切断西班牙帝国的血脉:1737-1740年詹金斯耳战争期间英国海军关于银舰队的政策和行动

IF 0.6 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Shinsuke Satsuma
{"title":"切断西班牙帝国的血脉:1737-1740年詹金斯耳战争期间英国海军关于银舰队的政策和行动","authors":"Shinsuke Satsuma","doi":"10.1080/03086534.2023.2275330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTIn studies on the War of Jenkins’ Ear, a conflict between the British and Spanish empires, historians tend to focus on colonial expeditions, such as those against Porto Bello and Cartagena. On the other hand, operations against Spanish silver fleets, the mainstay of the Spanish imperial trade system, have attracted far less attention. This article examines these somewhat undervalued operations against the silver fleets as well as those concerning other Spanish shipping during the War of Jenkins’ Ear, giving their political and diplomatic backgrounds. This analysis demonstrates the significance of the issue of the silver fleets in Anglo-Spanish relations at the time. It also indicates the deep involvement of France in this issue and its influence on British naval operations. Finally, this article describes the development and implementation of British naval policy to put economic and financial pressure on the Spanish empire, arguing that the naval operations during this period were one of the earliest attempts at using blockades on both sides of the Atlantic, which Britain further developed in later imperial wars that took place during the long eighteenth century.KEYWORDS: BritainSpainFranceempireWar of Jenkins’ EarNavysilver fleetstradeblockade AcknowledgementsI am grateful to Professor N.A.M. Rodger, Professor Jeremy Black and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on this article.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 In this paper, all dates are given in the Old Style of the Julian Calendar except where the date is specifically indicated as New Style by (n.s.) or both dates are used (e.g. 6/17 August). The new year is taken to have begun on 1 January, not 25 March.2 For example, see Richmond, Navy, i; Harding, Amphibious Warfare. However, it should be noted that Richmond was aware of the importance of intercepting the silver fleets. Richmond, Navy, i. 145, 277–8, vol. ii. 245.3 For the establishment of the Western Squadron, see, Duffy, “Establishment”.4 Torres Sánchez, Constructing a Fiscal-Military State, 138–40, 154, 214.5 Pares, War and Trade, 109–14.6 Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, esp., 175–6, 214; Harding, Emergence, esp., 57–8. Chapman, Disaster, 67–6, 70.7 Wilson, “Empire,” 74–109.8 Regarding the period of the War of Spanish Succession, there is an article on the issue of the silver fleets by Kamen. Kamen, “Destruction,” 165–73.9 Walker, Spanish Politics, 4–5; Pares, War, 3, 112–3. In addition, ships called avisos sailed between Spain and her American colonies, but their duty was to carry official papers and information, not valuable cargo.10 In the Pacific, Manila Galleons, or vessels engaged in the trans-pacific trade between Manila and Acapulco, were another important target for the British navy. For Manila Galleons, see Schurz, “Mexico”; Walker, Spanish Politics, 6–7. During the War of Austrian Succession, Commodore Anson succeeded in capturing one of them. For this capture, see Williams, Prize, ch. IV.11 Satsuma, Britain, 100–4, 119–21. A similar expectation of intercepting the silver fleets was still present in the Napoleonic Wars. Hall, British Strategy, 112.12 Kamen, “Destruction,” 169–72.13 Black, “Anglo-Spanish Naval Relations,” 242; Satsuma, Britain, 222–33.14 British Library [hereafter BL], Add MS 32801 fos. 120–20v, Keene to Newcastle, 14 July 1739; BL, Add MS 19034, fos. 72–3, ‘Mr Dellift’s Acct of the Trade &c to La Vera Cruz’, [n.d. but, probably early 1741]; BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 290–290v, “Extract of the Papers” [submitted to Newcastle by William Woods], [n. d., but probably mid-1739]; The National Archives, Kew (hereafter TNA), SP 78/218, fos. 153–53v, Sicilian Abbots to Waldegrave, 1738. In addition, both the government and the opposition sometimes claimed that the interruption of Spanish imperial shipping could be injurious also to the French, who were benefiting from the Spanish American trade. Daily Gazetteer, 15 Jan. 1740; Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 254.15 As to the issue of British smuggling and the Spanish depredations, see McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 78–96; Nelson, “Contraband Trade,” 55–67; Finucane, Temptations, 23–8, 34–6, 85–96.16 Temperley, “Causes,” 209; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 75.17 This is based on my survey of the correspondence between the Duke of Newcastle, Secretary of State for the South, and Sir Benjamin Keene, a British ambassador in Madrid, as well as other British envoys, which are in BL, Add MS 32794, 32795, 32796; TNA, SP 94/127, SP 94/128.18 For example, see, BL, Add MS 32795, fos. 51, 170–170v, 246–246v, 258–258v, Keene to Newcastle, 22 May, 29 July, 2 and 16 Sep. 1737; BL, Add MS 32796, f. 9v, Waldegrave to Keene, 14 Oct. 1737 (n.s.); fos. 14–14v, Keene to Newcastle, 14 Oct. 1737; fos. 136–136v, Keene to William Smith, [Secretary to the South Sea Company], 18 Nov. 1737.19 BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 243v–244, Keene to Newcastle, 13 Dec. 1737.20 BL, Add MS 32797, fos. 87v–89, 140v–141, Keene to Newcastle, 23 Feb. and 10 Mar. 1738.21 For example, see, BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 77–82, 284–7, Newcastle to Keene, 4 Nov. and 19 Dec. 1737; BL, Add MS 32797, fos. 10–11, Newcastle to Keene, 7 Jan. 1738.22 Richmond, Navy, i. 5–10.23 Temperley, “Causes,” 212–3. For the opposition’s criticism of the negotiations with Spain and their demand for tougher action against it in Parliament, see, for example, Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 580–3, 593–4, 616–20, 633–5, 718–9, 759–60, 764–5, 777–80.24 BL, Add MS 32798, fos. 48v–49v, 142v–43, Keene to Newcastle, 26 May and 23 June 1738.25 For Anglo-French diplomatic relations in this period, see Wilson, French Foreign Policy, chs. IX, XI–XII; Black, Natural and Necessary Enemies, ch. 1, 36–40.26 Temperley, “Causes,” 203; Wilson, French Foreign Policy, 29–41, 60–61.27 For Franco-Spanish disputes at this time, see Pares, War, 133–4; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 160–1. See also, BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 119–119v, Newcastle to Keene, 4 Nov. 1737; BL, Add MS 32796 fo. 237, Keene to Newcastle, 13 Dec. 1737; TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 41v–2, Waldegrave to Harrington, 1 June 1740.28 Stein and Stein, Silver, Trade, and War, 141–3.29 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 776, 826–7, 837, 947–8, 1418; Walpole, Grand Question, 18–20; Popular Prejudices, 9; Daily Gazetteer, 7 Mar. 1739. As seen here, the government also mentioned the interests of the British merchants trading with Spain and her colonies via Cadiz as a consideration to counter the opposition’s bellicose position. In fact, the British merchants were one of the major participants in the trade via Cadiz. This was still the case on the eve of the War of Jenkins’ Ear. Pearce, British Trade, 5–8. By contrast, the opposition were generally dismissive of the government’s concern over the interests of the British merchants trading via Cadiz. Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x, 838, 856–58, 985; Lyttelton, Ministerial Prejudices, 20. Wilson argued that the opposition in this period incorporated into its political propaganda the aggressive expansionist demands of British mercantile interests, especially those engaged in American colonial trade, who were also often involved in direct illicit trade with Spanish colonies. Wilson, “Empire,” 96–8. On the other hand, McLachlan once suggested that, in this period, the interests of the merchants carrying on peaceful trade with Spain and her colonies via Cadiz were in conflict with those of the merchants engaged in direct trade with Spanish colonies. Jean O. McLachlan, Trade and Peace with Old Spain 1667–1750: A Study of Commerce on Anglo-Spanish Diplomacy in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940), 78, 121. Given this conflict of interest, it is possible that the former, who preferred peace with Spain, might have been more closely connected with the government, which adopted restrained policy, than with the opposition, which was sympathetic to the latter merchants’ demands and called for a more aggressive policy, although further investigation is needed to clarify this point.30 TNA, SP 78/218, fos. 164v–166, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 11 June 1738 (n.s.).31 Common Sense, 9 Sep. 1738; Craftsman, 9 Sep. 1738; Craftsman, 23 Sep. 1738.32 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x, 838–9, 853–58, 1416–7; Lyttelton, Ministerial Prejudices, 19–20; Craftsman, 31 Mar. 1739.33 Daily Gazetteer, 11 Oct. 1738.34 BL, Add MS 32798, fos. 258v–59, Keene to Newcastle, 2 Aug. 1738.35 BL, Add MS 32691, fo. 502, Wager to Newcastle 2 Dec. 1738; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 72v–73, Newcastle to Keene, 26 Jan. 1739. However, the release of the register ship was taken up later by the opposition press and politicians, who criticised the government for being too soft in its negotiations with Spain. Craftsman, 17 Feb. 1739; Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 1173.36 Sperling, South Sea Company, 47–8; McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 114–9.37 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Manuscripts of Egmont, iii. 24–5, 19 Feb. 1739.38 Temperley, “Causes,” 227–32, 234–5; Pares, War and Trade, 55–6, 59; McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 120; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 207–9.39 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 885–8, 1159–61, 1172–4, 1209–13, 1286–7; Common Sense, 3 Mar. 1739; Craftsman, 27 Jan. 1739; Lyttelton, Considerations, 10–11, 20–1; Robins, Address, 18, 20–2.40 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 249, Francis Hare to Francis Naylor, 30 June 1739.41 Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 208–9.42 TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 27 Apr. 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 29–30, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 8/19 May 1739; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 299v–300, Keene to Newcastle, 24 Apr. 1739.43 TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 23 Mar. 1739.44 Temperley, “Causes,” 223–4; Hildner, “Role,” 338–41; Pares, War and Trade, 54–6.45 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 29, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 1/12 May 1739.46 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 234–35v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 8 June 1739.47 TNA, SP 45/2, 3 and 11 June 1739.48 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 235v–36, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 8 June 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 32, 33–4, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 1/12 June and 8/19 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 392v–93, [Newcastle] to [Keene], 8 May 1739.49 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 250–51v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 26 June 1739 (n.s.).50 TNA, SP78/221, fos. 40v–41, 101–101v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 1 and 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).51 BL, Add MS 32993, fo. 59, “Considerations,” 3 June 1739; TNA, SP 45/2, 3 June 1739.52 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 48v–49, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739; TNA, SP 94/133, “Extract of Consul Cayley’s letter from Cadiz,” 2 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 48, 115–115v, 121, Keene to Newcastle, 15 June, 9 and 14 July 1739.53 BL, Add MS 32801, fo. 143v, Keene to Newcastle, 27 July 1739.54 BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 359–359v, Keene to Newcastle, 18 May 1739.55 BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 23, 72–72v, 180–180v, Keene to Newcastle, 9, 14 June and 10 Aug. 1739.56 TNA, SP 42/86, fo. 53, Newcastle to Haddock, 6 June 1739.57 Richmond, Navy, i. 54.58 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 101v–102, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).59 BL, Add MS 35406, fo. 137v, Newcastle to Hardwicke, [n.d. but, c. 11 Aug. 1739]; fos. 138–138v, Newcastle to Hardwicke, 12 Aug. 1739.60 TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 265v, “Memorandum of Newcastle with Wager’s Observation,” 9 Aug 1739. Interestingly, a similar proposition was later made by the opposition. For example, the Duke of Argyll, one of the leading opposition aristocrats, argued for it in April 1740. Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 594.61 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 72–3, 79v, Haddock to Newcastle, 14 Aug. and 6 Sep. 1739.62 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 93–93v, W[illiam] Cayley [British consul in Cadiz] to Haddock, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); fo. 110v, Haddock to Newcastle, 26 Sep. 1739.63 TNA, SP 45/2, 3 and 11 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32993, fo. 59, “Considerations,” 3 June 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fo. 49v, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739. Information about movement of the galeones among Walpole’s paper dated in June 1739 also seems to suggest that the government then paid some attention to the galeones as well as the flota. Cambridge University Library [hereafter CUL]: Cholmondeley (Houghton) Papers, Political Papers 26/130, “Memorandum about the Movement of Some Spanish Galleon,” June 1739.64 BL, Add MS 40827, fos. 11–11v, Wager to Vernon, 19 July 1739; Add MS 32692, fos. 140–40v, “Draft of a Secret Instruction for Vice Admiral Edward Vernon,” 16 July 1739.65 TNA, SP 42/81 fo. 255, “Mem. of Alteration & Addition for V.A. Vernon’s Instructions” [n.d., but probably July or Aug. 1739?]; BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 342–342v, “Drat to Vice Adm Vernon,” 28 Sep. 1739; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 26, Wager to Vernon, 7 Oct. 1739.66 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 18–19, 20 June 1739; TNA, SP 78/220, fo. 272, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 3 July 1739 (n.s.); TNA, SP 94/133, “Extract of a letter from Cadiz, dated 14th July 1739”.67 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 49–49v, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739; fos. 55–55v, Newcastle to Haddock, 20 June 1739; BL, Add MS 40827, fo. 11, Wager to Vernon, 19 July 1739; TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 249, 13 July 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 69–69v, Newcastle to Haddock, 8 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Captain [Covil] Mayne of the Lenox, 15 Aug. 1739.68 BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 94v, 124v–25, Keene to Newcastle, 29 June and 14 July 1739; fos. 127v–128v, Keene to H. Walpole, 20 July 1739; fos. 143v–144, 158v, Keene to Newcastle, 27 July and 3 Aug. 1739.69 TNA, SP 78/221, fo. 9v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 22 July 1739 (n.s.). The French attitudes towards the issue of the azogues was examined in more detail in Pares, War and Trade, 143–4. What I attempt here is to place this episode in the context of the entire British operations against the silver fleets.70 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 9v–11v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 22 July 1739 (n.s.).71 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 50v–52v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 July 1739; fos. 80–81v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 203–203v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).72 BL, Add MS 32801, fo. 180, Keene to Newcastle, 10 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 72–72v, Haddock to Newcastle, 14 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 17 Aug. 1739; CUL, Cholmondeley (Houghton) Papers, Correspondence, 1, 2913, Wager to Walpole, 16 Aug. 1739.73 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 104–5, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 231v–2, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 30 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).74 BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 249–49v, Harrington to Vernon, 21 Aug. 1739.75 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 109–109v, 119–119v, Haddock to Newcastle, 26 Sep. and 4 Oct. 1739. According to Hussey, during the War of Austrian Succession, nine of the company’s ships were seized by the British. Hussey, Caracas Company, 77–8. As for the ships from Buenos Aires, they could have been register ships, though the British sources do not refer to them as such.76 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 134–134v, Captain Cooper to Newcastle, Oct. 1739; TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 250, 258, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 9 and 13 Nov. 1739 (n.s.); Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 35–6, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 30 Oct./10 Nov. and 2/13 Nov. 1739.77 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 255v–6, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 1 Nov. 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 253, Francis Hare to Francis Naylor, 4 Nov. 1739.78 TNA, SP 78/221, fo. 273, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Nov. 1739 (n.s.).79 This point was briefly mentioned by Pares. Pares, War and Trade, 110–1. I examine this connection in more detail here.80 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 1 and 31 Oct. 1739.81 The Vernon-Wager manuscripts in the Library of Congress [hereafter Vernon-Wager MSS], Edward Trelawny to Wager, 20 Sep. 1739; TNA, SP 42/85, fo. 50, “Treasure brought by the South Sea Fleet from Callao to Panama, being two Men of War and Four Merchant Ships … ,” 8 Aug. 1739. Hubert Tassell, a former factor of the South Sea Company, mentioned another possibility: that if the fair would be held at Panama, the money might be remitted from there to Acapulco and then transported to Vera Cruz, as happened in 1727 during the blockade by Hosier. BL, Add MS 32694, fo. 43v, [Hubert] Tassell to Sir Robert Walpole, 11 Sep. 1739.82 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 31 Oct. 1739; Vernon to Newcastle, 5 Nov. 1739. It should be also remembered that, as Pares has pointed out, Vernon’s expedition was also intended to revive the direct trade with Spanish-American colonies via Jamaica by demolishing the fortifications in Porto Bello and making the town accessible to British merchants. Pares, War and Trade, 115–6.83 TNA, SP 42/107, “Copy of V.A. Vernon’s Orders to Capt Knowles, of the Diamond, 3 Nov. 1739; ‘Copy of the Order of Battle and general Plan for the attack of Porto Bello’, 7 Nov. 1739; ‘Copy of V. A. Vernon’s Orders to Capt Knowles, of the Diamond,” [11 Dec. 1739].84 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 and 17 Dec. 1739. The idea of an expedition against Panama, as well as that against Cartagena and Manila, had been mentioned by Wager in the very early stage of the war. Vernon-Wager MSS, “Memorandum Respecting Proposed Expeditions to Manila and Cartagena,” [6 Nov. 1739].85 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 143–4, 152, 28 Jan. and 25 Feb. 1740.86 TNA, SP 78/222, fo. 115v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 2 Mar. 1740 (n.s.).87 TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 213v–214, “Advices from Spain’, 21 Mar. 1740 (n.s.); fo. 239v, ‘Advices from Madrid,” 4 Apr. 1740 (n.s.).88 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 101v–102, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 10 June 1740; fo. 142, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 6 July 1740 (n.s.).89 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 356v–7, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Dec. 1739; TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 76v–77, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 22 Jan. 1740; fos. 78v–79, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 22 Jan. 1740; fos. 114–14v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 2 Mar. 1740 (n.s.); fos. 131v–32v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Feb. 1740; fos. 156v–157v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 12 Mar. 1740 (n.s.).90 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 139, 145–6, 24 Jan. and 4 Feb. 1740; TNA, SP 45/2, 4 Feb. 1740; TNA, SP 42/81, fos. 316v–317, Feb. 1740.91 TNA, SP 45/2, 17 Apr. 1740; BL, Add MS 32693, fos. 227–227v, “Draft of a Letter to Vice Admiral Vernon (Most Private),” 18 Apr. 1740.92 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 162–3, 164, 180, 25 Mar., 2 Apr. and 30 Apr. 1740; TNA, SP 45/2, 25 Mar. 1740; TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 320–320v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 4 May 1740 (n.s.); Harding, Emergence, 69, 71.93 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 91–2, Vernon to Wager, 21 and 25 Apr. 1740; 93–4, “Order to Captain Dent of the Hampton Court,” 6 May. 1740; 97, Vernon to Newcastle, 26–31 May. 1740; 100, Vernon to Wager, 26–31 May 1740.94 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 and 17 Dec. 1739. Another plan of the Spaniards mentioned in Vernon’s letter to Wager was to have a fair in Panama, as had been done during Hosier’s blockade in 1726, or in Quito. Greenwich, National Maritime Museum, Caird Library [hereafter NMM], PHB/3/A, fo. 63, Vernon to Wager, 21 Apr. 1740; Vernon-Wager MSS, Vernon to Wager, 9 May 1740.95 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 251v–252, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 9 Nov. 1739 (n.s.); fos. 356–7, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Dec. 1739; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 61, Vernon to Wager, 18–31 Jan. 1740. A reference to the prevention of the return of the galeones in Newcastle’s memorandum for the meeting at the Cabinet Council, written around March 1740, seems to suggest that this was part of the agenda of the government’s naval policy at the time. BL, Add MS 32993. fo. 75v, “State of the Nation,” [Mar. 1739/40].96 TNA, SP 42/85, fos. 104–104v, Vernon to Newcastle, 18–31 Jan. and 2 Feb. 1740; Vernon-Wager MSS, Trelawny to Wager, 29 Aug. 1740; NMM, PHB/3/A, fos. 62–3, Vernon to Wager, 21 Apr. 1740.97 For an in-depth analysis of this expedition, see Harding, Amphibious Warfare.98 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 190–91, 193, 20 and 22 May 1740; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 47, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 2/13 and 13/24 May 1740; TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 41–41v, Waldegrave to Harrington, 1 June 1740 (n.s.).99 BL, Add MS 40827, fos. 15–15v, Vernon to Newcastle, 3 June 1740.100 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 101v–102, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 10 June 1740.101 TNA, SP 78/223, fo. 362v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 3 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 35406, fos. 225v–226, Andrew Stone to Hardwicke, 26 Aug. 1740; fo. 230, Newcastle to Hardwicke, 28 Aug. 1740.102 BL, Add MS 32802, fos. 161–61v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 15 July 1740.103 Original Letters, 18, Wager to Vernon, 6 Aug. 1740.104 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 374–75v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 5 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); fos. 382–3, Waldegrave to Harrington, 11 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); TNA, SP 78/224, fos. 72–3, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 28 Sep. 1740 (n.s.).105 TNA, SP 78/224, fos. 19v–20, 21–21v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 17 Sep. 1740 (n.s.).106 Original Letters, 26, 34, Wager to Vernon, 11 Oct. 1740 and 24 Feb. 1741.107 NMM, VER/1/2/T, Trelawny to Wager, 16 Oct. 1740; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 137–8, Vernon to Wager, 14 Oct. 1740; 140, ‘Order to Captain Rentone, Nov. 1740’.108 TNA, SP 78/224, fo. 161v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 30 Oct. 1740 (n.s.); TNA, SP 78/225, fos. 139–39v, Sicilian Abbot to Thompson, 21 Mar. 1741 (n.s.).109 NMM, VER/1/2/T, Captain Armstrong to [Vernon?], [n.d.].110 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 153–4, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 Dec. 1740; NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Josiah Burchett, Secretary of the Admiralty, 12 Dec. 1740.111 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 141, Vernon to Newcastle, 7 Nov. 1740; TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 360, Wager to Newcastle, 6 Dec. 1740, fo. 362, ‘Extract of a Letter from Capt. Reddish & some Merchants at Antigua, of the 11th, 14th & 16th Oct. 1740’.112 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 149–50, Vernon to Lord Cathcart, 10 Dec. 1740; NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Burchett, 12 Dec. 1740.113 NMM, PHB/3/A, p. 50, Lord Tyrawley to Wager, 5 Nov. 1740; TNA, SP42/89, fos. 4–4v, Sir Chaloner Ogle to Newcastle, 23 Dec. 1740; TNA, SP 78/225, fo. 22v, Thompson to Couraud, 21 Jan. 1741 (n.s.). Even after D’Antin’s squadron returned to Europe, some people in France still believed that this was its real aim. TNA, SP 78/225, fos. 243–43v, Thompson to Newcastle, 11 May 1741 (n.s.).114 NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Burchett, 12 Dec. 1740; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 152, 154, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 Dec. 1740; BL, Add MS 28133, fos. 75–6, 29 Jan. 1741. Harding, Amphibious Warfare, 87–8. It seems that Vernon’s view about the intention of French forces was more correct than Norris. In fact, according to Pares, the initial order to D’Antin was far more aggressive than the British government imagined. D’Antin was ordered to attack Vernon’s squadron and the reinforcements sent to him and to later invade Jamaica with a land force from Saint-Domingue. Yet, several factors (such as the arrival of a large number of British reinforcements, shortage of victualling, and failure in cooperation with the governor of Saint-Domingue and the commander of the Spanish squadrons) prevented the execution of these instructions, as well as another possible service of helping the Spaniards to hold a fair and transport the treasure back to Europe, which Maurepas, the French minister of Marine and Colonies, also regarded as an important task. Pares, War and Trade, 165–6, 172–6.115 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 171, “Draft Resolutions of a General Council of War,” 8 Feb. 1741.116 Ibid., 173–5, “Draft Resolutions of a General Council of War,” 16 and 23 Feb. 1741.117 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 777–80, 840.118 Operations of the War, 25–7, 29–30; Considerations on the Management, 21–3.119 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 712–3, 787, 831–3. For a similar defence of the blockade policy in the ministerial press, see Daily Gazetteer, 15 Jan. 1740.120 Harding, Emergence, 96, 122, 129, 135.121 For example, see, TNA, SP42/93, fos. 351v–352, Mathews to Newcastle, 11 Oct. 1743; fos. 447–448v, Newcastle to Mathews, 23 Dec. 1743; SP 42/94, fos. 46–48v, Mathews to Newcastle, 14 Jan. 1744; fos. 69–73v, Newcastle to Mathews, 3 Feb. 1744; fos. 147–50, Newcastle to Mathews, 16 Mar. 1744; SP42/96, fos. 253–253v, Newcastle to Rowley, 27 July 1745, SP 42/97, fos. 167v–168v, Medley to Newcastle, 20 Jan. 1747; fo. 228, Medley to Newcastle, 28 Apr. 1747.122 TNA, SP42/89, fos. 24–24v, Ogle to Newcastle, 18 Jan. 1743; fos. 48–48v, Ogle to Newcastle, 22 Mar. 1743; fos. 104v–105, Ogle to Newcastle, 19 Feb. 1744; fos. 120v–121, Ogle to Newcastle, 21 Apr. 1744; fos. 131v–132, Ogle to Newcastle, 8 May 1744; fos. 193, 194, Ogle to Newcastle, 24 Nov. 1744; fo. 210v, Ogle to Newcastle, 3 Feb. 1745.123 TNA, SP42/96, fos. 243, 244–245v, Newcastle to Rowley, 18 Jan. 1745.124 Pares, War and Trade, 111.125 TNA, SP42/96, fos. 84–85, 86v–87, Rowley to Newcastle, 21 Feb. 1745. This connection between the lack of sufficient force in the Mediterranean and the failure to intercept Torres’s squadron was pointed out by Harding. Harding, Emergence, 207–9.126 TNA, SP42/89, fo. 56, Ogle to Newcastle, 30 Apr. 1743; fo. 83, Ogle to Newcastle, 31 July 1743; fos. 152–152v, Rowley to Newcastle, 2 June 1745.127 TNA, SP42/89, fos. 270v–271, Vice-Admiral Davers to Newcastle, 24 Nov. 1745; fo. 343v, Davers to Newcastle, 9 Mar. 1746; SP42/96, fos. 159–159v, Rowley to Newcastle, 3 July 1745. Pares, War and Trade, 111.128 Richmond, Navy, iii. 247–8.129 Pares, War and Trade, 111–4; Stein and Stein, Silver, 192–5; Walker, Spanish Politics, 211, 215–7.130 For the increase in the number of register ships as well as azogues sailing to Spanish-American colonies after the war started, see Walker, Spanish Politics, 277, Table 1. In this trade using register ships, foreign merchants, especially French ones, were heavily involved. Stein and Stein, Silver, 192–3.131 Stein and Stein, Silver, 195; Kuethe and Andrien, Spanish Atlantic World, 154–5.132 Pares, War and Trade, 111–2.133 Lamikiz, Trade and Trust, ch. 3; Pearce, Origins, 11–12, 126–34, 177–8.134 Later on, in the early nineteenth century, during the Napoleonic Wars, the blockade was again employed as a powerful weapon against Spain, which further contributed to crumbling Spain’s Atlantic trade system. For the impact that British blockade had on Spanish Atlantic trade system and Spain’s finance in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, see Pearce, British Trade, 119–21; Stein and Stein, Crisis, 178, 259.Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI [Grant Numbers JP15K16865; JP17K03158].","PeriodicalId":46214,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF IMPERIAL AND COMMONWEALTH HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Severing the Sinews of the Spanish Empire: British Naval Policy and Operations Regarding the Silver Fleets during the War of Jenkins’ Ear, 1737–1740\",\"authors\":\"Shinsuke Satsuma\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03086534.2023.2275330\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTIn studies on the War of Jenkins’ Ear, a conflict between the British and Spanish empires, historians tend to focus on colonial expeditions, such as those against Porto Bello and Cartagena. On the other hand, operations against Spanish silver fleets, the mainstay of the Spanish imperial trade system, have attracted far less attention. This article examines these somewhat undervalued operations against the silver fleets as well as those concerning other Spanish shipping during the War of Jenkins’ Ear, giving their political and diplomatic backgrounds. This analysis demonstrates the significance of the issue of the silver fleets in Anglo-Spanish relations at the time. It also indicates the deep involvement of France in this issue and its influence on British naval operations. Finally, this article describes the development and implementation of British naval policy to put economic and financial pressure on the Spanish empire, arguing that the naval operations during this period were one of the earliest attempts at using blockades on both sides of the Atlantic, which Britain further developed in later imperial wars that took place during the long eighteenth century.KEYWORDS: BritainSpainFranceempireWar of Jenkins’ EarNavysilver fleetstradeblockade AcknowledgementsI am grateful to Professor N.A.M. Rodger, Professor Jeremy Black and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on this article.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 In this paper, all dates are given in the Old Style of the Julian Calendar except where the date is specifically indicated as New Style by (n.s.) or both dates are used (e.g. 6/17 August). The new year is taken to have begun on 1 January, not 25 March.2 For example, see Richmond, Navy, i; Harding, Amphibious Warfare. However, it should be noted that Richmond was aware of the importance of intercepting the silver fleets. Richmond, Navy, i. 145, 277–8, vol. ii. 245.3 For the establishment of the Western Squadron, see, Duffy, “Establishment”.4 Torres Sánchez, Constructing a Fiscal-Military State, 138–40, 154, 214.5 Pares, War and Trade, 109–14.6 Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, esp., 175–6, 214; Harding, Emergence, esp., 57–8. Chapman, Disaster, 67–6, 70.7 Wilson, “Empire,” 74–109.8 Regarding the period of the War of Spanish Succession, there is an article on the issue of the silver fleets by Kamen. Kamen, “Destruction,” 165–73.9 Walker, Spanish Politics, 4–5; Pares, War, 3, 112–3. In addition, ships called avisos sailed between Spain and her American colonies, but their duty was to carry official papers and information, not valuable cargo.10 In the Pacific, Manila Galleons, or vessels engaged in the trans-pacific trade between Manila and Acapulco, were another important target for the British navy. For Manila Galleons, see Schurz, “Mexico”; Walker, Spanish Politics, 6–7. During the War of Austrian Succession, Commodore Anson succeeded in capturing one of them. For this capture, see Williams, Prize, ch. IV.11 Satsuma, Britain, 100–4, 119–21. A similar expectation of intercepting the silver fleets was still present in the Napoleonic Wars. Hall, British Strategy, 112.12 Kamen, “Destruction,” 169–72.13 Black, “Anglo-Spanish Naval Relations,” 242; Satsuma, Britain, 222–33.14 British Library [hereafter BL], Add MS 32801 fos. 120–20v, Keene to Newcastle, 14 July 1739; BL, Add MS 19034, fos. 72–3, ‘Mr Dellift’s Acct of the Trade &c to La Vera Cruz’, [n.d. but, probably early 1741]; BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 290–290v, “Extract of the Papers” [submitted to Newcastle by William Woods], [n. d., but probably mid-1739]; The National Archives, Kew (hereafter TNA), SP 78/218, fos. 153–53v, Sicilian Abbots to Waldegrave, 1738. In addition, both the government and the opposition sometimes claimed that the interruption of Spanish imperial shipping could be injurious also to the French, who were benefiting from the Spanish American trade. Daily Gazetteer, 15 Jan. 1740; Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 254.15 As to the issue of British smuggling and the Spanish depredations, see McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 78–96; Nelson, “Contraband Trade,” 55–67; Finucane, Temptations, 23–8, 34–6, 85–96.16 Temperley, “Causes,” 209; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 75.17 This is based on my survey of the correspondence between the Duke of Newcastle, Secretary of State for the South, and Sir Benjamin Keene, a British ambassador in Madrid, as well as other British envoys, which are in BL, Add MS 32794, 32795, 32796; TNA, SP 94/127, SP 94/128.18 For example, see, BL, Add MS 32795, fos. 51, 170–170v, 246–246v, 258–258v, Keene to Newcastle, 22 May, 29 July, 2 and 16 Sep. 1737; BL, Add MS 32796, f. 9v, Waldegrave to Keene, 14 Oct. 1737 (n.s.); fos. 14–14v, Keene to Newcastle, 14 Oct. 1737; fos. 136–136v, Keene to William Smith, [Secretary to the South Sea Company], 18 Nov. 1737.19 BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 243v–244, Keene to Newcastle, 13 Dec. 1737.20 BL, Add MS 32797, fos. 87v–89, 140v–141, Keene to Newcastle, 23 Feb. and 10 Mar. 1738.21 For example, see, BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 77–82, 284–7, Newcastle to Keene, 4 Nov. and 19 Dec. 1737; BL, Add MS 32797, fos. 10–11, Newcastle to Keene, 7 Jan. 1738.22 Richmond, Navy, i. 5–10.23 Temperley, “Causes,” 212–3. For the opposition’s criticism of the negotiations with Spain and their demand for tougher action against it in Parliament, see, for example, Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 580–3, 593–4, 616–20, 633–5, 718–9, 759–60, 764–5, 777–80.24 BL, Add MS 32798, fos. 48v–49v, 142v–43, Keene to Newcastle, 26 May and 23 June 1738.25 For Anglo-French diplomatic relations in this period, see Wilson, French Foreign Policy, chs. IX, XI–XII; Black, Natural and Necessary Enemies, ch. 1, 36–40.26 Temperley, “Causes,” 203; Wilson, French Foreign Policy, 29–41, 60–61.27 For Franco-Spanish disputes at this time, see Pares, War, 133–4; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 160–1. See also, BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 119–119v, Newcastle to Keene, 4 Nov. 1737; BL, Add MS 32796 fo. 237, Keene to Newcastle, 13 Dec. 1737; TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 41v–2, Waldegrave to Harrington, 1 June 1740.28 Stein and Stein, Silver, Trade, and War, 141–3.29 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 776, 826–7, 837, 947–8, 1418; Walpole, Grand Question, 18–20; Popular Prejudices, 9; Daily Gazetteer, 7 Mar. 1739. As seen here, the government also mentioned the interests of the British merchants trading with Spain and her colonies via Cadiz as a consideration to counter the opposition’s bellicose position. In fact, the British merchants were one of the major participants in the trade via Cadiz. This was still the case on the eve of the War of Jenkins’ Ear. Pearce, British Trade, 5–8. By contrast, the opposition were generally dismissive of the government’s concern over the interests of the British merchants trading via Cadiz. Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x, 838, 856–58, 985; Lyttelton, Ministerial Prejudices, 20. Wilson argued that the opposition in this period incorporated into its political propaganda the aggressive expansionist demands of British mercantile interests, especially those engaged in American colonial trade, who were also often involved in direct illicit trade with Spanish colonies. Wilson, “Empire,” 96–8. On the other hand, McLachlan once suggested that, in this period, the interests of the merchants carrying on peaceful trade with Spain and her colonies via Cadiz were in conflict with those of the merchants engaged in direct trade with Spanish colonies. Jean O. McLachlan, Trade and Peace with Old Spain 1667–1750: A Study of Commerce on Anglo-Spanish Diplomacy in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940), 78, 121. Given this conflict of interest, it is possible that the former, who preferred peace with Spain, might have been more closely connected with the government, which adopted restrained policy, than with the opposition, which was sympathetic to the latter merchants’ demands and called for a more aggressive policy, although further investigation is needed to clarify this point.30 TNA, SP 78/218, fos. 164v–166, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 11 June 1738 (n.s.).31 Common Sense, 9 Sep. 1738; Craftsman, 9 Sep. 1738; Craftsman, 23 Sep. 1738.32 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x, 838–9, 853–58, 1416–7; Lyttelton, Ministerial Prejudices, 19–20; Craftsman, 31 Mar. 1739.33 Daily Gazetteer, 11 Oct. 1738.34 BL, Add MS 32798, fos. 258v–59, Keene to Newcastle, 2 Aug. 1738.35 BL, Add MS 32691, fo. 502, Wager to Newcastle 2 Dec. 1738; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 72v–73, Newcastle to Keene, 26 Jan. 1739. However, the release of the register ship was taken up later by the opposition press and politicians, who criticised the government for being too soft in its negotiations with Spain. Craftsman, 17 Feb. 1739; Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 1173.36 Sperling, South Sea Company, 47–8; McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 114–9.37 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Manuscripts of Egmont, iii. 24–5, 19 Feb. 1739.38 Temperley, “Causes,” 227–32, 234–5; Pares, War and Trade, 55–6, 59; McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 120; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 207–9.39 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 885–8, 1159–61, 1172–4, 1209–13, 1286–7; Common Sense, 3 Mar. 1739; Craftsman, 27 Jan. 1739; Lyttelton, Considerations, 10–11, 20–1; Robins, Address, 18, 20–2.40 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 249, Francis Hare to Francis Naylor, 30 June 1739.41 Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 208–9.42 TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 27 Apr. 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 29–30, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 8/19 May 1739; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 299v–300, Keene to Newcastle, 24 Apr. 1739.43 TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 23 Mar. 1739.44 Temperley, “Causes,” 223–4; Hildner, “Role,” 338–41; Pares, War and Trade, 54–6.45 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 29, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 1/12 May 1739.46 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 234–35v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 8 June 1739.47 TNA, SP 45/2, 3 and 11 June 1739.48 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 235v–36, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 8 June 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 32, 33–4, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 1/12 June and 8/19 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 392v–93, [Newcastle] to [Keene], 8 May 1739.49 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 250–51v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 26 June 1739 (n.s.).50 TNA, SP78/221, fos. 40v–41, 101–101v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 1 and 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).51 BL, Add MS 32993, fo. 59, “Considerations,” 3 June 1739; TNA, SP 45/2, 3 June 1739.52 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 48v–49, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739; TNA, SP 94/133, “Extract of Consul Cayley’s letter from Cadiz,” 2 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 48, 115–115v, 121, Keene to Newcastle, 15 June, 9 and 14 July 1739.53 BL, Add MS 32801, fo. 143v, Keene to Newcastle, 27 July 1739.54 BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 359–359v, Keene to Newcastle, 18 May 1739.55 BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 23, 72–72v, 180–180v, Keene to Newcastle, 9, 14 June and 10 Aug. 1739.56 TNA, SP 42/86, fo. 53, Newcastle to Haddock, 6 June 1739.57 Richmond, Navy, i. 54.58 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 101v–102, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).59 BL, Add MS 35406, fo. 137v, Newcastle to Hardwicke, [n.d. but, c. 11 Aug. 1739]; fos. 138–138v, Newcastle to Hardwicke, 12 Aug. 1739.60 TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 265v, “Memorandum of Newcastle with Wager’s Observation,” 9 Aug 1739. Interestingly, a similar proposition was later made by the opposition. For example, the Duke of Argyll, one of the leading opposition aristocrats, argued for it in April 1740. Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 594.61 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 72–3, 79v, Haddock to Newcastle, 14 Aug. and 6 Sep. 1739.62 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 93–93v, W[illiam] Cayley [British consul in Cadiz] to Haddock, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); fo. 110v, Haddock to Newcastle, 26 Sep. 1739.63 TNA, SP 45/2, 3 and 11 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32993, fo. 59, “Considerations,” 3 June 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fo. 49v, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739. Information about movement of the galeones among Walpole’s paper dated in June 1739 also seems to suggest that the government then paid some attention to the galeones as well as the flota. Cambridge University Library [hereafter CUL]: Cholmondeley (Houghton) Papers, Political Papers 26/130, “Memorandum about the Movement of Some Spanish Galleon,” June 1739.64 BL, Add MS 40827, fos. 11–11v, Wager to Vernon, 19 July 1739; Add MS 32692, fos. 140–40v, “Draft of a Secret Instruction for Vice Admiral Edward Vernon,” 16 July 1739.65 TNA, SP 42/81 fo. 255, “Mem. of Alteration & Addition for V.A. Vernon’s Instructions” [n.d., but probably July or Aug. 1739?]; BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 342–342v, “Drat to Vice Adm Vernon,” 28 Sep. 1739; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 26, Wager to Vernon, 7 Oct. 1739.66 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 18–19, 20 June 1739; TNA, SP 78/220, fo. 272, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 3 July 1739 (n.s.); TNA, SP 94/133, “Extract of a letter from Cadiz, dated 14th July 1739”.67 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 49–49v, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739; fos. 55–55v, Newcastle to Haddock, 20 June 1739; BL, Add MS 40827, fo. 11, Wager to Vernon, 19 July 1739; TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 249, 13 July 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 69–69v, Newcastle to Haddock, 8 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Captain [Covil] Mayne of the Lenox, 15 Aug. 1739.68 BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 94v, 124v–25, Keene to Newcastle, 29 June and 14 July 1739; fos. 127v–128v, Keene to H. Walpole, 20 July 1739; fos. 143v–144, 158v, Keene to Newcastle, 27 July and 3 Aug. 1739.69 TNA, SP 78/221, fo. 9v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 22 July 1739 (n.s.). The French attitudes towards the issue of the azogues was examined in more detail in Pares, War and Trade, 143–4. What I attempt here is to place this episode in the context of the entire British operations against the silver fleets.70 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 9v–11v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 22 July 1739 (n.s.).71 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 50v–52v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 July 1739; fos. 80–81v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 203–203v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).72 BL, Add MS 32801, fo. 180, Keene to Newcastle, 10 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 72–72v, Haddock to Newcastle, 14 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 17 Aug. 1739; CUL, Cholmondeley (Houghton) Papers, Correspondence, 1, 2913, Wager to Walpole, 16 Aug. 1739.73 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 104–5, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 231v–2, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 30 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).74 BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 249–49v, Harrington to Vernon, 21 Aug. 1739.75 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 109–109v, 119–119v, Haddock to Newcastle, 26 Sep. and 4 Oct. 1739. According to Hussey, during the War of Austrian Succession, nine of the company’s ships were seized by the British. Hussey, Caracas Company, 77–8. As for the ships from Buenos Aires, they could have been register ships, though the British sources do not refer to them as such.76 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 134–134v, Captain Cooper to Newcastle, Oct. 1739; TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 250, 258, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 9 and 13 Nov. 1739 (n.s.); Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 35–6, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 30 Oct./10 Nov. and 2/13 Nov. 1739.77 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 255v–6, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 1 Nov. 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 253, Francis Hare to Francis Naylor, 4 Nov. 1739.78 TNA, SP 78/221, fo. 273, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Nov. 1739 (n.s.).79 This point was briefly mentioned by Pares. Pares, War and Trade, 110–1. I examine this connection in more detail here.80 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 1 and 31 Oct. 1739.81 The Vernon-Wager manuscripts in the Library of Congress [hereafter Vernon-Wager MSS], Edward Trelawny to Wager, 20 Sep. 1739; TNA, SP 42/85, fo. 50, “Treasure brought by the South Sea Fleet from Callao to Panama, being two Men of War and Four Merchant Ships … ,” 8 Aug. 1739. Hubert Tassell, a former factor of the South Sea Company, mentioned another possibility: that if the fair would be held at Panama, the money might be remitted from there to Acapulco and then transported to Vera Cruz, as happened in 1727 during the blockade by Hosier. BL, Add MS 32694, fo. 43v, [Hubert] Tassell to Sir Robert Walpole, 11 Sep. 1739.82 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 31 Oct. 1739; Vernon to Newcastle, 5 Nov. 1739. It should be also remembered that, as Pares has pointed out, Vernon’s expedition was also intended to revive the direct trade with Spanish-American colonies via Jamaica by demolishing the fortifications in Porto Bello and making the town accessible to British merchants. Pares, War and Trade, 115–6.83 TNA, SP 42/107, “Copy of V.A. Vernon’s Orders to Capt Knowles, of the Diamond, 3 Nov. 1739; ‘Copy of the Order of Battle and general Plan for the attack of Porto Bello’, 7 Nov. 1739; ‘Copy of V. A. Vernon’s Orders to Capt Knowles, of the Diamond,” [11 Dec. 1739].84 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 and 17 Dec. 1739. The idea of an expedition against Panama, as well as that against Cartagena and Manila, had been mentioned by Wager in the very early stage of the war. Vernon-Wager MSS, “Memorandum Respecting Proposed Expeditions to Manila and Cartagena,” [6 Nov. 1739].85 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 143–4, 152, 28 Jan. and 25 Feb. 1740.86 TNA, SP 78/222, fo. 115v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 2 Mar. 1740 (n.s.).87 TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 213v–214, “Advices from Spain’, 21 Mar. 1740 (n.s.); fo. 239v, ‘Advices from Madrid,” 4 Apr. 1740 (n.s.).88 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 101v–102, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 10 June 1740; fo. 142, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 6 July 1740 (n.s.).89 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 356v–7, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Dec. 1739; TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 76v–77, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 22 Jan. 1740; fos. 78v–79, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 22 Jan. 1740; fos. 114–14v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 2 Mar. 1740 (n.s.); fos. 131v–32v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Feb. 1740; fos. 156v–157v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 12 Mar. 1740 (n.s.).90 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 139, 145–6, 24 Jan. and 4 Feb. 1740; TNA, SP 45/2, 4 Feb. 1740; TNA, SP 42/81, fos. 316v–317, Feb. 1740.91 TNA, SP 45/2, 17 Apr. 1740; BL, Add MS 32693, fos. 227–227v, “Draft of a Letter to Vice Admiral Vernon (Most Private),” 18 Apr. 1740.92 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 162–3, 164, 180, 25 Mar., 2 Apr. and 30 Apr. 1740; TNA, SP 45/2, 25 Mar. 1740; TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 320–320v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 4 May 1740 (n.s.); Harding, Emergence, 69, 71.93 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 91–2, Vernon to Wager, 21 and 25 Apr. 1740; 93–4, “Order to Captain Dent of the Hampton Court,” 6 May. 1740; 97, Vernon to Newcastle, 26–31 May. 1740; 100, Vernon to Wager, 26–31 May 1740.94 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 and 17 Dec. 1739. Another plan of the Spaniards mentioned in Vernon’s letter to Wager was to have a fair in Panama, as had been done during Hosier’s blockade in 1726, or in Quito. Greenwich, National Maritime Museum, Caird Library [hereafter NMM], PHB/3/A, fo. 63, Vernon to Wager, 21 Apr. 1740; Vernon-Wager MSS, Vernon to Wager, 9 May 1740.95 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 251v–252, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 9 Nov. 1739 (n.s.); fos. 356–7, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Dec. 1739; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 61, Vernon to Wager, 18–31 Jan. 1740. A reference to the prevention of the return of the galeones in Newcastle’s memorandum for the meeting at the Cabinet Council, written around March 1740, seems to suggest that this was part of the agenda of the government’s naval policy at the time. BL, Add MS 32993. fo. 75v, “State of the Nation,” [Mar. 1739/40].96 TNA, SP 42/85, fos. 104–104v, Vernon to Newcastle, 18–31 Jan. and 2 Feb. 1740; Vernon-Wager MSS, Trelawny to Wager, 29 Aug. 1740; NMM, PHB/3/A, fos. 62–3, Vernon to Wager, 21 Apr. 1740.97 For an in-depth analysis of this expedition, see Harding, Amphibious Warfare.98 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 190–91, 193, 20 and 22 May 1740; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 47, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 2/13 and 13/24 May 1740; TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 41–41v, Waldegrave to Harrington, 1 June 1740 (n.s.).99 BL, Add MS 40827, fos. 15–15v, Vernon to Newcastle, 3 June 1740.100 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 101v–102, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 10 June 1740.101 TNA, SP 78/223, fo. 362v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 3 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 35406, fos. 225v–226, Andrew Stone to Hardwicke, 26 Aug. 1740; fo. 230, Newcastle to Hardwicke, 28 Aug. 1740.102 BL, Add MS 32802, fos. 161–61v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 15 July 1740.103 Original Letters, 18, Wager to Vernon, 6 Aug. 1740.104 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 374–75v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 5 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); fos. 382–3, Waldegrave to Harrington, 11 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); TNA, SP 78/224, fos. 72–3, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 28 Sep. 1740 (n.s.).105 TNA, SP 78/224, fos. 19v–20, 21–21v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 17 Sep. 1740 (n.s.).106 Original Letters, 26, 34, Wager to Vernon, 11 Oct. 1740 and 24 Feb. 1741.107 NMM, VER/1/2/T, Trelawny to Wager, 16 Oct. 1740; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 137–8, Vernon to Wager, 14 Oct. 1740; 140, ‘Order to Captain Rentone, Nov. 1740’.108 TNA, SP 78/224, fo. 161v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 30 Oct. 1740 (n.s.); TNA, SP 78/225, fos. 139–39v, Sicilian Abbot to Thompson, 21 Mar. 1741 (n.s.).109 NMM, VER/1/2/T, Captain Armstrong to [Vernon?], [n.d.].110 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 153–4, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 Dec. 1740; NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Josiah Burchett, Secretary of the Admiralty, 12 Dec. 1740.111 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 141, Vernon to Newcastle, 7 Nov. 1740; TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 360, Wager to Newcastle, 6 Dec. 1740, fo. 362, ‘Extract of a Letter from Capt. Reddish & some Merchants at Antigua, of the 11th, 14th & 16th Oct. 1740’.112 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 149–50, Vernon to Lord Cathcart, 10 Dec. 1740; NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Burchett, 12 Dec. 1740.113 NMM, PHB/3/A, p. 50, Lord Tyrawley to Wager, 5 Nov. 1740; TNA, SP42/89, fos. 4–4v, Sir Chaloner Ogle to Newcastle, 23 Dec. 1740; TNA, SP 78/225, fo. 22v, Thompson to Couraud, 21 Jan. 1741 (n.s.). Even after D’Antin’s squadron returned to Europe, some people in France still believed that this was its real aim. TNA, SP 78/225, fos. 243–43v, Thompson to Newcastle, 11 May 1741 (n.s.).114 NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Burchett, 12 Dec. 1740; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 152, 154, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 Dec. 1740; BL, Add MS 28133, fos. 75–6, 29 Jan. 1741. Harding, Amphibious Warfare, 87–8. It seems that Vernon’s view about the intention of French forces was more correct than Norris. In fact, according to Pares, the initial order to D’Antin was far more aggressive than the British government imagined. D’Antin was ordered to attack Vernon’s squadron and the reinforcements sent to him and to later invade Jamaica with a land force from Saint-Domingue. Yet, several factors (such as the arrival of a large number of British reinforcements, shortage of victualling, and failure in cooperation with the governor of Saint-Domingue and the commander of the Spanish squadrons) prevented the execution of these instructions, as well as another possible service of helping the Spaniards to hold a fair and transport the treasure back to Europe, which Maurepas, the French minister of Marine and Colonies, also regarded as an important task. Pares, War and Trade, 165–6, 172–6.115 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 171, “Draft Resolutions of a General Council of War,” 8 Feb. 1741.116 Ibid., 173–5, “Draft Resolutions of a General Council of War,” 16 and 23 Feb. 1741.117 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 777–80, 840.118 Operations of the War, 25–7, 29–30; Considerations on the Management, 21–3.119 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 712–3, 787, 831–3. For a similar defence of the blockade policy in the ministerial press, see Daily Gazetteer, 15 Jan. 1740.120 Harding, Emergence, 96, 122, 129, 135.121 For example, see, TNA, SP42/93, fos. 351v–352, Mathews to Newcastle, 11 Oct. 1743; fos. 447–448v, Newcastle to Mathews, 23 Dec. 1743; SP 42/94, fos. 46–48v, Mathews to Newcastle, 14 Jan. 1744; fos. 69–73v, Newcastle to Mathews, 3 Feb. 1744; fos. 147–50, Newcastle to Mathews, 16 Mar. 1744; SP42/96, fos. 253–253v, Newcastle to Rowley, 27 July 1745, SP 42/97, fos. 167v–168v, Medley to Newcastle, 20 Jan. 1747; fo. 228, Medley to Newcastle, 28 Apr. 1747.122 TNA, SP42/89, fos. 24–24v, Ogle to Newcastle, 18 Jan. 1743; fos. 48–48v, Ogle to Newcastle, 22 Mar. 1743; fos. 104v–105, Ogle to Newcastle, 19 Feb. 1744; fos. 120v–121, Ogle to Newcastle, 21 Apr. 1744; fos. 131v–132, Ogle to Newcastle, 8 May 1744; fos. 193, 194, Ogle to Newcastle, 24 Nov. 1744; fo. 210v, Ogle to Newcastle, 3 Feb. 1745.123 TNA, SP42/96, fos. 243, 244–245v, Newcastle to Rowley, 18 Jan. 1745.124 Pares, War and Trade, 111.125 TNA, SP42/96, fos. 84–85, 86v–87, Rowley to Newcastle, 21 Feb. 1745. This connection between the lack of sufficient force in the Mediterranean and the failure to intercept Torres’s squadron was pointed out by Harding. Harding, Emergence, 207–9.126 TNA, SP42/89, fo. 56, Ogle to Newcastle, 30 Apr. 1743; fo. 83, Ogle to Newcastle, 31 July 1743; fos. 152–152v, Rowley to Newcastle, 2 June 1745.127 TNA, SP42/89, fos. 270v–271, Vice-Admiral Davers to Newcastle, 24 Nov. 1745; fo. 343v, Davers to Newcastle, 9 Mar. 1746; SP42/96, fos. 159–159v, Rowley to Newcastle, 3 July 1745. Pares, War and Trade, 111.128 Richmond, Navy, iii. 247–8.129 Pares, War and Trade, 111–4; Stein and Stein, Silver, 192–5; Walker, Spanish Politics, 211, 215–7.130 For the increase in the number of register ships as well as azogues sailing to Spanish-American colonies after the war started, see Walker, Spanish Politics, 277, Table 1. In this trade using register ships, foreign merchants, especially French ones, were heavily involved. Stein and Stein, Silver, 192–3.131 Stein and Stein, Silver, 195; Kuethe and Andrien, Spanish Atlantic World, 154–5.132 Pares, War and Trade, 111–2.133 Lamikiz, Trade and Trust, ch. 3; Pearce, Origins, 11–12, 126–34, 177–8.134 Later on, in the early nineteenth century, during the Napoleonic Wars, the blockade was again employed as a powerful weapon against Spain, which further contributed to crumbling Spain’s Atlantic trade system. For the impact that British blockade had on Spanish Atlantic trade system and Spain’s finance in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, see Pearce, British Trade, 119–21; Stein and Stein, Crisis, 178, 259.Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI [Grant Numbers JP15K16865; JP17K03158].\",\"PeriodicalId\":46214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF IMPERIAL AND COMMONWEALTH HISTORY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF IMPERIAL AND COMMONWEALTH HISTORY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03086534.2023.2275330\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF IMPERIAL AND COMMONWEALTH HISTORY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03086534.2023.2275330","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

20bl,添加MS 32797, fos。87v-89, 140v-141,基恩到纽卡斯尔,1738.21年2月23日和3月10日例如,参见BL,添加MS 32796, fos。1737年11月4日和12月19日,77-82、284-7,纽卡斯尔到基恩;BL,添加MS 32797, fos。10-11,纽卡斯尔到基恩,1738.22年1月7日,里士满,海军,i. 5-10.23,坦波利,“原因”,212-3。关于反对派对与西班牙谈判的批评以及他们要求在议会中对其采取更强硬行动的要求,例如,参见Cobbett的议会史,第580 - 3,593 - 4,616 - 20,633 - 5,718 - 9,759 - 60,764 - 5,777 - 80.24 BL, Add MS 32798, fos。1738.25关于这一时期的英法外交关系,见威尔逊,《法国外交政策》,第18页。黑色,自然和必要的敌人,第1章,36-40.26坦波利,“原因,”203;威尔逊,《法国外交政策》,第29-41页,第60-61.27页。伍德法恩,《不列颠尼亚的荣耀》,160-1页。另见,BL,添加MS 32796, fos。1737年11月4日纽卡斯尔对基恩119 - 119;BL,加MS 32796到。237、基恩到纽卡斯尔,1737年12月13日;TNA, sp78 /223, fos。41v-2,瓦德格拉夫致哈林顿,1740年6月1日。28斯泰因与斯泰因:白银、贸易与战争,141-3.29科贝特的议会史,第776、826 - 7,837、947 - 8,1418期;沃波尔,《大问题》,18-20;《大众偏见》,9;《每日公报》1739年3月7日如图所示,政府还提到了通过加的斯与西班牙及其殖民地进行贸易的英国商人的利益,作为对反对派好战立场的考虑。事实上,英国商人是加的斯贸易的主要参与者之一。在詹金斯耳朵战争前夕,情况仍然如此。皮尔斯,英国贸易,5-8页。相比之下,反对派普遍对政府对通过加的斯进行贸易的英国商人利益的关注不屑一顾。科贝特的议会史,x, 838, 856 - 58,985;利特尔顿,《部长的偏见》,第20页。威尔逊认为,这一时期的反对派将英国商业利益的侵略性扩张主义要求纳入其政治宣传,特别是那些从事美国殖民地贸易的人,他们也经常参与与西班牙殖民地的直接非法贸易。威尔逊,《帝国》,96-8页。另一方面,McLachlan曾提出,在这一时期,通过加的斯与西班牙及其殖民地进行和平贸易的商人的利益与直接与西班牙殖民地进行贸易的商人的利益相冲突。Jean O. McLachlan,《与旧西班牙1667-1750的贸易与和平:18世纪上半叶英西外交的商业研究》(剑桥:剑桥大学出版社,1940),78,121。考虑到这种利益冲突,有可能前者更倾向于与西班牙和平,可能与采取克制政策的政府联系更紧密,而不是与反对派联系更紧密,后者同情后者商人的要求,并呼吁采取更激进的政策,尽管需要进一步的调查来澄清这一点TNA, sp78 /218, fos。164v-166,《瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔》,1738年6月11日(新编)《常识》,1738年9月9日;工匠,1738年9月9日;《工匠》,1738.32年9月23日《科贝特的议会史》,第x期,838 - 9,853 - 58,1416 - 7;利特尔顿,《部长偏见》,19-20页;《工匠》,1739.33年3月31日,《日报》,1738.34年10月11日,增MS 32798, fos。258v-59,基恩至纽卡斯尔,1738.35年8月2日,加MS 32691号。1738年12月2日,威格去纽卡斯尔;BL,添加ms32800, fos。1739年1月26日,纽卡斯尔对基恩,72 - 73。然而,这艘注册船的释放后来被反对派媒体和政界人士所利用,他们批评政府在与西班牙的谈判中过于软弱。《工匠》,1739年2月17日;《科贝特的议会史》,x. 1173.36 Sperling, South Sea Company, 47-8;麦克拉克兰,贸易与和平,114-9.37历史手稿委员会,埃格蒙特手稿,iii。1739.38坦波利,“原因”,227 - 32,234 - 5;巴黎,战争与贸易,55 - 6,59;麦克拉克兰,《贸易与和平》,120页;《不列颠尼亚的荣耀》,207-9.39科贝特的议会史,第885 - 8,1159 - 61,1172-4,1209-13,1286-7期;《常识》,1739年3月3日;工匠,1739年1月27日;Lyttelton,《考虑》,10 - 11,20 - 1;罗宾斯,地址,18,20-2.40,历史手稿委员会,第十四份报告,249,弗朗西斯·黑尔给弗朗西斯·内勒,176月30日;伍德芬,《不列颠尼亚的荣耀》,2008 - 9.42,TNA, SP 94/133,基恩致纽卡斯尔,1739年4月27日;历史手稿委员会,第十四份报告,29-30,霍雷肖·沃波尔给罗伯特·特雷弗,1739年5月8日至19日;BL,添加ms32800, fos。299v-300, Keene to Newcastle, 1739.43 4月24日TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 1739.44 3月23日Temperley,“Causes,”223-4;希尔德纳,《角色》,338-41页;巴黎,战争与贸易,54-6页。 45历史手稿委员会,第十四份报告,29,霍雷肖·沃波尔致罗伯特·特雷弗,1739.46年5月1日至12日TNA, SP 78/220, fos。1739.47 TNA, sp45 / 2,3和1739.48 TNA, sp78 /220, fos, 6月8日,Newcastle至Waldegrave, 234-35v。235v-36,纽卡斯尔到瓦德格拉夫,1739年6月8日;历史手稿委员会,第十四次报告,32,33 - 4,霍雷肖·沃波尔给罗伯特·特雷弗,1739年6月1日至12日和8月19日;BL,添加ms32800, fos。392v-93, [Newcastle] to [Keene], 1739年5月8日《瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔》,1739年6月26日(新编)TNA, SP78/221, fos。《瓦尔德格雷夫到纽卡斯尔》,1739年8月1日和15日,第51页BL,添加MS 3299359,“考虑”,1739年6月3日;TNA, SP 45/2, 3 June 1739.52半径标注48 v-49。”《给阿道克海军少将的指示》,1739年6月6日;TNA, SP 94/133,“Cayley领事来自加的斯的信件摘录”,1739年6月2日;BL,添加MS 32801, fos1739年6月15日,7月9日和14日,第48,115-115v, 121,基恩到纽卡斯尔,1739年3月53日BL,添加MS 32801号。143v,基恩到纽卡斯尔,1739.54年7月27日,加MS 32800, fos。1739.55年5月18日,基恩至纽卡斯尔的359-359v号邮编:32801号。23, 72-72v, 180-180v,基恩至纽卡斯尔,6月9日,14日和8月10日1739.56 TNA, SP 42/86, 6。53、纽卡斯尔到黑道克,1739.57年6月6日里士满,海军,i. 54.58 TNA, SP 78/221, fos。《瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔》,1739年8月15日(新编)添加MS 35406;137v,纽卡斯尔到哈德威克,[无日期][[1739年8月11日];安全系数。138-138v,纽卡斯尔至哈德威克,1739.6 8月12日TNA, SP 42/81, 6。265v,“纽卡斯尔备忘录与韦格的观察”,1739年8月9日。有趣的是,反对党后来也提出了类似的主张。例如,阿盖尔公爵,一个主要的反对派贵族,在1740年4月提出了这一主张。科贝特的议会史,11。594.61 TNA, SP 42/86, fos。72 - 3,79 v,黑道克至纽卡斯尔,8月14日和9月6日,1739.62 TNA, SP 42/86, fos。1739年8月23日,W[威廉]凯利[英国驻加的斯领事]到阿道克;fo。1739年9月26日,黑道克至纽卡斯尔110v; 1739年6月11日,TNA, sp45 / 2,3和;BL,添加MS 3299359,“考虑”,1739年6月3日;TNA, SP 42/86, 6。49 v”,半径标注。《给阿道克海军少将的指示》,1739年6月6日。沃波尔1739年6月的论文中关于加隆船运动的信息似乎也表明,当时政府对加隆船和船队给予了一定的关注。剑桥大学图书馆[以下简称CUL]: Cholmondeley (Houghton)论文,政治论文26/130,“关于一些西班牙帆船运动的备忘录”,1739.64年6月,BL, Add MS 40827, fos。1739年7月19日,韦格到弗农;添加MS 32692, fos。140-40v,“给爱德华·弗农海军中将的秘密指令草案”,1739.65年7月16日,TNA, SP 42/81页。255年,“Mem。修改和补充V.A.弗农的指示”[未注明日期],但可能是1739年7月或8月?BL,添加MS 32692, fos。1739年9月28日,“致弗农副海军上将”。Ranft主编,Vernon Papers, 26, wagner to Vernon, 1739.66 BL, Add MS 28132, fos。1739年6月20日;TNA, sp78 /220;272,瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔,1739年7月3日(新编);TNA, SP 94/133,“1739年7月14日来自加的斯的一封信摘录”,67TNA, SP 42/86, fos。半径标注49-49v。”《给阿道克海军少将的指示》,1739年6月6日;安全系数。1739年6月20日,纽卡斯尔至阿道克55 - 55;BL,添加MS 40827。1739年7月19日,韦格致弗农;TNA, SP 42/81;1739年7月13日;TNA, SP 42/86, fos。1739年8月8日,纽卡斯尔至阿道克,69-69v;TNA, SP 42/107,弗农致Lenox号船长[Covil] Mayne, 1739.68年8月15日,BL, Add MS 32801, fos。1739年6月29日和7月14日,94v, 124v,基恩对纽卡斯尔;安全系数。127v-128v,基恩致H.沃波尔,1739年7月20日;安全系数。143v - 144,158v,基恩到纽卡斯尔,7月27日和8月3日1739.69 TNA, SP 78/221, 6。1739年7月22日,瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔。法国对偶氮石问题的态度在巴黎,战争与贸易,143-4中有更详细的审查。我想在这里把这段插曲放在英国对银舰队的整个行动的背景下TNA, sp78 /221, fos。1739年7月22日,《瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔》(第71页)TNA, sp78 /221, fos。1739年7月27日,纽卡斯尔对瓦德格拉夫50v-52v;安全系数。《瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔》,1739年8月15日(新编);BL,添加MS 32801, fos《瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔》,1739年8月23日(新编)BL,添加MS 328011739年8月10日,基恩到纽卡斯尔;TNA, SP 42/86, fos。72-72v,阿道克到纽卡斯尔,1739年8月14日;1739年8月17日,Keene至Newcastle, TNA, SP 94/133;CUL, Cholmondeley (Houghton)论文,通信,1,2913,Wager to Walpole, 1739.16 TNA, SP 78/221, fos。《瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔》,1739年8月23日(新编);BL,添加MS 32801, fos1739年8月30日《瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔》(新编)BL,添加MS 32692, fos。249-49v, Harrington至Vernon, 1739.75 8月21日TNA, SP 42/86, fos。109-109v, 119-119v, 1739年9月26日和10月4日,阿道克到纽卡斯尔。 1740;弗农-韦格MSS,特里罗尼到韦格,1740年8月29日;NMM, PHB/3/A, fos。关于这次远征的深入分析,见哈丁,《两栖战争》,1998年版,Add MS 28132, fos。1740年5月190-91、193、20和22日;历史手稿委员会,第十四份报告,47,霍雷肖·沃波尔给罗伯特·特雷弗,1740年5月13日和13日;TNA, sp78 /223, fos。《瓦德格拉夫致哈林顿信》,1740年6月1日(新编)BL,添加ms40827, fos。15-15v,弗农至纽卡斯尔,1740.100 6月3日TNA, SP 78/223, fos。101v-102,纽卡斯尔至瓦尔德格雷夫,1740.101 TNA, SP 78/223, 6月10日。1740年9月3日,瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔;BL,添加MS 35406。225v-226安德鲁·斯通致哈德威克,1740年8月26日;fo。1740年8月28日,纽卡斯尔至哈德威克230号,邮编32802号。1740.103年7月15日,纽卡斯尔致瓦尔德格雷夫信,原信,18,韦格致弗农信,1740.104年8月6日,TNA, SP 78/223, fos。1740年9月5日,瓦尔德格雷夫到纽卡斯尔,374-75v;安全系数。《瓦德格拉夫致哈林顿信》,1740年9月11日(新译本);TNA, sp78 /224, fos。1740年9月28日,瓦德格拉夫到纽卡斯尔(n.s)TNA, sp78 /224, fos。19v - 20,21 - 21v,瓦尔德格雷夫到纽卡斯尔,1740年9月17日(n.s)原始信件,26,34,韦格致弗农,1740年10月11日和1741年2月24日。NMM, VER/1/2/T,特里罗尼致韦格,1740年10月16日;兰特主编,弗农论文,137-8,弗农到韦格,1740年10月14日;给伦通船长的命令,1740年11月TNA, sp78 /224, 6。161v,瓦尔德格雷夫到纽卡斯尔,1740年10月30日(新编);TNA, sp78 /225, fos。139-39v,西西里修道院院长到汤普森,1741年3月21日(n.s.)NMM, VER/1/2/T,阿姆斯特朗船长呼叫弗农?.110]、[留言。兰特主编,弗农论文,153-4,弗农纽卡斯尔,1740年12月12日;NMM, VER/1/2/D,弗农致海军部部长约西亚·伯切特,1712月12日;111兰特主编,弗农论文,141;TNA, SP 42/81;1740年12月6日,韦格去纽卡斯尔。362、“1740年10月11日、14日和16日,雷迪什船长和一些商人在安提瓜的一封信节选”兰特主编,弗农论文,149-50,弗农致卡斯卡特勋爵,1740年12月10日;NMM, PHB/3/A, p. 50, Lord Tyrawley to Wager, 1740年11月5日;TNA, SP42/89, fos。1740年12月23日,查洛纳·奥格尔爵士到纽卡斯尔;TNA, sp78 /225;汤普逊致考劳,1741年1月21日(续)。甚至在丹坦的舰队返回欧洲以后,法国的一些人仍然认为这是它的真正目的。TNA, sp78 /225, fos。243-43v,汤姆逊到纽卡斯尔,1741年5月11日(新编)NMM, VER/1/2/D,弗农至伯切特,1740年12月12日;兰特编辑,弗农论文,152,154,弗农到纽卡斯尔,1740年12月12日;BL,添加ms28133, fos。1741年1月29日哈丁,《两栖战争》,87-8页。看来弗农对法军意图的看法比诺里斯更正确。事实上,根据帕里斯的说法,最初向丹坦下达的命令远比英国政府想象的更具侵略性。丹坦奉命攻击弗农的中队和派给他的援军,随后从圣多明各率领一支陆地部队入侵牙买加。然而,有几个因素(如大批英国援军的到来,粮食短缺,与圣多明各总督和西班牙舰队指挥官的合作失败)阻碍了这些指示的执行,以及帮助西班牙人举行一次博览会并将宝藏运回欧洲的另一项可能的服务,法国海军和殖民地部长莫雷帕斯也认为这是一项重要的任务。Ranft主编,Vernon Papers, 171,“战争总委员会的决议草案”,1741.116同上,173-5,“战争总委员会的决议草案”,1741.117科贝特的议会历史,11。《战争作战》,25 - 7,29 - 30;关于管理的思考,21-3.119科贝特的议会史,11。712 - 3,787, 831-3。关于部长报刊上对封锁政策的类似辩护,见1740年1月15日的《每日公报》(Daily gazette)。351v-352,马修斯到纽卡斯尔,1743年10月11日;安全系数。447-448v,纽卡斯尔到马修斯,1743年12月23日;SP 42/94, fos。46-48v,马修斯到纽卡斯尔,1744年1月14日;安全系数。69-73v,纽卡斯尔到马修斯,1744年2月3日;安全系数。147-50,纽卡斯尔到马修斯,1744年3月16日;SP42/96,安全系数。1745年7月27日,纽卡斯尔至罗利253-253v, SP 42/97, fos。167v-168v,麦德利到纽卡斯尔,1747年1月20日;fo。228,麦德利到纽卡斯尔,1747年4月28日122 TNA, SP42/89, fos。24-24v, Ogle to Newcastle, 1743年1月18日;安全系数。1848 - 48v,奥格尔到纽卡斯尔,1743年3月22日;安全系数。104v-105,奥格尔到纽卡斯尔,1744年2月19日;安全系数。1744年4月21日,Ogle to Newcastle, 120v-121;安全系数。131v-132, Ogle to Newcastle, 1744年5月8日;安全系数。193,194,奥格尔到纽卡斯尔,1744年11月24日;fo。2010, Ogle to Newcastle, 1745.3 TNA, SP42/96, fos。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Severing the Sinews of the Spanish Empire: British Naval Policy and Operations Regarding the Silver Fleets during the War of Jenkins’ Ear, 1737–1740
ABSTRACTIn studies on the War of Jenkins’ Ear, a conflict between the British and Spanish empires, historians tend to focus on colonial expeditions, such as those against Porto Bello and Cartagena. On the other hand, operations against Spanish silver fleets, the mainstay of the Spanish imperial trade system, have attracted far less attention. This article examines these somewhat undervalued operations against the silver fleets as well as those concerning other Spanish shipping during the War of Jenkins’ Ear, giving their political and diplomatic backgrounds. This analysis demonstrates the significance of the issue of the silver fleets in Anglo-Spanish relations at the time. It also indicates the deep involvement of France in this issue and its influence on British naval operations. Finally, this article describes the development and implementation of British naval policy to put economic and financial pressure on the Spanish empire, arguing that the naval operations during this period were one of the earliest attempts at using blockades on both sides of the Atlantic, which Britain further developed in later imperial wars that took place during the long eighteenth century.KEYWORDS: BritainSpainFranceempireWar of Jenkins’ EarNavysilver fleetstradeblockade AcknowledgementsI am grateful to Professor N.A.M. Rodger, Professor Jeremy Black and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on this article.Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 In this paper, all dates are given in the Old Style of the Julian Calendar except where the date is specifically indicated as New Style by (n.s.) or both dates are used (e.g. 6/17 August). The new year is taken to have begun on 1 January, not 25 March.2 For example, see Richmond, Navy, i; Harding, Amphibious Warfare. However, it should be noted that Richmond was aware of the importance of intercepting the silver fleets. Richmond, Navy, i. 145, 277–8, vol. ii. 245.3 For the establishment of the Western Squadron, see, Duffy, “Establishment”.4 Torres Sánchez, Constructing a Fiscal-Military State, 138–40, 154, 214.5 Pares, War and Trade, 109–14.6 Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, esp., 175–6, 214; Harding, Emergence, esp., 57–8. Chapman, Disaster, 67–6, 70.7 Wilson, “Empire,” 74–109.8 Regarding the period of the War of Spanish Succession, there is an article on the issue of the silver fleets by Kamen. Kamen, “Destruction,” 165–73.9 Walker, Spanish Politics, 4–5; Pares, War, 3, 112–3. In addition, ships called avisos sailed between Spain and her American colonies, but their duty was to carry official papers and information, not valuable cargo.10 In the Pacific, Manila Galleons, or vessels engaged in the trans-pacific trade between Manila and Acapulco, were another important target for the British navy. For Manila Galleons, see Schurz, “Mexico”; Walker, Spanish Politics, 6–7. During the War of Austrian Succession, Commodore Anson succeeded in capturing one of them. For this capture, see Williams, Prize, ch. IV.11 Satsuma, Britain, 100–4, 119–21. A similar expectation of intercepting the silver fleets was still present in the Napoleonic Wars. Hall, British Strategy, 112.12 Kamen, “Destruction,” 169–72.13 Black, “Anglo-Spanish Naval Relations,” 242; Satsuma, Britain, 222–33.14 British Library [hereafter BL], Add MS 32801 fos. 120–20v, Keene to Newcastle, 14 July 1739; BL, Add MS 19034, fos. 72–3, ‘Mr Dellift’s Acct of the Trade &c to La Vera Cruz’, [n.d. but, probably early 1741]; BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 290–290v, “Extract of the Papers” [submitted to Newcastle by William Woods], [n. d., but probably mid-1739]; The National Archives, Kew (hereafter TNA), SP 78/218, fos. 153–53v, Sicilian Abbots to Waldegrave, 1738. In addition, both the government and the opposition sometimes claimed that the interruption of Spanish imperial shipping could be injurious also to the French, who were benefiting from the Spanish American trade. Daily Gazetteer, 15 Jan. 1740; Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 254.15 As to the issue of British smuggling and the Spanish depredations, see McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 78–96; Nelson, “Contraband Trade,” 55–67; Finucane, Temptations, 23–8, 34–6, 85–96.16 Temperley, “Causes,” 209; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 75.17 This is based on my survey of the correspondence between the Duke of Newcastle, Secretary of State for the South, and Sir Benjamin Keene, a British ambassador in Madrid, as well as other British envoys, which are in BL, Add MS 32794, 32795, 32796; TNA, SP 94/127, SP 94/128.18 For example, see, BL, Add MS 32795, fos. 51, 170–170v, 246–246v, 258–258v, Keene to Newcastle, 22 May, 29 July, 2 and 16 Sep. 1737; BL, Add MS 32796, f. 9v, Waldegrave to Keene, 14 Oct. 1737 (n.s.); fos. 14–14v, Keene to Newcastle, 14 Oct. 1737; fos. 136–136v, Keene to William Smith, [Secretary to the South Sea Company], 18 Nov. 1737.19 BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 243v–244, Keene to Newcastle, 13 Dec. 1737.20 BL, Add MS 32797, fos. 87v–89, 140v–141, Keene to Newcastle, 23 Feb. and 10 Mar. 1738.21 For example, see, BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 77–82, 284–7, Newcastle to Keene, 4 Nov. and 19 Dec. 1737; BL, Add MS 32797, fos. 10–11, Newcastle to Keene, 7 Jan. 1738.22 Richmond, Navy, i. 5–10.23 Temperley, “Causes,” 212–3. For the opposition’s criticism of the negotiations with Spain and their demand for tougher action against it in Parliament, see, for example, Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 580–3, 593–4, 616–20, 633–5, 718–9, 759–60, 764–5, 777–80.24 BL, Add MS 32798, fos. 48v–49v, 142v–43, Keene to Newcastle, 26 May and 23 June 1738.25 For Anglo-French diplomatic relations in this period, see Wilson, French Foreign Policy, chs. IX, XI–XII; Black, Natural and Necessary Enemies, ch. 1, 36–40.26 Temperley, “Causes,” 203; Wilson, French Foreign Policy, 29–41, 60–61.27 For Franco-Spanish disputes at this time, see Pares, War, 133–4; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 160–1. See also, BL, Add MS 32796, fos. 119–119v, Newcastle to Keene, 4 Nov. 1737; BL, Add MS 32796 fo. 237, Keene to Newcastle, 13 Dec. 1737; TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 41v–2, Waldegrave to Harrington, 1 June 1740.28 Stein and Stein, Silver, Trade, and War, 141–3.29 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 776, 826–7, 837, 947–8, 1418; Walpole, Grand Question, 18–20; Popular Prejudices, 9; Daily Gazetteer, 7 Mar. 1739. As seen here, the government also mentioned the interests of the British merchants trading with Spain and her colonies via Cadiz as a consideration to counter the opposition’s bellicose position. In fact, the British merchants were one of the major participants in the trade via Cadiz. This was still the case on the eve of the War of Jenkins’ Ear. Pearce, British Trade, 5–8. By contrast, the opposition were generally dismissive of the government’s concern over the interests of the British merchants trading via Cadiz. Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x, 838, 856–58, 985; Lyttelton, Ministerial Prejudices, 20. Wilson argued that the opposition in this period incorporated into its political propaganda the aggressive expansionist demands of British mercantile interests, especially those engaged in American colonial trade, who were also often involved in direct illicit trade with Spanish colonies. Wilson, “Empire,” 96–8. On the other hand, McLachlan once suggested that, in this period, the interests of the merchants carrying on peaceful trade with Spain and her colonies via Cadiz were in conflict with those of the merchants engaged in direct trade with Spanish colonies. Jean O. McLachlan, Trade and Peace with Old Spain 1667–1750: A Study of Commerce on Anglo-Spanish Diplomacy in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940), 78, 121. Given this conflict of interest, it is possible that the former, who preferred peace with Spain, might have been more closely connected with the government, which adopted restrained policy, than with the opposition, which was sympathetic to the latter merchants’ demands and called for a more aggressive policy, although further investigation is needed to clarify this point.30 TNA, SP 78/218, fos. 164v–166, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 11 June 1738 (n.s.).31 Common Sense, 9 Sep. 1738; Craftsman, 9 Sep. 1738; Craftsman, 23 Sep. 1738.32 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x, 838–9, 853–58, 1416–7; Lyttelton, Ministerial Prejudices, 19–20; Craftsman, 31 Mar. 1739.33 Daily Gazetteer, 11 Oct. 1738.34 BL, Add MS 32798, fos. 258v–59, Keene to Newcastle, 2 Aug. 1738.35 BL, Add MS 32691, fo. 502, Wager to Newcastle 2 Dec. 1738; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 72v–73, Newcastle to Keene, 26 Jan. 1739. However, the release of the register ship was taken up later by the opposition press and politicians, who criticised the government for being too soft in its negotiations with Spain. Craftsman, 17 Feb. 1739; Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 1173.36 Sperling, South Sea Company, 47–8; McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 114–9.37 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Manuscripts of Egmont, iii. 24–5, 19 Feb. 1739.38 Temperley, “Causes,” 227–32, 234–5; Pares, War and Trade, 55–6, 59; McLachlan, Trade and Peace, 120; Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 207–9.39 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, x. 885–8, 1159–61, 1172–4, 1209–13, 1286–7; Common Sense, 3 Mar. 1739; Craftsman, 27 Jan. 1739; Lyttelton, Considerations, 10–11, 20–1; Robins, Address, 18, 20–2.40 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 249, Francis Hare to Francis Naylor, 30 June 1739.41 Woodfine, Britannia’s Glories, 208–9.42 TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 27 Apr. 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 29–30, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 8/19 May 1739; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 299v–300, Keene to Newcastle, 24 Apr. 1739.43 TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 23 Mar. 1739.44 Temperley, “Causes,” 223–4; Hildner, “Role,” 338–41; Pares, War and Trade, 54–6.45 Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 29, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 1/12 May 1739.46 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 234–35v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 8 June 1739.47 TNA, SP 45/2, 3 and 11 June 1739.48 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 235v–36, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 8 June 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 32, 33–4, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 1/12 June and 8/19 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 392v–93, [Newcastle] to [Keene], 8 May 1739.49 TNA, SP 78/220, fos. 250–51v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 26 June 1739 (n.s.).50 TNA, SP78/221, fos. 40v–41, 101–101v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 1 and 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).51 BL, Add MS 32993, fo. 59, “Considerations,” 3 June 1739; TNA, SP 45/2, 3 June 1739.52 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 48v–49, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739; TNA, SP 94/133, “Extract of Consul Cayley’s letter from Cadiz,” 2 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 48, 115–115v, 121, Keene to Newcastle, 15 June, 9 and 14 July 1739.53 BL, Add MS 32801, fo. 143v, Keene to Newcastle, 27 July 1739.54 BL, Add MS 32800, fos. 359–359v, Keene to Newcastle, 18 May 1739.55 BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 23, 72–72v, 180–180v, Keene to Newcastle, 9, 14 June and 10 Aug. 1739.56 TNA, SP 42/86, fo. 53, Newcastle to Haddock, 6 June 1739.57 Richmond, Navy, i. 54.58 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 101v–102, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).59 BL, Add MS 35406, fo. 137v, Newcastle to Hardwicke, [n.d. but, c. 11 Aug. 1739]; fos. 138–138v, Newcastle to Hardwicke, 12 Aug. 1739.60 TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 265v, “Memorandum of Newcastle with Wager’s Observation,” 9 Aug 1739. Interestingly, a similar proposition was later made by the opposition. For example, the Duke of Argyll, one of the leading opposition aristocrats, argued for it in April 1740. Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 594.61 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 72–3, 79v, Haddock to Newcastle, 14 Aug. and 6 Sep. 1739.62 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 93–93v, W[illiam] Cayley [British consul in Cadiz] to Haddock, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); fo. 110v, Haddock to Newcastle, 26 Sep. 1739.63 TNA, SP 45/2, 3 and 11 June 1739; BL, Add MS 32993, fo. 59, “Considerations,” 3 June 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fo. 49v, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739. Information about movement of the galeones among Walpole’s paper dated in June 1739 also seems to suggest that the government then paid some attention to the galeones as well as the flota. Cambridge University Library [hereafter CUL]: Cholmondeley (Houghton) Papers, Political Papers 26/130, “Memorandum about the Movement of Some Spanish Galleon,” June 1739.64 BL, Add MS 40827, fos. 11–11v, Wager to Vernon, 19 July 1739; Add MS 32692, fos. 140–40v, “Draft of a Secret Instruction for Vice Admiral Edward Vernon,” 16 July 1739.65 TNA, SP 42/81 fo. 255, “Mem. of Alteration & Addition for V.A. Vernon’s Instructions” [n.d., but probably July or Aug. 1739?]; BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 342–342v, “Drat to Vice Adm Vernon,” 28 Sep. 1739; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 26, Wager to Vernon, 7 Oct. 1739.66 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 18–19, 20 June 1739; TNA, SP 78/220, fo. 272, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 3 July 1739 (n.s.); TNA, SP 94/133, “Extract of a letter from Cadiz, dated 14th July 1739”.67 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 49–49v, “Dra. of Instructions for Rear Admiral Haddock,” 6 June 1739; fos. 55–55v, Newcastle to Haddock, 20 June 1739; BL, Add MS 40827, fo. 11, Wager to Vernon, 19 July 1739; TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 249, 13 July 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 69–69v, Newcastle to Haddock, 8 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Captain [Covil] Mayne of the Lenox, 15 Aug. 1739.68 BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 94v, 124v–25, Keene to Newcastle, 29 June and 14 July 1739; fos. 127v–128v, Keene to H. Walpole, 20 July 1739; fos. 143v–144, 158v, Keene to Newcastle, 27 July and 3 Aug. 1739.69 TNA, SP 78/221, fo. 9v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 22 July 1739 (n.s.). The French attitudes towards the issue of the azogues was examined in more detail in Pares, War and Trade, 143–4. What I attempt here is to place this episode in the context of the entire British operations against the silver fleets.70 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 9v–11v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 22 July 1739 (n.s.).71 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 50v–52v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 July 1739; fos. 80–81v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 15 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 203–203v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).72 BL, Add MS 32801, fo. 180, Keene to Newcastle, 10 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 72–72v, Haddock to Newcastle, 14 Aug. 1739; TNA, SP 94/133, Keene to Newcastle, 17 Aug. 1739; CUL, Cholmondeley (Houghton) Papers, Correspondence, 1, 2913, Wager to Walpole, 16 Aug. 1739.73 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 104–5, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Aug. 1739 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 32801, fos. 231v–2, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 30 Aug. 1739 (n.s.).74 BL, Add MS 32692, fos. 249–49v, Harrington to Vernon, 21 Aug. 1739.75 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 109–109v, 119–119v, Haddock to Newcastle, 26 Sep. and 4 Oct. 1739. According to Hussey, during the War of Austrian Succession, nine of the company’s ships were seized by the British. Hussey, Caracas Company, 77–8. As for the ships from Buenos Aires, they could have been register ships, though the British sources do not refer to them as such.76 TNA, SP 42/86, fos. 134–134v, Captain Cooper to Newcastle, Oct. 1739; TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 250, 258, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 9 and 13 Nov. 1739 (n.s.); Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 35–6, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 30 Oct./10 Nov. and 2/13 Nov. 1739.77 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 255v–6, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 1 Nov. 1739; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 253, Francis Hare to Francis Naylor, 4 Nov. 1739.78 TNA, SP 78/221, fo. 273, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 23 Nov. 1739 (n.s.).79 This point was briefly mentioned by Pares. Pares, War and Trade, 110–1. I examine this connection in more detail here.80 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 1 and 31 Oct. 1739.81 The Vernon-Wager manuscripts in the Library of Congress [hereafter Vernon-Wager MSS], Edward Trelawny to Wager, 20 Sep. 1739; TNA, SP 42/85, fo. 50, “Treasure brought by the South Sea Fleet from Callao to Panama, being two Men of War and Four Merchant Ships … ,” 8 Aug. 1739. Hubert Tassell, a former factor of the South Sea Company, mentioned another possibility: that if the fair would be held at Panama, the money might be remitted from there to Acapulco and then transported to Vera Cruz, as happened in 1727 during the blockade by Hosier. BL, Add MS 32694, fo. 43v, [Hubert] Tassell to Sir Robert Walpole, 11 Sep. 1739.82 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 31 Oct. 1739; Vernon to Newcastle, 5 Nov. 1739. It should be also remembered that, as Pares has pointed out, Vernon’s expedition was also intended to revive the direct trade with Spanish-American colonies via Jamaica by demolishing the fortifications in Porto Bello and making the town accessible to British merchants. Pares, War and Trade, 115–6.83 TNA, SP 42/107, “Copy of V.A. Vernon’s Orders to Capt Knowles, of the Diamond, 3 Nov. 1739; ‘Copy of the Order of Battle and general Plan for the attack of Porto Bello’, 7 Nov. 1739; ‘Copy of V. A. Vernon’s Orders to Capt Knowles, of the Diamond,” [11 Dec. 1739].84 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 and 17 Dec. 1739. The idea of an expedition against Panama, as well as that against Cartagena and Manila, had been mentioned by Wager in the very early stage of the war. Vernon-Wager MSS, “Memorandum Respecting Proposed Expeditions to Manila and Cartagena,” [6 Nov. 1739].85 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 143–4, 152, 28 Jan. and 25 Feb. 1740.86 TNA, SP 78/222, fo. 115v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 2 Mar. 1740 (n.s.).87 TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 213v–214, “Advices from Spain’, 21 Mar. 1740 (n.s.); fo. 239v, ‘Advices from Madrid,” 4 Apr. 1740 (n.s.).88 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 101v–102, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 10 June 1740; fo. 142, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 6 July 1740 (n.s.).89 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 356v–7, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Dec. 1739; TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 76v–77, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 22 Jan. 1740; fos. 78v–79, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 22 Jan. 1740; fos. 114–14v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 2 Mar. 1740 (n.s.); fos. 131v–32v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Feb. 1740; fos. 156v–157v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 12 Mar. 1740 (n.s.).90 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 139, 145–6, 24 Jan. and 4 Feb. 1740; TNA, SP 45/2, 4 Feb. 1740; TNA, SP 42/81, fos. 316v–317, Feb. 1740.91 TNA, SP 45/2, 17 Apr. 1740; BL, Add MS 32693, fos. 227–227v, “Draft of a Letter to Vice Admiral Vernon (Most Private),” 18 Apr. 1740.92 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 162–3, 164, 180, 25 Mar., 2 Apr. and 30 Apr. 1740; TNA, SP 45/2, 25 Mar. 1740; TNA, SP 78/222, fos. 320–320v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 4 May 1740 (n.s.); Harding, Emergence, 69, 71.93 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 91–2, Vernon to Wager, 21 and 25 Apr. 1740; 93–4, “Order to Captain Dent of the Hampton Court,” 6 May. 1740; 97, Vernon to Newcastle, 26–31 May. 1740; 100, Vernon to Wager, 26–31 May 1740.94 TNA, SP 42/107, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 and 17 Dec. 1739. Another plan of the Spaniards mentioned in Vernon’s letter to Wager was to have a fair in Panama, as had been done during Hosier’s blockade in 1726, or in Quito. Greenwich, National Maritime Museum, Caird Library [hereafter NMM], PHB/3/A, fo. 63, Vernon to Wager, 21 Apr. 1740; Vernon-Wager MSS, Vernon to Wager, 9 May 1740.95 TNA, SP 78/221, fos. 251v–252, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 9 Nov. 1739 (n.s.); fos. 356–7, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 27 Dec. 1739; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 61, Vernon to Wager, 18–31 Jan. 1740. A reference to the prevention of the return of the galeones in Newcastle’s memorandum for the meeting at the Cabinet Council, written around March 1740, seems to suggest that this was part of the agenda of the government’s naval policy at the time. BL, Add MS 32993. fo. 75v, “State of the Nation,” [Mar. 1739/40].96 TNA, SP 42/85, fos. 104–104v, Vernon to Newcastle, 18–31 Jan. and 2 Feb. 1740; Vernon-Wager MSS, Trelawny to Wager, 29 Aug. 1740; NMM, PHB/3/A, fos. 62–3, Vernon to Wager, 21 Apr. 1740.97 For an in-depth analysis of this expedition, see Harding, Amphibious Warfare.98 BL, Add MS 28132, fos. 190–91, 193, 20 and 22 May 1740; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, 47, Horatio Walpole to Robert Trevor, 2/13 and 13/24 May 1740; TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 41–41v, Waldegrave to Harrington, 1 June 1740 (n.s.).99 BL, Add MS 40827, fos. 15–15v, Vernon to Newcastle, 3 June 1740.100 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 101v–102, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 10 June 1740.101 TNA, SP 78/223, fo. 362v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 3 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); BL, Add MS 35406, fos. 225v–226, Andrew Stone to Hardwicke, 26 Aug. 1740; fo. 230, Newcastle to Hardwicke, 28 Aug. 1740.102 BL, Add MS 32802, fos. 161–61v, Newcastle to Waldegrave, 15 July 1740.103 Original Letters, 18, Wager to Vernon, 6 Aug. 1740.104 TNA, SP 78/223, fos. 374–75v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 5 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); fos. 382–3, Waldegrave to Harrington, 11 Sep. 1740 (n.s.); TNA, SP 78/224, fos. 72–3, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 28 Sep. 1740 (n.s.).105 TNA, SP 78/224, fos. 19v–20, 21–21v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 17 Sep. 1740 (n.s.).106 Original Letters, 26, 34, Wager to Vernon, 11 Oct. 1740 and 24 Feb. 1741.107 NMM, VER/1/2/T, Trelawny to Wager, 16 Oct. 1740; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 137–8, Vernon to Wager, 14 Oct. 1740; 140, ‘Order to Captain Rentone, Nov. 1740’.108 TNA, SP 78/224, fo. 161v, Waldegrave to Newcastle, 30 Oct. 1740 (n.s.); TNA, SP 78/225, fos. 139–39v, Sicilian Abbot to Thompson, 21 Mar. 1741 (n.s.).109 NMM, VER/1/2/T, Captain Armstrong to [Vernon?], [n.d.].110 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 153–4, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 Dec. 1740; NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Josiah Burchett, Secretary of the Admiralty, 12 Dec. 1740.111 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 141, Vernon to Newcastle, 7 Nov. 1740; TNA, SP 42/81, fo. 360, Wager to Newcastle, 6 Dec. 1740, fo. 362, ‘Extract of a Letter from Capt. Reddish & some Merchants at Antigua, of the 11th, 14th & 16th Oct. 1740’.112 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 149–50, Vernon to Lord Cathcart, 10 Dec. 1740; NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Burchett, 12 Dec. 1740.113 NMM, PHB/3/A, p. 50, Lord Tyrawley to Wager, 5 Nov. 1740; TNA, SP42/89, fos. 4–4v, Sir Chaloner Ogle to Newcastle, 23 Dec. 1740; TNA, SP 78/225, fo. 22v, Thompson to Couraud, 21 Jan. 1741 (n.s.). Even after D’Antin’s squadron returned to Europe, some people in France still believed that this was its real aim. TNA, SP 78/225, fos. 243–43v, Thompson to Newcastle, 11 May 1741 (n.s.).114 NMM, VER/1/2/D, Vernon to Burchett, 12 Dec. 1740; Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 152, 154, Vernon to Newcastle, 12 Dec. 1740; BL, Add MS 28133, fos. 75–6, 29 Jan. 1741. Harding, Amphibious Warfare, 87–8. It seems that Vernon’s view about the intention of French forces was more correct than Norris. In fact, according to Pares, the initial order to D’Antin was far more aggressive than the British government imagined. D’Antin was ordered to attack Vernon’s squadron and the reinforcements sent to him and to later invade Jamaica with a land force from Saint-Domingue. Yet, several factors (such as the arrival of a large number of British reinforcements, shortage of victualling, and failure in cooperation with the governor of Saint-Domingue and the commander of the Spanish squadrons) prevented the execution of these instructions, as well as another possible service of helping the Spaniards to hold a fair and transport the treasure back to Europe, which Maurepas, the French minister of Marine and Colonies, also regarded as an important task. Pares, War and Trade, 165–6, 172–6.115 Ranft, ed., Vernon Papers, 171, “Draft Resolutions of a General Council of War,” 8 Feb. 1741.116 Ibid., 173–5, “Draft Resolutions of a General Council of War,” 16 and 23 Feb. 1741.117 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 777–80, 840.118 Operations of the War, 25–7, 29–30; Considerations on the Management, 21–3.119 Cobbett’s Parliamentary History, xi. 712–3, 787, 831–3. For a similar defence of the blockade policy in the ministerial press, see Daily Gazetteer, 15 Jan. 1740.120 Harding, Emergence, 96, 122, 129, 135.121 For example, see, TNA, SP42/93, fos. 351v–352, Mathews to Newcastle, 11 Oct. 1743; fos. 447–448v, Newcastle to Mathews, 23 Dec. 1743; SP 42/94, fos. 46–48v, Mathews to Newcastle, 14 Jan. 1744; fos. 69–73v, Newcastle to Mathews, 3 Feb. 1744; fos. 147–50, Newcastle to Mathews, 16 Mar. 1744; SP42/96, fos. 253–253v, Newcastle to Rowley, 27 July 1745, SP 42/97, fos. 167v–168v, Medley to Newcastle, 20 Jan. 1747; fo. 228, Medley to Newcastle, 28 Apr. 1747.122 TNA, SP42/89, fos. 24–24v, Ogle to Newcastle, 18 Jan. 1743; fos. 48–48v, Ogle to Newcastle, 22 Mar. 1743; fos. 104v–105, Ogle to Newcastle, 19 Feb. 1744; fos. 120v–121, Ogle to Newcastle, 21 Apr. 1744; fos. 131v–132, Ogle to Newcastle, 8 May 1744; fos. 193, 194, Ogle to Newcastle, 24 Nov. 1744; fo. 210v, Ogle to Newcastle, 3 Feb. 1745.123 TNA, SP42/96, fos. 243, 244–245v, Newcastle to Rowley, 18 Jan. 1745.124 Pares, War and Trade, 111.125 TNA, SP42/96, fos. 84–85, 86v–87, Rowley to Newcastle, 21 Feb. 1745. This connection between the lack of sufficient force in the Mediterranean and the failure to intercept Torres’s squadron was pointed out by Harding. Harding, Emergence, 207–9.126 TNA, SP42/89, fo. 56, Ogle to Newcastle, 30 Apr. 1743; fo. 83, Ogle to Newcastle, 31 July 1743; fos. 152–152v, Rowley to Newcastle, 2 June 1745.127 TNA, SP42/89, fos. 270v–271, Vice-Admiral Davers to Newcastle, 24 Nov. 1745; fo. 343v, Davers to Newcastle, 9 Mar. 1746; SP42/96, fos. 159–159v, Rowley to Newcastle, 3 July 1745. Pares, War and Trade, 111.128 Richmond, Navy, iii. 247–8.129 Pares, War and Trade, 111–4; Stein and Stein, Silver, 192–5; Walker, Spanish Politics, 211, 215–7.130 For the increase in the number of register ships as well as azogues sailing to Spanish-American colonies after the war started, see Walker, Spanish Politics, 277, Table 1. In this trade using register ships, foreign merchants, especially French ones, were heavily involved. Stein and Stein, Silver, 192–3.131 Stein and Stein, Silver, 195; Kuethe and Andrien, Spanish Atlantic World, 154–5.132 Pares, War and Trade, 111–2.133 Lamikiz, Trade and Trust, ch. 3; Pearce, Origins, 11–12, 126–34, 177–8.134 Later on, in the early nineteenth century, during the Napoleonic Wars, the blockade was again employed as a powerful weapon against Spain, which further contributed to crumbling Spain’s Atlantic trade system. For the impact that British blockade had on Spanish Atlantic trade system and Spain’s finance in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, see Pearce, British Trade, 119–21; Stein and Stein, Crisis, 178, 259.Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI [Grant Numbers JP15K16865; JP17K03158].
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: This journal has established itself as an internationally respected forum for the presentation and discussion of recent research in the history of the British Empire and Commonwealth and in comparative European colonial experiences. Particular attention is given to imperial policy and rivalries; colonial rule and local response; the rise of nationalism; the process of decolonization and the transfer of power and institutions; the evolution of the Imperial and Commonwealth association in general; and the expansion and transformation of British culture. The journal also features a substantial review section of recent literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信