Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Blockaded Seaports in the History in International Law

Blockaded Seaports in the History in International Law 2 trade with the enemy was threatened with heavy punishments4. As a rule neutrals as well as nationals were permitted to entertain commercial relations with inimical subjects, especially with those of the Southern Netherlands, on payment of duties, called "convoys" and (or) "licenses"5. The advantages of this system were twofold. On the one hand the vitally important provinces of Holland and Zealand could maintain their flourishing trades and industries; on the other hand the output of the licenses contributed to cover the costs of the war. Consequently, instead of being pernicious, trade with the enemy was conditional to the Netherlands' successful resistance against the Spanish foe 6 The chief difficulty, of course, was the levying of licenses where neutrals were concerned. Dutch merchants had to pay them at inland offices, but from foreigners they were collected on the river Scheldt, the mouth of which was under Northern control. In 1572, immediately after the surprise of The Brill by the Beggars of the Sea, Flushing had joined the insurrection and two years later the conquest of Middelburg had completed the control of the river. This meant that neutrals, trading to the Spanish Netherlands along the Scheldt, could at certain http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Legal History Review / Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis / Revue d'Histoire du Droit Brill

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/blockaded-seaports-in-the-history-in-international-law-VTogr0zO3Q

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0040-7585
eISSN
1571-8190
DOI
10.1163/157181974X00016
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

2 trade with the enemy was threatened with heavy punishments4. As a rule neutrals as well as nationals were permitted to entertain commercial relations with inimical subjects, especially with those of the Southern Netherlands, on payment of duties, called "convoys" and (or) "licenses"5. The advantages of this system were twofold. On the one hand the vitally important provinces of Holland and Zealand could maintain their flourishing trades and industries; on the other hand the output of the licenses contributed to cover the costs of the war. Consequently, instead of being pernicious, trade with the enemy was conditional to the Netherlands' successful resistance against the Spanish foe 6 The chief difficulty, of course, was the levying of licenses where neutrals were concerned. Dutch merchants had to pay them at inland offices, but from foreigners they were collected on the river Scheldt, the mouth of which was under Northern control. In 1572, immediately after the surprise of The Brill by the Beggars of the Sea, Flushing had joined the insurrection and two years later the conquest of Middelburg had completed the control of the river. This meant that neutrals, trading to the Spanish Netherlands along the Scheldt, could at certain

Journal

The Legal History Review / Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis / Revue d'Histoire du DroitBrill

Published: Jan 1, 1974

There are no references for this article.