Matriz del perfil competitivo

‘All laws prohibiting the importation of any goods from France should be repealed’.76 Often, both merchants and authorities failed to adhere to the embargos implemented during this conflict, and on some occasions prohibitions were revoked from an early point in the war. Just a week before war was declared by Scotland, and just after war had been declared by England, a renewed Franco-Scottish alliance was being considered. On 5 May 1702, in a letter to Caspar Frederick Henning, one J.G. wrote from Paris that: ‘depuis Mecredy la Cour est à Marly où l’on delibere actuellement sur l’alliance entre la France et l’Ecosse, et sur les moyens d’engager les Escosais dans l’Interest de la France.’77 This did not come to fruition, but actions on the part of both the Scottish and French throughout a time of ostensible conflict highlight a desire to prolong the commercial relationship. Despite the arrêt they had issued on 28 August 1703 the French Council of Commerce announced shortly afterwards that they were re- opening trade with Scotland and Ireland, and was soon flooded with requests for passports from Frenchmen and from Irish and Scottish merchants residing in French ports.78 The Scottish Wine Act of 1703 rescinded all previous legislation concerning the importation of French wine – in direct contravention of the economic blockade that was a key strategy in the Crown’s war effort against the French.79 This act benefited the                                                                                                                

75 _{Anon., Reasons against a war with France or an argument shewing that the French King’s Owning the}

Prince of Wales as King of England, Scotland and Ireland; is no Sufficient Ground of a War (London, 1701), TNA SP9/248, 12-13. Complaints of Scottish merchants can be found directed at the behaviour of English ships, rather than French. During the War of the Spanish Succession some Edinburgh merchants petitioned Queen Anne complaining of Scottish vessels being stopped and seized by English ships under fabricated claims that they were bound for France – even though the Scots could prove that they had in fact been freighted for Lisbon. n.d., c. 1702-1707; NAS, PA7/21, f196; Murdoch, Terror, 322 n.199. Indeed, Isobel Grant has suggested that ‘as far as the Scots were concerned, the worst offenders in terms of piracy were the English’, and routes to France and the Netherlands were particularly liable to attack. Between 1569-87 £20,717 worth of goods were taken from the Scots, of which £15,974 remained un- restored. I. Grant, Social and Economic Development in Scotland Before 1603 (Edinburgh/London, 1930) 344; see also T. Pagan, The Convention of the Royal Burghs of Scotland (Glasgow, 1926) 159, who argues that the Convention fitted out planned expeditions against the English, using up their resources and Keith, ‘Economic Causes’, 51

76 _{Historical Manuscripts Commission, Report on the Manuscripts of Lord Polwarth, 3 volumes (London,}

1911-1931) I, 9-10, George Baillie of Jerviswood to Marchmont, 16 May 1713

77 _{J.G. to Caspar Frederick Henning in London, 5 May 1702, Paris, TNA SP78/153/72. This could}

perhaps be James Gordon, although this is pure speculation.

78 _{Schaeper, Council of Commerce, 113}

79 _{Whatley, Scots and the Union, 200; Murdoch, ‘French Connection’, 37; Graham, ‘Scottish Maritime}

Treasury through increased import duties, but also legalised practices merchants were already pursuing.80 In February 1706 Captain Archibald Cockburn of Edinburgh, Daniel Masson of St Martins and Alexander Young of St Martins brought a case to the Admiralty Court against George Gordon in Leith, formerly of Bordeaux, representing the Bordeaux merchant Samuel Martin and Peter Lawson, master of the St Anne of Bergen. They claimed £13,026 Scots for ‘tonnage for fourty tuns claret wyne from Bordeaux to Leith’.81 From the moment they declared war, Scotland asserted her independence from England, Parliament refusing to augment the tariffs on merchandises coming in from France despite urgent requests from Queen Anne to do so.82 The French Council continued to grant passports to Scottish vessels83 and by 1706 permitted direct trade with England, thus pursuing trade not only with her auld ally but also her erstwhile enemy.84 In 1708 and 1710, the Lord High Admiral of Great Britain ordered all ‘captains and commanders of her Majesty’s ships and vessels, as also all persons who now have, or shall have private commissions or letters of Marque, not to molest any of the fishing vessels belonging to the subjects of France’ – part of a reciprocal agreement with the French.85 _{On 15 March 1711, two years before the Treaty of} Utrecht, the British Parliament formally allowed the importation of French wine in neutral vessels. Suggestions were being made in London by the end of the conflict in 1713 that ‘all laws made in Great Britain since the year 1664 prohibiting the importation of any goods from France [should] be repealed’.86

80 _{Whatley, Scots and the Union, 199. Some remained unconvinced that a move towards France would be}

of any assistance, claming that exports of salmon, herring, butter and beef to France were not as beneficial as had previously been believed and that the cost of importing French wine would not be balanced. ‘Philopatris’ to the Duke of Hamilton, 1703, NAS GD406/1/5217; Whatley, Scots and the Union, 200

81 _{15 February 1706, Edinburgh, NAS AC13/1, 40, 259. This Daniel Masson is almost certainly the same}

individual trading in La Rochelle and St Martins during the Nine Years’ War.

82 _{H. Sée and A. Cormack, ‘Commercial Relations between France and Scotland in 1707’ in Scottish}

Historical Review, XXIII (1926) 276. This split was recognised immediately in Britain. In November 1701, six months before war was officially declared, a report in a London newspaper advertised a new publication: The dangers of Europe, From the Growing Power of France. With some Free Thoughts on Remedies. And particularly on the Cure of our Divisions at Home: In Order to a Successful War Abroad, against the French King and his Allies: Flying Post or the Post Master, London, 29 November 1701, issue 1025 [my emphasis]

83 _{They also offered a similar favour to the Dutch. Sée and Cormack, ‘Commercial Relations’, 275} 84 _{Schaeper, French Council of Commerce, 114}

85 _{11 May 1708, TNA, HCA 26/13; Murdoch, Terror, 307; London Gazette, 10 May 1708, 7 September}

1710, issue 4741. It has been argued that from 1710 the tenor of the war changed and conditions more favourable to peace began to emerge. Cornette, Chronique, 517

86 _{Schaeper, The French Council of Commerce, 131; Levasseur, Histoire, 406; George Baillie of}

Jerviswood to Marchmont, 16 May 1713, Historical Manuscripts Commission, Polwarth, I, 9-10. Schaeper includes an assessment that even though these wines were still subject to the high import duties implemented in the 1690s, many Englishmen were becoming tired of inferior and unfamiliar wines from