ground that they infringed upon the possessions of the king of Spain "whose title . . . was indisputable by the Conquest of Castile, and by the Pope's Bull of Donation."[1] The question came up in the House of Commons in 1620 and 1621 when title by papal grant was derided.[2]
In 1531 Francis I. prohibited the Norman vessels from voyages to Brazil or Guinea, where the king of Portugal claimed to be sovereign.[3] The municipal council of Rouen protested in vain. This royal decision was secured by the Portuguese ambassador by bribing Admiral Chabot. Again in 1537 and 1538 the Portuguese secured new ordinances prohibiting voyages to Brazil and Malaguette under pain of confiscation and bodily punishment.[4] Baron Saint Blancard vigorously protested, maintaining the freedom of the seas, and that trade with the peoples of the New World could not be monopolized by one nation any more than trade with the peoples of the Old World.[5]
The same contention is made even more clearly by the French author of one of the relations in Ramusio's Navigationi: "The Portuguese have no more right to prevent the French resorting to these lands, where they have not themselves
- ↑ Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, I, 16. An elaborate answer seems to have been prepared.
- ↑ Debates of House of Commons, 1620 and 1621, I, 250–51, cited from Bancroft's History of the United States, I, 10.
- ↑ Francis I. is said to have remarked, in reference to the Demarcation Line: "Je voudrais bien qu'on me montrât l'article du testament d'Adam qui partage le Nouveau-Monde entre mes frères, l'Empereur Charles V. et le Roi de Portugal, en m'excluant de la succession." Bernal Diaz relates this anecdote.
- ↑ Pigeonneau, Hist. du Commerce de la France, II, 150–54. In 1539, Chabot was disgraced and Francis I. withdrew his prohibitions, but he was never active on the side of the voyagers. See Pigeonneau, 134–70.
- ↑ "Dictus Rex Serenissimus [Portugaliæ] nullum habet dominium nec jurisdictionem in dictis insulis; imo gentes eas incolentes plurimos habent regulos quibus more tamen et ritu silvestri reguntur, et ita ponitur in facto. Etiam ponitur in facto probabili quod dictus serenissimus Rex Portugaliæ nullam majorem habeat potestatem in dictus insulis quam habet Rex Christianissimus, imo enim mare sit commune, et insulæ præfatæ omnibus apertæ, permissum est nedum Gallis sed omnibus aliis nationibus eas frequentare et cum accolis commercium habere." Cited from D'Avezac, from Varnhagen, Historia geral do Brazil, 443, or French ed., I, 441.
