

• •

. .

. .

174

15

1787

24

Si

44

6

17

• •

4

2

I

• •

. .

. .

179

15

1788

25

84

45

6

17

• •

2

I

I

. .

. .

• •

• .

181

15

1789

27

82

44

6

17

* •

2

I

• •

• •

. .

• •

• •

i So

15

1790

29

85

44

4

17

• •

3

I

. .

• •

. .

• •

• •

183

15

1791

28

93

44

4

17

• •

2

I

. .

• •

• •

• •

189

15

1792

30

103

44

i

18

* .

2

I

. .

. .

. .

199

15

1793

31

104

44

i

ii

2

I

194

15

1794

35

96

44

i

17

I

2

196

II

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 287

APPENDIX B.

STATISTICS OF DUTCH WHALING, 1670-1794.

Years.

Vessels sailed
to Greenland.

Whales caught
off Greenland.

Vessels sailed to
Davis Straits.

Whales caught in
Davis Straits.

1670

148

792

1671

155

630^

1072 1 ^ne Greenland trade in these years was forbidden
1?> because of the troublous times.

1674 )

1675

148

88i|

1676

145

8o8§

1677

149

686

1678

110

iiiSf

1679

126

831

1680

148

1373

1681

172

889

1682

1 86

1470

1683

242

1343

1684

246

1185

1685

212

1383^

1686

189

639

1687

194

617

1688

214

345

1689

I63

243

1690

117

8i84

1691

( (Sailed from Hamburg and Bremen, whaling
2 \ being prohibited throughout the Republic. )

1692

32

62

1693

89

175

1694

62

156}

1695

96

201

1696

IOO

380

1697

III

12745

1698

140

I488|

1699

151

775i

1700

173

907

1701

207

2071!

1702

225

697!

1703

208

646*

1704

130

6515

1705

157

16643

1706

149

4525

1707

131

128

1708

121

525!

1709

127

I9°i

1710

137

62

288 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX B. — STATISTICS OF DUTCH WHALING — continued.

Years.

Vessels sailed
to Greenland.

Whales caught ^
off Greenland.

/essels sailed to
Davis Straits.

Whales caught in
Davis Straits.

I7II

117

630*

1712

1 08

3701

*

1713

94

256

1714

108

1234

1715

134

696^

1716

153

519

1717

1 80

391

1718

194

28lf

1719

182

308

1719-1728

1504

3439

748

1251

1729-1738

858

2198

975

1929

1737

88

149

1 06

355

1738

74

"33

112

360

1739

58

133

6765

1740

• •

. .

* •

. •

1741

. .

. .

. . .

1742

48

5°

125

5082

1743

49

742

137

850^

1744

39

182^

148

1311

1745

31

206^

153

362^

1746

40

341

130

820"

1747

37

135?

128

820

1748

93

217

1749

116

470!

41

206

1750

112

5331

46

62^

1751

117

264H

45

652

1752

117

4381

42

107*

1753

118

5392

48

IOO

1754

135

654H

36

18

1755

152

6854

29

31

1756

1 60

529J

26

39

1757

159

4I3i

20

10

1758

151

. .

7

1759

133

425

22

39

1760

139

15

78

1761

138

287!

23

70

1762

139

124

26

651

1763

127

565

35

132

1764

126

193

38

31

1765

130

394

35

82

1766

135

156^

32

1767

132

IO2J

33

83

1768

124

392

36

2071

1769

in

684

43

I54aL

1770

105

4342

45

85!

1771

no

1051

40

38

1772

93

546A

38

2395

1773

91

193^2

43

2475

1774

72

281

48

179

1775

88

86

.41

19

1776

84

3645

39

I53s

1777

75

250!

42

177?

1778

64

252

47

542

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 289
APPENDIX B. — STATISTICS OF DUTCH WHALING — continued.

Years.

Vessels sailed
to Greenland.

Whales caught
off Greenland.

Vessels sailed to
Davis Straits.

Whales caught in
Davis Straits.

1779

59

I32|

45

36

1780

46

383§

36

91

> No business done on account of the war.
1782 j

1783

46

325i

9

2

1784

57

163^

4

8

1785

65

328

i

5

1786

?

. .

?

1787

60

198*

7

41

1788

58

167

ii

21

1789

53

481!

8

23

1790

52

103^

14

IO

1791

49

6i|

13

!7i

1792

47

200

14

2

1793

31

72

i

1794

55

92?

3

13!

APPENDIX C

COD FISHERY OFF ICELAND, 1751-1790.

Years.

Number of
vessels.

Average number of
lasts caught by each
vessel.

Years.

Number of
vessels.

Average number of
lasts caught by each
vessel.

I751

73

12

1772

121

7

1752

64

7

1773

107

5

1753

56

20

1774

83

8

1754

95

ii

1775

78

5

1755

76

15

1776

36

9

1756

95

2, 3, or 4

1777

22

16

1757
1758

in
94

a few lasts only.

I778

24

(even better than
\ in 1770.

1759

124

1779

6l

16

1760

15

1780

63

20

1761
1762

123
142

20

I78ll
I782/

Stopped by war.

1763

148

1783

very bad.

1764

H3

I784

49

unfavourable.

1765

140

1/85

52

i >

1766

155

10

1786

58

1767

157

1787

2

1768

1 60

5

1788

I

1769

137

8

1789

None.

1770

126

14

1790

1 1

1771

H5

6

2QO THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX D.

Text of the Law on Herring Fishery, elated March I2th,
1818 (Siaatsblad) No. 15) ; literally translated.

WE, WILLIAM, by the grace of God, King of the Netherlands,
Prince of Orange-Nassau, Grand Duke of Luxemburg, &c., £c.

To all who shall see these, or hear them read, Our greeting.

Whereas We have considered, that the Grand or Herring Fishery of
this Kingdom has always been an object of the Government's
solicitude and protection ;

That measures have at several times been taken to prevent prejudice
by all such doings and evil practices as might endanger and
diminish the renown of Herring caught and cured by the
Fisheries of this Kingdom ;

That the happy result of these measures yields constant proof of
their suitableness, whence there is reason to forcibly maintain
them ;

Considering, moreover, that the said Fishery is not exercised in the
same manner in all provinces of this Kingdom, and that care
ought to be taken lest a protection of both fisheries should lead
to their doing each other a prejudice ; the object being, on the
contrary, that both shall contribute to the welfare of this branch
of general industry ;

We have, after taking the advice of the Council of State, and upon
common deliberation with the States- General, decreed, and
hereby do decree as follows :

GENERAL RULES.

Art. i. — Herring-fishery under the Netherlands colours shall be

exercised only for the account of inhabitants of this Kingdom,

and in vessels owned by them.
2. — No one shall, under a penalty of 2000 florins, let any foreigner

have a share in a herring- fishing enterprise, or lend his name

to a foreigner for such enterprise.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 291

3. — All inhabitants of this Kingdom are forbidden, under the same
penalty, to participate, even indirectly, in any herring-fishery
under foreign colours.

4. — Any person who shall undertake either directly or indirectly to
entice inhabitants of this Kingdom to exercise herring-fishery
in a foreign country, shall forfeit a penalty of 2000 florins, or be
imprisoned for one year.

5- — Any fisherman who shall have either exercised herring-fishery
abroad, or engaged there to exercise such fishery, shall be
imprisoned for six months.

6. — No foreign herring, whether fresh, cured, salted or smoked, shall
be imported into this Kingdom, on pain of forfeiture of the
herring, and a fine of 500 florins for every barrel of salted
pickle-herring, or 5 florins per hundred of herrings fresh or
smoked.

GENERAL SUPERINTENDENCE AND POLICE OF THE HERRING '

FISHERY.

7- — The external police, or general superintendence of the herring-
fishery, shall be governed by uniform rules all over the Kingdom,
established by law and by Royal Decrees based upon the law.

8. — The internal police, or detailed regulations for these fisheries,
shall be established for each sea-bound Province, by the
Provincial States ; but the said regulations shall not be contrary
to the general rules.

9. — The internal police of the herring fisheries includes : the details
of equipment, the rules relative to applying for, and obtaining,
permission to fish for herring, the mode of preparing, sorting
and salting herring, and the necessary precautions relative to
vessels going for cod-fish and having some herring nets on
board.

10. — In every sea-province where it shall be found useful, the
Provincial States shall, subject to Our approval, appoint a
College to have the direction of all things concerning the
herring fishery.

ii. — In provinces where herring-fishery has not sufficient import-
ance to require a separate College, it shall be lawful for the
Provincial States to confide the care of that fishery to such
Boards as shall have the direction of other fisheries in such
provinces.

292 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

12. — Any persons exercising herring-fishery without being authorized
thereto in the manner stipulated by the Provincial States, shall
be liable, viz. the equipper of the vessel to a fine ranging from
300 florins to 3000 florins, and her steersman to imprisonment
for not less than fourteen days and not more than two months.

OF THE SEVERAL HERRING-FISHERIES.

13. — The Grand, or Pickle-herring Fishery is exercised in the summer
or autumn, in keeled vessels, off Hitland [Shetlands] and
Edinburgh, and under the coasts of England.

14. — The object of this fishery is, to catch herring of the best
quality, and to cure, salt and barrel such herring at sea, both
for exportation and home consumption.

15. — The Small, or Fresh-herring Fishery is exercised in the high
sea, generally in the so-called Deep Water, about east of
Yarmouth, in flat-bottomed and keelless vessels which
commonly do not enter any port, but go ashore on the sea-
beach.

1 6. — It shall be provisionally interdicted as heretofore, to cure
herring from the latter-named fishery, either at sea or ashore,
under the following penalties, viz. one month's imprisonment
for the steersman, and a fine of 5 florins per hundred of herrings
to be forfeited by the shipowner and all other delinquents,
besides forfeiture of the herring. It shall, however, be lawful
for the King upon advice of the Provincial States to ordain
how, in how far, and at what time herring from the Small Fishery
shall be allowed to be cured and made into pickle-herring,
without prejudice either to the interests of the Grand Fishery
or to the renown of Netherlands herring.

17. — The Pan-herring fishery is exercised, with or without vessels,
in the entire extent of the Kingdom in the rivers, river-mouths,
inner seas, and within one hour's distance from the outer sea-
shores.

1 8. — All fishermen, equippers of vessels, dealers, and persons what-
soever are prohibited, on pain of one month's imprisonment
and a fine of 5 florins per hundred of herrings, besides forfeiture
of the herring, to cure or salt as pickle-herring any herring
from the fishery last named.

19. — All dispositions further required respecting the said fishery
shall be enacted by the States of the several Provinces, who
shall be entitled to comminate penalties against breach of their

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 293

rules, viz. from fourteen days' to two months' imprisonment, and
fines up to 300 florins, whether separately or in cumulation.

FISHERMEN'S DUTIES DURING THEIR VOYAGES OUT AND HOME.

20. — All steersmen of herring-ships shall be obliged to carry the
herring caught by them into this Kingdom, on pain of one
month's imprisonment and a fine of 50 florins.

21. — All herring fishermen, having left their port or place of equip-
ment, shall be bound, time and weather serving, to sail straight
to their fishing water, and likewise to sail straight home thence

22. — They shall not, unless in case of urgent necessity, enter any
foreign port, or port belonging to another province than where
the vessel was equipped.

23. — All fishermen are prohibited, on pain of one month's imprison-
ment and a fine of 100 florins, from selling, bartering, ex-
changing, or giving away at sea, any herring caught by them.

24. — They are prohibited, under the same penalties, from buying
herring either abroad or at sea, for the purpose of bringing such
herring into this Kingdom.

25. — Any shipowner convicted of having, after the close of the
fishery, given his vessel another destination besides the usual
and lawful one, i.e. destined her to buy herring at sea or abroad,
or sell his own in a foreign country, shall be fined 50 florins per
barrel of foreign herring brought home, and 300 florins if he
shall have sold his own abroad.

LIMITS OF THE HERRING-FISHING SEASON.

26. — No inhabitant of this Kingdom shall be allowed to shoot nets
for herring fishery in the open sea earlier than June 24th, at
night, or later than December 3ist. Any steersman contra-
vening this enactment shall be imprisoned for one month, and
fined 50 florins. The vessel's owner shall be fined 1000 florins,
if privy to the transgressions.

27. — The aforesaid prohibition is not applicable to vessels mentioned
in Article 9, sailing for cod-fish and having some herring nets on
board. Dispositions relative to such vessels shall be enacted
by the Provincial States.

28. — Muster-rolls shall be made out, and signed by the steersman
and crew of each herring-fishing vessel ; the forms for such
muster-rolls shall be determined by the Provincial States.

29. — The Provincial States shall be entitled to determine the date

294 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

on which herring fishermen shall be allowed to enter port, cases
of urgent necessity and extraordinary capture excepted.
30. — The Provincial States are likewise entitled to determine the
opening of the Small or Fresh-herring Fishery ; and to comminate
fines not exceeding 100 florins against transgressors of this and
the last article.

OF SALE-HUNTING (Jagery).

3!. — it shall be permitted annually to send some vessels out to the
herring fleet, there to take on board herring of the first captiire3
in order to bring them speedily into this Kingdom.

32. — The said vessels, known as herring-hunters (liar ing- jagers),
shall not carry the herring taken on board by them anywhere
but to the port whence they have sailed.

33. — The opening and closing dates of herring-hunting shall be
determined by the Provincial States.

34. — Articles 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 of the present law shall apply
to the owners and skippers of herring-hunters.

RULES TO BE OBSERVED WHILE IN FISHING WATER.

35. — All herring fishermen from this Kingdom are prohibited from
fishing for herring, at any time, between the sand-bars and rocks
of Norway, Ireland, and Scotland.

36. — Any injury or damage done by one herring-fisher to another at
sea shall be subject to a fine ranging between 10 florins and 100
florins, and imprisonment from 10 days to one month ; without
prejudice to an action for damages and interests.

37. — All vessels and fishing implements shall be marked with
convenient marks, to be determined by the Provincial States.

OF THE ASSAYING OF PICKLE-HERRING, AND BRANDING OF
BARRELS USED FOR SALTING AND PACKING SUCH HERRING.

38. — No pickle-herring shall be sold, or carried from the place
where landed, unless the fish be previously assayed by sworn
assay ers (keurmeesters}^ and the barrel branded with the name
of the place where such herring was brought ashore.

39. — Pickle-herring transported from one province into another shall
be allowed to be exported abroad in the same barrel, and only
marked with the local brand ; but if repacked into another
barrel, such herring shall not be exported abroad unless branded

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 295

with the name or escutcheon of the province where it was

landed.
40. — No province-brands shall be apposed to barrels unless

previously marked with the peculiar signs to be determined by

provincial -regulations.
41. — Any brander who shall have apposed the provincial or local

brand to barrels known by him to contain foreign herring, or

herring from another province, shall be liable to imprisonment

for one year.
42. — All barrels, great or small, used in salting herring, shall be

previously tested by sworn assayers.
43. — The assayers, both of herring and barrels, and the branders,

both of local and provincial marks, shall be appointed and

sworn by the municipal magistrates.
44. — The Provincial States shall draw up the assayers' and branders'

instructions, and determine the peculiar marks to be apposed

to barrels in order to certify the year when the herring was

caught, its quality and sort.
45. — Any person selling or expediting herring in this Kingdom,

whether to a home or foreign destination, shall be liable to a

fine of 20 florins for each barrel, great or small, not provided with

the prescribed brands.

ADDITIONAL CLAUSES.

46. — The premiums proffered for herring-fishery shall be regulated

by the King in a fair proportion, in consideration of the

expenses of the several kinds of equipment.
47. — All provincial and municipal statutes not in contradiction to

the terms of the present law shall remain in force till ulteriorly

provided for by the Provincial States.
The which We order and command to be inserted into the Statute-

Book (Staatsblad), and that all ministerial departments and

authorities, colleges and officers whatsoever shall see to the

strict execution of the same.
Given at the Hague, on March I2th of the year 1818, the Fifth of

Our Reign.

(Signed} WILLIAM,

By the King's Order,
(Signed) A. R. FALCK.

296 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX E.

STATISTICAL ACCOUNT OF THE "GRAND" OR CURED-HERRING

FISHERY, 1814-1853.

Years.

Number of Busses.

Total number of
lasts of herrings.

Average number of lasts
brought in by each buss.

1814

98

1862

19

1815

137

3558

26

1816

159

3498

22

1817

1 60

3360

21

1818

1 68

1680

10

1819

169

1521

9

1820

153

1380

9

1821

168

2856

17

1822

1 60

1600

10

1823

128

1792

14

1824

123

2214

18

1825

in

2664

24

1826

130

3120

24

1827

130

3250

25

1828

133

3059

23

1829

131

1965

15

1830

173

4329

25

1831

132

2178

16

1832

1 20

252O

21

1833

107

2568

24

1834

116

2900

25

i835

"3

226O

2O

1836

117

2925

25

1837

117

3550

31

1838

121

3267

27

1839

120

2280

19

1840

122

23l8

19

1841

123

2706

22

1842

129

2964

23

1843

127

1150

9

1844

126

2800

23

1845

127

1263

10

1846

116

1283

II

1847

"5

2149

19 .

1848

107

29OO

28

1849

no

2260

20

1850

1 02

2515

245

1851

97

2454

25

1852

93

1499

16

1853

92

2284

25

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 297

APPENDIX F.

STATISTICAL ACCOUNT OF THE FISHERY OF SALT HERRING FOR
SMOKING (Steurharing], CARRIED ON IN VESSELS FROM THE
COAST VILLAGES OF SCHEVENINGEN, KATWIJK, AND NOORDWIJK,
1823-1853.

Years.

Number of boats.

Herrings brought
home.

Average number of
herrings per boat.

1823

35

4,2O2,OOO

121, 2OO

1824

4i

3,IO2,OOO

75,658

1825

43

2,378,000

55,502

1826

40

3,192,000

79 , 800

1827

45

4,6l5,OOO

102,555

1828

47

4,476,000

95,650

1829

43

6,I5O,OOO

143,023

I830

5i

3,641,000

7i,4i9

I83I

39

1,282,000

32,872

I832

36

930,000

25,833

1833

39

4,199,400

107,677

1834

45

2 , 699 , OOO

59,3n

1835

49

3,430,000

69,592

I836

52

6,952,2OO

133,700

1837

7i

IO,503,OOO

147,930

I838

83

7,138,000

86,000

1839

93

8,630,000

92 , 800

1840

101

9,539,000

94,445

1841

IOO

8,215, ooo

82,150

1842

1 06

8 , 942 , 600

84,364

1843

IOO

5,695,000

56,950

1844

89

7,632,000

85,752

1845

89

8,932,000

100,358

1846

94

8,716,000

92,723

I847

96

12,398,000

129,146

1848

96

9,520,600

99,166

1849

98

10,906,000

112,204

1850

1 02

9,767,000

95,755

1851

in

14,000,000

126,207

1852

117

15,918,000

136,569

1853

118

23,433,°°o

198,585

E. 8.

298 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX G.

GENERAL ACCOUNT OF THE DUTCH HERRING FISHERIES BETWEEN

1834 AND 1853.

Years.

Cure-herring caught.

Salt herring (stenr-
haring) caught.

Fresh or "pan herring"
caught.

1834

32,480,000

2,699,000

3I,92O,OOO

1835

25,312,000

3,430,000

29,890,000

1836

32,760,000

6,952,200

16,550,000

1837

39,760,000

10,503,000

5,730,000

1838

39,590,400

7,138,000

2,27O,OOO

1839

25,536,000

8,630,000

3,410,000

1840

25,961,600

9,539,000

4,590,OOO

1841

30,307,200

8,215,000

9,56o,OOO

1842

33,196,800

8,942,600

I2,I4O,OOO

1843

I2,88o,OOO

5,695,000

II,O9O,OOO

1844

31,360,000

7,632,000

8,360,000

1845

14,145,600

8,932,000

14,240,000

1846

14,369,600

8,716,000

l7,68o,OOO

1847

24,068,800

12,398,000

I2,94O,OOO

1848

32,480,000

9,520,000

23,82O,OOO

1849

25,312,000

10,906,000

I4,I2O,OOO

1850

28,l68,OOO

9,767,000

22,52O,OOO

1851

27,484,800

14,000,000

l8,26o,OOO

1852

16,788,800

15,918,000

l6,5OO,OOO

1853

25,580,800

23,433,000

II,92O,OOO

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 299

APPENDIX H.

ACCOUNT OF THE ICELAND COD FISHERY BETWEEN

1844 AND

Years.

Number of ships, each making
one voyage.

Total returns. Lasts of salt
cod of divers kinds.

1844

2

50

l845

2

51

1846

2

58

1847

3

S4£

1848

5

176

1849

6

176

1850

3

93

1851

3

108

1852

5

155

1853

6

141

300 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX I.

ACCOUNT OF THE NORTH SEA HOOK FISHERY IN WINTER, FOR COD,
HADDOCK, PLAICE, &c. (peugvisscherij}, BETWEEN 1844 AND 1853.

Years.

Number of
Ships.

Number of
Voyages.

Total catch.

Barrels of salt cod and
haddock, plaice, &c.

Numbers of cod, haddock,
plaice, &c., brought home
alive.

I844

41

147

7,122

31 » 141

1845

36

119

4; 307

17,132

1846

38

139

7,607

21,946

I847

39

136

6,334

19,062

1848

3°

105

4,3i6

9,919

i*49

35

98

4,423

11,897

18150

32

HO

4,993

9,9SS

i8«,i

26

97

7,464

15,010

1852

38

144

n,939

16,924

i853

*> f
o5

112

8,078

I4,i85

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 301

APPENDIX J.

ACCOUNT OF THE TRAWLING RETURNS OBTAINED BY TRAWLERS OF

KATWIJK, 1821-1850.

Years.

Number of trawl
boats.

Total returns.

Average return per
boat.

1821

38

fl. II2,3O2

fl. 2955.26

1822

37

79,128

2138.85

1823

34

65,047

I9I3-I5

1824

3i

70,573

2276.58

1825

30

75,169

2505.62

1826

3i

78,413

2529-45

1827

3i

68,678

2215.40

1828

32

55,872

1746.00

1829

33

57,560

I743-63

I830

*j ^

OJ

69,577

2I08.0O

1831

27

49,055

1816.75

I832

27

48,905

l8ll.22

1833

28

51,690

1846.00

1834

29

59,091

2037.62

1835

29

61,316

2114.30

I836

29

55,753

1922.50

1837

27

60,539

2242.2O

I838

32

64,400

2012. 5I5

1839

36

84,376

2343.80

1840

42

79,762

I899.095

1841

46

6i,793

i 343 -33s

1842

50

69,377

i 387-545

1843

50

86,638

1732.76

1844

49

89,653

1829. 45s

1845

43

73,769

i7i5"-56

1846

48

58,162

1211.71

I847

47

79,593

1693.49

1848

50

8o,437

i6o8.745

1849

50

76,223

1524.46

1850

48

78,902

1643.78

502 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX

NORTH SEA HERRING FISHERIES
THE REPEAL OF

HERRING BROUGHT HOME.

Years.

Vessels employed.

Cured herring (barrels) by

Fresh herring salted prepara-
tory to smoking (steurharing]
(thousands), by

Keeled
boats.

Bumboats.

Keeled
vessels.

Bumboats.

Keeled
vessels.

Bumboats.

i

2

3

4

5

6

7

3

1856

82

H7

35.924

1 06

36,295

1857

91

157

21,924

210

29,803

1858

95

175

16,940

548

24,969

1859

79

I78

23,226

1,398

27,768

1860

92

174

26,222

295

22,545

1861

9i

181

29 , 260

I65

20,568

1862

90

181

51,108

136

32,011

1863

86

170

35,056

127

38,612

1864

80

1 80

26,946

140

33,535

1865

81

1 86

29,388

419

57,372

1866

82

195

22,856

3,096$

48,498

1867

89

198

27,664

2,811

46,928

1868

91

202

38,515

4,714

74,043

1869

104

192

29,900

3,827

1,539

27,323

1870

1 20

189

70,868

4,130

5>265

59,025

1871

122

20O

77,897

21,544

55366

86,699

1872

1 08

208

60 , 442

22,248

1,655

39,350

1873

102

205

77,412

39,962

2,710

53,295

1874

114

218

66,118

46,5J9

i,349

27,582

1875

US

222

59,483

42,478

826

19,439

1876

109

229

50,102

58,221

I,O2I

37,478

1877

"3

244

71,585

69,414

2,013

38,932

1878

127

265

70,355

41,176

2,628

30,465

1879

128

268

78,103

87,750

1,764

44,260

1880

133

284

134,275

83,724

9,989

56,74i

1881

139

269

no, no

88,788

3,323

50*279

* Column 9. Smoked herring from the Zuider Zee is comprised in these figures.

f Column 10. A considerable part of these figures, in the earlier years especially, represents
This fraud ceased in later years, when Dutch-brand herring was neither dearer, nor expected

% Column 5. Most, and in latter years the whole, of this pickle herring from the coast was not
luggers, and branded and exported along with such herring.

$ Column 8. The export figures for 1879 and following years are taken from Custom-house
over Custom-house declarations in it. The figures down to 1879 are collected from the College's
for exportation, and their figures are constantly at variance with Custom-house statistics.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 303

K.

IN THE NETHERLANDS, FROM
THE LAW OF 1818.

EXPORTS.

IMPORTS.

HIGHEST AND '.
Of "full "-cared

(«) in keeled vessels,
after the close of
hunting time (barrels
containing 800
herrings).

LOWEST PRICES.
herring brought

(£) in bumboats from
Scheveningen
(barrels containing
620 herrings).

Of cured
herring
(barrels).

Of smoked
herring or
"bucking."

(thousands)*

Of cured herring
for consumption
(barrels).

8

9

iof

ii

12

13

14

H.

L.

H.

L.

fl.

fl.

fl.

fl.

33,099

.€

28,OOI

17,140

30,9I9

4,098

69

36

78

2O

15,355

27,863

3,787

38

33

34

21

14,490

25,803

about 8,000

48-25

47-50

26

21

15,040

27,244

5,276

83

43-50

88

23

22,236

25,184

6,069

32

21

24

16

22,250

4I>310

less than 4,000

42

2O

oQ

35

22

14,726

42,698

8,364

50

20

27.50

I7-50

17,224

49,404

9,715

45

25

45

16

13,023

66,072

14,822

5i

27-25

27

20

15,098

53,729

12,280

63

2O

22. IO

I7-25

22,152

71,275

5,400

60

19

28

12

15,921

55,086

21,060

66

25

28

12

39,435

59,032

i6,734

40

24

f.

24

48,437

84,176

2,709

44

25

28

13

46,839

67,916

1,984

76

28

24

15

58,388

47,645

3,415

29.25

21

27

17

68,306

44,928

2,080

39-75

27-50

28

18

68,142

27,486

1,770

45

24.25

36.50

I7-50

68,430

23,166

2,830

61

34-75

34-25

26.50

88,843

42,201

1,205

98

22

26.50

16 "

76,004

*? "J 1 A C*

oo, ^45

475

3I-25

18

26 "

14.50

90, 841 §

45,216

2,033

56

23

33-25

19

138,986

52,470

480

22-75

14.50

32.50

10.50

134,620

41,427

220

35

25

27

I7-50

Scotch herring imported and re-exported after being transferred to Dutch-branded barrels.

to be better than Scotch.

branded upon coming ashore, but carried to Vlaardingen and mixed up with herring caught in

statistics, and are probably inexact, as the article is duty free, and there is no sufficient control
reports, who were enabled, before the said year, to state the exact number of barrels branded

304 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX L.

EXPORTS OF SALT COD.

Years.

Quantities exported to

Total of exports.

Belgium.

Germany.

Barrels.

Barrels.

Barrels

1857

456

i,949

2,883

1858

498

2,118

3,274

1859

280

2,445

2,886

1860

402

i,474

3,564

1861

333

2,384

3,774

1862

200

2,494

3,590

1863

244

2,956

3,592

1864

1,530*

19,980*

21,780*

1865

2,390

2,030

6,630

1866

4,160

2,000

7,550

1867

1,250

1,810

3,5io

1868

3,48o

1,640

5,840

1869

4,260

2,750

7,790

1870

3,900

2,530

6,600

1871

2,210

1,540

4,030

1872

about 2,440

1,460

3,9oo

i873

546t

2OOJ

764t

1874

about 272

404

676

i875

257

323

580

1876

528

415

943

1877

539

434

973

1878

337

263

600

1879

648

245

893

1880

274

202

533

1881

302

223

575

* These figures, although taken from Custom-house statistics, are obviously erroneous,
•f In consequence of a change in the arrangement of Custom-house statistics, exports of
salt cod are given in thousands of kilogrammes from 1872 downwards.

THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES. 305

APPENDIX M.

EXPORTS OF FRESH SEA FISH.
(In thousands of kilogrammes .}

Years.

Fresh fish exported to

Total of exports.

Belgium

Germany.

1857

9S3

440

1498

1858

999

802

I863

1859

750

689

1611

1860

716

830

l653

1861

520

526

1163

1862

820

593

1499

1863

1362

406

1915

1864

1394

758

2256

1865

1599

474

2095

1866

H45

152

1914

1867

1617

157

2IIO

1868

1207

276

1499

1869

1961

327

23O2

1870

2745

390

3 HO

1871

2614

416

3"4

1872

2617

420

3120

1873

4327

633

5459

1874

4456

583

5584

i875

5491

470

6911

1876

5452

375

6779

1877

3637

375

4236

1878

4671

603

5354

1879

5952

416

6638

1880

6445

443

6959

iSSi

3943

463

4800

E. 8.

306 THE HISTORY OF DUTCH SEA FISHERIES.

APPENDIX N

ZUIDER ZEE FISHERIES, 1854-1881.

Years.

Pan-herring brought to
sale at Monnickendam
(in thousands).*

Anchovies caught (in
" ankers," or 5olb.
barrels).

Highest prices of anchovy
caught and sold in the
same year (per anker).

f.

1854

I3,l6o

IO,000

12

I855

10,674

2,OOO

16.50

I856

15 , 390

2,OOO

21

1857

11,980

IO,OOO

17

1858

13,880

60 , ooo

9-50

1859

14,920

30,000

II

1860

13,071

6,000

7.50

1861

16,460

5,000

9

1862

16,232

7,000

9-25

1863

25,755

1,000

20

1864

20,278

2,000

20

1865

16,179

1 ,000

52

1866

20,326

65,000

2O

1867

19,472

10,000

18

1868

17,105

I, OOO

29

1869

18,657

75,000

15

1870

n5435

4,000

17

1871

15,336

7,000

23-50

1872

6,694*

9,000

25-75

i873

9,158

30,000

3i

1874

6,106

40,000

27.50

1875

8,364

55,ooo

25-50

1876

5,605

46 , ooo

22.75

1877

6,496

6,000

22

1878

1,823

1,400

29

1879

4,635

3,000

43

1880

12,566

i ,000

78

1881

7,770

15,000

66

* The total quantities of pan-herring caught in the Zuider Zee are about double the quan-
tities mentioned in this column as regards the earlier years. Since 1872 most Zuider
Zee herring has been carried direct to the inland markets : and the decline of the sales at
Monnickendam is no sign of corresponding decline in the business.

7

V