Post by caton on Jan 18, 2005 16:36:27 GMT -3
The Nootka Sound Treaty and the Malvinas/Falkland
Here is a brief account of this treaty, which was almost unknown for everybody in the old forum till I wrote about it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two British ships were captured by the Spaniards at Nootka Sound (Vancouver, Canada) for entering in what was at that time their jurisdiction. That information arrived to the Spanish Court at the end of 1789. As it has happened with Malvinas (giving place to the "secret clause" recognising the Spanish sovereignty of the archipelagos I have written about in my "Chronology of Malvinas/Falklands" postings), the British considered their honour was at stake and demanded a reparation. William Pitt the Younger was Prime Minister at those times and he began war preparatives (Spain too). The Spanish Real Armada was in no position at those times to fight a war alone against the Royal Navy as this later had twice it's size. Spain looked for support to the France of Louis XVI, which was in fact ruled by the National Assembly at those times, being Mirabeau one of it's leading representatives.France was once again reticent with her ally. There were negotiations between Spain and Britain in wich the latter obtained many adventages.
The Convention of Nootka Sound was signed on October 28th, 1790, at San
Lorenzo, ceding Spain, in spite of Floridablanca's attempts. The ships
captured were returned to the British; no reparation should be paid, but
subjects of both powers were not to be disturbed when fishing or sailing
alongside the Pacific Ocean or the South Atlantic Seas, either landing in
coast by those waters - in unsettled lands - , trading with the naturals,
or even stablishing settlements. All that could be done, with the
following limitations only:
Article 4th stated that the English activities must not be useful as "pretext to an ilicit trade with the Spanish Settlements and with that aim in mind it has been expressely stablished that British subjects will not sail nor fish in those seas at a distance of less than ten sea leagues of any part of land already occupied by Spain".
Article 5th made reference to free trade in northwestern North América north of the zone then occupied by Spain: where none of those sea powers had settlements, the other would be free to trade.
Article 6th stablished that either in the eastern as in the western coasts and adyacent island of South América no new settlement was going to be stablished in the future by either power south of those already occupied by Spain. In spite of this, the subjects of both powers could go ashore for things related with fishing and even build "lodges and other temporary buildings useful for that aim only."
Article 7th stablished that in case of any violation of any clause, the Offitials of both sides -without going to hands- should made a clear statement of facts and send them to their respective authorities.
The English obtained nearly everything they had asked for, but British settlements in what are now Argentinian coasts (including Malvinas/Falkland) had been avoided (exept those temporary for sealers and whalers).
The agreement not to establish new settlements either in the eastern as in
the western coasts and adyacent island of South América already occupied
by Spain (as per article 6th), recognizes Spanish sovereignty over Carmen de Patagones, San José, Deseado y PUERTO SOLEDAD (MALVINAS Is). This Treaty was disadventagious for Spain, BUT IT IS A BRITISH RECOGNIZEMENT to the SPANISH SOVEREIGNTY of MALVINAS. At those times, Spain had been for 16 years the only stablished country in Malvinas, after the English abandoned them in 1774.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"GÜAY DE LOS PUEBLOS QUE OLVIDAN SU HISTORIA !" (difficult for me to translate, but something like "Oh, what will become of those peoples who
forget their history?").
Best Regards,
Javier
Here is a brief account of this treaty, which was almost unknown for everybody in the old forum till I wrote about it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two British ships were captured by the Spaniards at Nootka Sound (Vancouver, Canada) for entering in what was at that time their jurisdiction. That information arrived to the Spanish Court at the end of 1789. As it has happened with Malvinas (giving place to the "secret clause" recognising the Spanish sovereignty of the archipelagos I have written about in my "Chronology of Malvinas/Falklands" postings), the British considered their honour was at stake and demanded a reparation. William Pitt the Younger was Prime Minister at those times and he began war preparatives (Spain too). The Spanish Real Armada was in no position at those times to fight a war alone against the Royal Navy as this later had twice it's size. Spain looked for support to the France of Louis XVI, which was in fact ruled by the National Assembly at those times, being Mirabeau one of it's leading representatives.France was once again reticent with her ally. There were negotiations between Spain and Britain in wich the latter obtained many adventages.
The Convention of Nootka Sound was signed on October 28th, 1790, at San
Lorenzo, ceding Spain, in spite of Floridablanca's attempts. The ships
captured were returned to the British; no reparation should be paid, but
subjects of both powers were not to be disturbed when fishing or sailing
alongside the Pacific Ocean or the South Atlantic Seas, either landing in
coast by those waters - in unsettled lands - , trading with the naturals,
or even stablishing settlements. All that could be done, with the
following limitations only:
Article 4th stated that the English activities must not be useful as "pretext to an ilicit trade with the Spanish Settlements and with that aim in mind it has been expressely stablished that British subjects will not sail nor fish in those seas at a distance of less than ten sea leagues of any part of land already occupied by Spain".
Article 5th made reference to free trade in northwestern North América north of the zone then occupied by Spain: where none of those sea powers had settlements, the other would be free to trade.
Article 6th stablished that either in the eastern as in the western coasts and adyacent island of South América no new settlement was going to be stablished in the future by either power south of those already occupied by Spain. In spite of this, the subjects of both powers could go ashore for things related with fishing and even build "lodges and other temporary buildings useful for that aim only."
Article 7th stablished that in case of any violation of any clause, the Offitials of both sides -without going to hands- should made a clear statement of facts and send them to their respective authorities.
The English obtained nearly everything they had asked for, but British settlements in what are now Argentinian coasts (including Malvinas/Falkland) had been avoided (exept those temporary for sealers and whalers).
The agreement not to establish new settlements either in the eastern as in
the western coasts and adyacent island of South América already occupied
by Spain (as per article 6th), recognizes Spanish sovereignty over Carmen de Patagones, San José, Deseado y PUERTO SOLEDAD (MALVINAS Is). This Treaty was disadventagious for Spain, BUT IT IS A BRITISH RECOGNIZEMENT to the SPANISH SOVEREIGNTY of MALVINAS. At those times, Spain had been for 16 years the only stablished country in Malvinas, after the English abandoned them in 1774.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"GÜAY DE LOS PUEBLOS QUE OLVIDAN SU HISTORIA !" (difficult for me to translate, but something like "Oh, what will become of those peoples who
forget their history?").
Best Regards,
Javier