Page:A Comprehensive History of India Vol 1.djvu/355

 Chap V.| THE TliEATY UF BKEDA. c21

that, as the vessel was trading without license within the limits of the Corn- ad. i667. pany's charter, both it and the goods found in it were forfeited. In terms of the charter, the judgment thus pronounced was subject to review, and Skinner, on making his appeal, was entitled to insist that, for the purpose of carrying it out, he should be sent home in one of the Company's ships to England. This, how- ever, was refused, and he was left to make his way to Europe as he best could, by an overland jom-ney. His complaint, presented at first to the government, impoitjiut was referred successively to a committee of the council, and to the House of tionai Peers. The Company, when ordered to answer, declined, on the ground that the House of Peers had no primtuy jurisdiction, and could only judge by appeal in the last resort. The lords found that they had jurisdiction, and peremptorily ordered the Company to plead. On their continued refusal judgment was given against them, to the amount of £5000. The Company's plea raised a great constitutional ((uestion, which, on their petition, was keenly taken up by the House of Commons and decided in the Company's favour. Two branches of the legislature were thus diametrically opposed, and can-ied on the dispute with more temper than judgment. When Skinner attempted to enforce the judg- ment, the commons interfered and sent him a piisoner to the Tower. The lords were not slow to follow this bad exami)le, and imprisoned the governor, Sir Samuel Barnadiston, and three other members of the court. Not satisfied with this, they declared the petition of the Company to the conmions to be false and scandalous, and the commons retaliated by resolving that any one who should execute the judgment in Skinner's favour was a betrayer of the rights and liberties of the commons of England. The controversy threatened to be interminable, and was not settled till parliament had been adjourned seven times. At last the king held a conference with both houses at Whitehall, and succeeded, by personal persuasion, in inducing them to erase all the proceedings from their journals. In one sense this gave the Company the victory, as the judgment against them was not enforced, and Skinner remained without redress. The next event of this period deserving of particidar notice, is the general })eace concluded by the treaty of Breda, 31st July, IGGT. To this treaty Britain, France, Holland, and Denmark were parties. The benefit which com- merce in general derived from the cessation of hostilities could not but be felt by the London Eaat India Company. It was not, however, without alloy. The principle ado])ted in framing the treaty was that of ut'i possidetis, which of Coiuutions

of theti-eaty

course left the parties, in regard to possession, exactly as they stood at its date, of Bmia. In the case of the Company, the effect was that they finally lost the islands of Polaroon and Damm, because, in the course of the war, the Dutch had availed themselves of their naval superiority to capture them. The loss seemed the more grievous because the Company had been sanguine enough to expect that, by the possession of them, they might be able to secure a share in the envied spice trade. So intent were they on this object that, even after these islands Vol. I. 41