Abstract
The resumption of commercial relations after the termination of the wars in Europe and America was slow and uncertain. It has been stated before that American merchants perforce entered the field late. Only after the lifting of the blockade did they come in, in 1815, with eagerness to resume their pre-war business. But they found then a great number of competitors, already more or less established: the British, of course, who took advantage of a favored position in Holland, and merchants from the Hanseatic cities and Scandinavian countries, which tried to recapture the References shipping intercourse won by them as neutrals in the previous years. Even the Dutch themselves developed some activity in the reëstablishment of their national navigation. Right after the restoration of independence, in December 1813, the merchants appear to have addressed the American consul about the possibility of an admittance of neutral vessels to United States ports 1). Bourne had presumed at first, from the defective state of the blockade at that time, that a mutually advantageous trade might be carried on there by the Dutch 2), which would leave American commerce passive but would bring about a renewal of its relations with Holland.
It is necessary to state at the outset of this chapter that the quantities and amounts given in various statistical tables and quotations have been gathered from the material obtainable in contemporary publications and consular returns; that, however, in consequence of the defectiveness of statistical services, in the Netherlands as well as in the United States, the quotations used can in general not be trusted for specific facts to reflect the actual state of things which they pretend to represent. Various complaints of consular officers exhibit their inability to collect data on even the national trade movements which they had by their very commissions undertaken to register. (For instance in R. A. B. Z. Leg. Washington No. 30 etc. : the shipmasters sail without having received the necessary certificates from the consuls.) The statistical service of the United States was completely reorganized in 1820 (Keiler p. 48). Only then do its quotations become relatively trustworthy. All data collected before this year must be taken with a great deal of indulgence. If quoted here for the sake of concrete illustration, they are of use only for a construction of the general lines of the movements of navigation and commerce, under the reasonable assumption that their respective deviations from fact will on the whole agree enough to give sense to a mutual comparison. (Cf. chapter II, p, 30 , footnote 1.)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Dec. 23 1813, Bourne to Van der Duyn (R. A. B. Z. 2: bur. I. S. No. 61).
Dec. 27 1813 (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Amsterdam).
Febr. 11 1814 (Ibid.).
See Chapter IV, p. 67 f.
But many vessels were carrying on the trade with England (Koophandel en Zeevaarttijdingen of 1814; Municipal Archives of Amsterdam, Library, No. 4). 7) Oct. 3 1814, Bourne to Taylor (L. o. C. Bourne Papers).
Jan. 5 1815, Bourne to Taylor (Ibid.).
May 17th the first American ship arrived at Hamburg (Wat jen l.c. p. 6).
July 3 1815 (L. o. C. Bourne Papers).
Sept. 19 1815, New York, Ludlow to Bourne (Ibid.).
July 18 1815, New York, Harvey Strong to Bourne (Ibid.).
Aug. 31 1815, George R. Curtis to Bourne (Ibid.).
Oct. 1815, Amsterdam, Bourne to Taylor (Ibid.).
De Amsterdamsche Courant of Jan. 16 1817, No. 14. — A table given in J. A. Drieling, Bijdragen tot een vergelijkend overzigt van Nederland’s zeevaart en handel (‘s-Gravenhage—Amsterdam 1829), p. 232,233, gives the following numbers of American ships which passed the Sont in both directions: 1814, 9; 1815,128; 1816,168; 1817,136; 1818, 128; 1819, 89; 1820, 169; 1821, 196. About the half of each figure indicates the number of vessels engaged in this trade.
Idem of Jan. 31 1816, No. 27. 18 were piloted outward.
L.c. p. 36. Compiled from A. S. P. Commerce and Navigation.
Ibid. — Pitkin l.c. (1835) p. 363 gives tables not of tonnage entered, but of tonnage employed. His percentages deviate slightly from those above.
Wätjen l.c. p. 13 (table from Baasch).
Oct. 18 1816, Eustis to Monroe (D. o. S. Desp. Neth.). — Jan. 17 1817, idem (ibid.) mentions a total number of 152 vessels.
Archives of the Legation, Miscellaneous 1806–1825.
Jan. 5 1820, Jan. 3, July 8 and Dec. 31 1821 (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Rotterdam).
See footnote No. 1.
Hazard to the Secretary of State (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Antwerp). 5) A newspaper report from the Journal de la Belgique, communicated by Van Hogendorp, Bijdragen etc. I p. 267, states 28 American vessels for Antwerp in 1816.
Amsterdamsche Courant of Jan. 17 1820 No. 6, and of Jan. 5 1821 No. 5.
From a table composed by Van Mechelen, Zeevaart en zeehandel van Rotterdam (1813–1830), p. 160, footnote 1, from “various consular statements”. It gives for 1820, 74 vessels, for 21, 69.
May 19 1817 Wambersie figures (to Eustis, L. o. C. Eustis Papers) that in the general foreign intercourse of the Netherlands the number of American vessels was 1/15 that of British, and 1/4 that of French, Spanish, Russian, Prussian, Danish or Swedish vessels. It should be remarked, however, that the tonnage of the American ships was in general considerably greater than that of the average European vessels, which did not engage in trans-atlantic intercourse but performed a European coasting trade.
There is little reason to ascribe the small number of Antwerp arrivals in 1818 to the higher, differential duties levied temporarily on American tonnage, in the first half of that year.
Cf. Drieling p. 203.
Jan. 3 1817, Eustis to E. Wambersie, consul at Ostend (L. o. C. Eustis Papers); May 5 1818, Wambersie to Adams (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Rotterdam I); Jan. 27 1819, Everett to Adams (D. o. S. Desp. Neth.). — In 1819 Wambersie was appointed consul at Rotterdam; the Ostend consulate was abandoned.
Jan. 24 1818, Clibborn to Adams (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Antwerp).
Archives Legation U. S. A. at The Hague, Miscellaneous 1806–1825.
From a statement in R. A. Coll. Goldberg Port. 208 V. Van den Brink p. 233 f.
De Amsterdamsche Courant of Jan. 2 1818, No. 2, and of Jan. 4 1819, No. 3. Neither the earlier nor the later years of this paper give the necessary specification as to the American ports from which the vessels arrived.
No evidence is to be had from the registers for 1817 and 1818 whether Boston in England or Boston, Mass. is meant.
Rhode Island or England.
Virginia or Egypt.
It is to be observed that from an agricultural point of view Maryland is included under the Southern states rather than under the Middle states; as for trade and shipping, however, it is preferable to class it geographically under one head with Pennsylvania.
Van Mechelen, p. 220–221.
Also here the numbers registered for Boston are subject to doubt. Above quoted are the minimum figures.
Cf. Johnson et al. II p. 34.
Cf. p. 35.
Van Mechelen p. 162.
See below p. 367, footnote 2.
Clive Day, History of the commerce of the United States, 1925, (a handbook), p. 161.
Van Mechelen p. 159.
June 2 1815, Bourne to Monroe (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Amsterdam).
June 17 1818, Van Nagell to Ten Cate (R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 5; Dossier 724 Ko. 1509).
July 25 1816, Wichers to the King (R. A. B. Z. 2: bur. I. S. 1816 No. 2835), enclosing a list of the Netherlands vessels.
They are to be found in the Archives of the Dutch Legation (R. A. B. Z. B XXIg in Nos. 28 f., 38 and 42. No special reference has been made to them in the followin) survey.
June 24 1817, Moses Myers to Ten Cate (Ibid. No. 38).
The difference of these statistics with those of the Netherlands quoted before, caused by the deficiency of both, has been explained in the footnote at the beginning of the present chapter.
For an explanation of the difference in vessels arrived and cleared, see: for the trade to the Netherlands, supra; to the colonies, infra.
Jan. 7 1819, Zimmermann to De Quabeck (R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 32). 3) Pitkin l.c. (1835) p. 365.
Wätjen p. 6 f., 13. In the year 1830—’31 the participation by the Hanseatic Cities in the trade intercourse with the United States for the first time after 1815 equalled the American participation.
April 9 1818 (Colenbrander Gedenkst. VIII 1815–1825 III No. 188).
Aug. 13 1821 (Ibid. No. 240).
„Waarom werden onze schepen te voren als vrachtvaarders van geheel Europa gebruikt? Omdat zij goedkooper en beter voeren dan anderen. En waarom nu niet meer? Omdat zij het duurder en helaas niet beter dan anderen doen”.
Cf. Van Mechelen p. 162. Above p. 355.
Jan. 7 1819, New York, Zimmermann to De Quabeck (R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 32).
Van Mechelen p. 174.
Amsterdam Febr. 1816, Willink es. to the King (Colenbrander Gedenkst. VIII II No. 31). — The Hague, Febr. 22 1816, Salviati, the Prussian chargé d’affaires, observes that a state of commerce not able „de... contenter les demandes des étrangers et nommément des Américains, les forcerait à chercher ailleurs les marchandises dont ils auraient besoin” (Ibid. VIII I No. 385).
R. A. Coll. Goldberg Port. 210.
Bark of the quercitron tree, a specialty of United States forests, in demand for the preparation of yellow dyestuffs.
E.g. Norfolk, Dec. 28 1818, Moses Myers to De Quabeck, reporting a “considerable trade hence to Holland, particularly in Tobacco and Cotton” (R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 31). Tobacco, rice and cotton are mentioned in many preparative documents to the negotiations, and during the conferences themselves. Also by F. Smeer, Aug. 16 1817, to Van der Kemp (R. A. B. Z. Dossier 724).
On the development of its exports, see above chapter II, p, 26 , footnote 1. 4) Antwerp, July 3 1816, Hazard to the Secretary of State (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Antwerp).
May 19 1817, E. Wambersie to Eustis (L. o. C. Eustis Papers).
Antwerp, Jan. 24 1818, Clibborn to the Secretary of State (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Antwerp). The demand for potashes was supplied from Russia.
L.c. p. 68, Annex B. 3) „Vaten”.
H. J. Swarth, Jan. 27 1820, enclosure, (Colenbrander Gedenkstukken VIII III, No. 194, p. 303). 5) Note by G. Schimmelpenninck, Aug. 1820 (Ibid. No. 239).
Ed. 1835, p. 86 f., 119 f. It is to be noticed that most tables given in this valuable treatise show a lack of data for the years 1817–1820. Pitkin’s figures were taken from the returns of the American customshouse books. The author is aware (p. 412) that they “do not always shew the real extent of the commerce with particular countries”, in consequence of indirect voyages and other causes of a misrepresentation of the actual trade movement.
A Dutch calculation of the value of several articles of importation, contained in the table annexed to chapter IX, gives the prices per unit in guilders in 1814 (1 fl. = $ 0.40): Tobacco, Virginia, per hogshead fl. 225 = $90; Maryland, idem fl. 150 = $60; North American cotton, per pd. fl. 0.65 = $0.26; rice, per 600 pds. fl. 60 = $24; pot-, perl-ashes, per 100 pds. fl. 14 = $5.60.
Making a value of about 2 millions of dollars.
Making a value of almost 3 millions of dollars.
Chapter II p. 36 .
Van Mechelen p. 184.
P. 157 f. for sugar and coffee in 1814–1816.
1818, p. 263 f.
Baasch, Holi. Wirtschaftsgesch. p. 468 f.
Cf. chapter II p. 29,33.
P. 239.
R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42.
Archives Legation U. S. A. at The Hague, Miscellaneous 1806–1825.
Consular return ibid.
In R. A. Coll. Goldberg Port. 209. The following firms bought these cargoes, or parts of them: Karthaus, Hasenclever & Comp., W. & J. Willink, Ruys & Zimmermann, D. Crommelin & Soonen, Alstorphius & Van Hemert, N. & J. R. van Stap-horst, and Hope & Co.
Cf. De Nederlandsche Hermes 1828 No. 1, p. 57.
R. A. Coll. Goldberg Port. 210.
Eng. = England, Germ. = Germany (via the river Rhine), Fr. = France, Sp. = Spain, Port. = Portugal, Sw. 1] Switzerland.
March 20 1816, Hazard to Bourne (L. o. C. Bourne Papers): “it is rare for a vessel to go home”.
Ostend, May 19 1817, to Eustis (L. o. C. Eustis Papers). He assumed the probability that the articles in question would in due time “resume their former demands”. July 1 1820, however, writing from Rotterdam, where he had taken the American consulate, he had to state again that all American vessels had returned home in ballast (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Rotterdam).
Archives Legation U. S. A. at The Hague, Miscellaneous 1806–1825.
Adam Seybert, Statistical Annals of the United States of America, 1789–1818, p. 204 f.
Mostly textiles.
Bureau of statistics, Imports of coffee and tea 1790–1896, (Washington 1897) p. 3 f. See below, p. 383.
The table contains also molasses, rum, sugar and coffee, all of which were doubtless imported from the West Indies and Surinam, not from Dutch territories in Europe.
Cf. p. 26, footnote 4, quoting more than one million of gallons, against $30 thousands in 1815. Also: Dobbelaar p. 261.
Cf. documents used for the treaty negotiations in 1817, passim (e.g. Aug. 16 1817, F. Smeer to Van der Kemp, R. A. B. Z. Dossier 724). Flemish linens were still imported irom Archangel, Russia, in 1815, a consequence of the war period. A table in the „Am-sterdamsche Courant” of Febr. 17 1816, No. 42, shows that of 8.846 pieces shipped from that port, in 1815, 8.183 were carried to America.
Archives Legation U. S. A. at The Hague, Miscellaneous 1806–1825.
R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42.
Sept. 30 1817, Goldberg and Van der Kemp to Gallatin and Eustis (see chapter XV).
Paris, Oct. 9 1817, Gallatin to Eustis (L. o. C. Eustis Papers).
Except for Holland gin, distilled from grain (Cf. p. 158, footnote 3). 5) P. 241. Cf. Buck l.c. p. 117 f.
Oct. 3 1814, Bourne to Taylor (L. o. C. Bourne Papers).
Aug. 24 1815, Plimpton & Marett to Mess. S. Bourne & Co. (Ibid.).
March 30 1815, John Derby & John Prince Jr. to Eustis (L. o. C. Eustis Papers II): “inform us, if the Dutch will allow us a trade with their Colonys in India and if we can carry cargo to them or if their produce is only to be purchased with specie”.
June 1815, to Winthrop (R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 51, letterbook).
Nov. 18 1815, Lechleitner to Van Nagell (Ibid.): “Les négociants américains ne cessent de me demander des renseignements sur nos colonies à savoir lesquelles nous seront rendues, et à quels points il leur sera permis de trafiquer”. Also: Febr. 18 1816, to the governor of Surinam; March 7 1816, to the governor general at Batavia.
Aug. 20 1816, Ten Cate to the governor general of the Dutch East Indies (Ibid.). March 16, 1816, Lechleitner to Ten Cate (Ibid. No. 28); and April 6 1816, Gebhard to Ten Cate (R. A. B. Z. 2: bur. I. S. 1816 No. 2286): “frequent enquiries have been made, if and what trade will be allowed to the Dutch West Indian colonies”.
See chapter X.
July 26 1816, Van Nagell to the Dept. of Commerce and the Colonies (R. A. B. Z. Dossier 724, Minute No. 1859).
Their correspondence is to be found in R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 51. The tariff policy as evinced by rates and regulations has been treated in chapter X.
St. Eustatius, March 25 1816, R. ’t Hoen, governor ad interim, to Lechleitner (Ibid.). Although the Bermudas were made a freeport by the British, several English merchants have established themselves at St. Eustatius, he reports, in the prospect that the profitable smuggling trade may thus flourish the better.
See above p, 357, 358.
Van den Bosch, who visited these islands in 1827—’28, on a special mission, gives the following quantities of sugar production at St. Martin: in 1816, 1400.000 pds.; in 1817, 600.000 pds.; in 1818,1400.000 pds. In the next years the amounts drop considerably, on account of ill weather and storms. (His letters, published by B. de Gaay Fortmanin Bijdr. en Meded. van het Hist. Genootschap 51, p. 295.)
The vessels arriving at Boston during 1818 from St. Eustatius carried molasses, rum, sugar, oranges (R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42).
J. de Hullu, St. Eustatius in 1819 (Bijdr. taal-, land- en volkenkunde van Ned. Indie, 68, p. 437, 438); and: St. Martin en Saba omstreeks 1818 (De Indische Gids 1916, p. 212 f.).
Curaçao, April 6 1816, A. Kikkert, Governor General, to Lechleitner (R. A. B. Z B XXI No. 24 f.). — J. de Hullu, Curaçao in 1817 (Bijdr. taal-, land- en volkenkunde Ned. Indie, 67 p. 598 f.). De Gaay Fortman, Curaçao en onderhoorige eilanden, 1816 – 1828 (De West-Indische Gids 9, p. 97 f.).
Jan. 211820, C. L. Parker to the Secretary of State (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Curaçoa). 7) R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42.
R. A. Archives of Curaçoa and dependencies, No. 1595.
Sept. 8 1817 a Dutch vessel arrived from Boston with soap and tobacco. It was the only Dutch arrival in the intercourse with the United States registered in the above weigh-house book.
R. A. Archives of Curaçoa and dependencies, No. 1577.
Ibid. No. 1588.
American statistics for 1818 yield the following figures of the trade movement between Curaçoa and Boston and New York (see above p. 357, 358):
R. A. Archives of Curaçoa and dependencies, No. 1578.
Ibid. No. 1591 foll.
Ibid. No. 1592.
Surinam, May 31 1816, Van Panhuys, Governor General, to Lechleitner (R. A. B. Z. BXXI No. 24 f.).
J. van den Bosch, Nederlandsche bezittingen in Azia, Amerika en Afrika (1818), II p. 240 and table No. 2.
Cf. Senas’ memorandum (chapter X p. 217).
R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42.
Consular return, enclosed with Dec. 31 1820, Trask to the Secretary of State (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Paramaribo).
Ibid.
Mentioned above, in this chapter, p. 356, 357.
R. A. B. Z. I. S. 1817 No. 4090.
Cf. Clauder l.c. p. 177, 229 f., on the central place of Havana in the West Indian trade about 1810.
May 2 1818, Ten Cate to Vaillant, governor of Surinam (R. A. B, Z. B XXI No. 51).
Keiler p. 52. For a preceding Act of March 11817, see chapter XVIII, p. 336.
Sept. 30 and Nov. 6 1818 (R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 35). Dodge wanted the qualities of a Dutch consular function. A list transmitted by the Dutch consul at Boston (ibid. No. 42) specifies the arrivals at this port in 1817 from the British West Indies: 44 British vessels and 1 American vessel.
The commerce of the island is declining rapidly, states the American agent Parker, Sept. 10 1824 (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Curaçoa), “as the Columbian Provinces in our neighbourhood become more tranquil”.
Curaçoa was made a freeport in 1827, Jan. 1, St. Eustatius in 1828. — J. van den Bosch, afterwards famous as Governor General of the Dutch East Indies, was charged with a special mission to the West in 1827 and ’28, for a revision of its colonial administration and the furtherance of its commerce and trade. His reports were published by De Gaay Fortman in Bijdr. en Meded. van het Hist. Genootschap, 51, 1930, p. 189 f.
Ed. 1817: p. 86 f., p. 157 f.
Pitkin (1835) p. 242, the years running from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30.
p. 263–265.
Imports of coffee and tea, 1790–1896 (Washington 1897), p. 3–5. Tables in regard to sugar and molasses (Washington 1887), p. 634.
Drawn from data furnished by United States officers, for the years 1814–1828. Quoted in De Nederlandsche Hermes 1829 No. 10 p. 4.
R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42.
Already at the fitting out of the expedition which was to take over the East Indian colonies from the British officers, a great need of transport vessels had been encountered in Holland (Van der Kemp, De teruggave der Oost-Indische koloniën 1814–1816, p. 217 f.).
June 27 1817, Ten Cate to Van Nagell (R. A. B. Z. I. S. 1817 No. 4090).
Chapter X.
Communicated by D. F. van Alphen, Redevoering over het ontwerp van wet der geldleening ten behoeve van de overzeesche bezittingen, 27 Februari 1826 (Leyden 1826, published in French translation also), p. 89.
Report of John Shillaber, commercial agent at Batavia, April 6 1825 (D. o. S. Cons. Desp. Batavia).
A. S. P. Commerce and Navigation, II p. 55, 92, 158, 388, 469, 650.
R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42.
E.g. Sept. 7 1817, F. Smeer to Van der Kemp (R. A. B. Z. Dossier 724). Cf. G. Gonggrijp, Schets eener economische geschiedenis van Nederlandsch-Indië (Haarlem 1928, Volksuniversiteitsbibliotheek, 41), p. 104.
Reported for instance in a memorandum of Aug./Sept. 1817 (R. A. Coll. Goldberg Port. 210).
P. H. van der Kemp, Hoe men vóór het cultuurstelsel opnam het consigneeren naar Nederland van de gouvernementsproducten (In Bijdr. taal-, land- en volkenkunde van Ned. Indië, 68, 1913), p. 455, 457.
Bureau of Statistics, Imports of Coffee and Tea, 1790–1896, p. 3–5.
Treasury Department, Bureau of Statistics, Tables in regard to Sugar and Molasses, p. 634.
The trade to the peppercoast of Sumatra is not to be considered, for our period, as falling under the Dutch colonial régime. In 1820, Mr. Dennett asserts (Americans-in Eastern Asia, p. 31), 40 vessels of about 200 tons each were sent to Sumatra annually.
R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42.
Chapter X, p. 216.
Dec. 23 1817, The colonial government to the department of the Colonies (quoted by Van der Kemp, Hoe men etc., p. 470).
Ibid.
Febr. 12 1821, Everett to Adams (D. o. S. Desp. Neth.): “as we are the only foreign nation that takes any considerable share in the trade, it is against us, if any body, that the jealousy of the native merchants must be directed”.
Memorieboek p. 66 f. — For a survey, and literature, on the early Dutch tea trade, in the 17th and 18th centuries, see Van der Kemp, Oost-Indië’s geldmiddelen etc., p. 288 f.
Cf. Van Winter II p. 108.
See chapter XIX.
„Onderzoek of het voor het belang van den Nederlandschen handel raadzaam zij den invoer van thee in dat Koningrijk al dan niet vrij te stellen, door P. Pous”. (Middel-burg 1817.) P. 20.
R. A. B. Z. B XXI No. 42.
Cf. Survey of American foreign relations, 1930, p. 201–209.
Cf. Van der Kemp, Oost-Indië’s geldmiddelen etc., p. 303 f.
Only 1 Dutch vessel sailed for Canton in 1818 (Van der Kemp l.c. p. 315).
Colenbrander, Gedenkst. VIII III p. 298, Jan. 27 1820, H. J. Swarth to Van Hogendorp: „De prijzen zijn zoo laag dat niemand aangemoedigd is geworden eenige expeditie naar China te ondernemen. De Amerikanen zijn dus onze eenige aanvoerders.”
De Nederlandsche Hermes, 1830 No. 7, p. 50.
Returns of the first Dutch expeditions, set out for this trade after the Restoration..
„Bedenkingen aan Directeuren der Chinasche expedition te Middelburg, tegens den voortduur eener onbepaalde aanvoer van thee in Nederland” (December 1821). It urged the reëstablishment of the system of licences, for national vessels exclusively.. The Americans derived special advantages, it says (p. 5), from the warehouse system — „entrepotstelsel” — in the Netherlands. This system allowed the storage of cargo without the payment of import duties until it should be sold to merchants of the country „ and at the same time reserved the possibility of reshipping the articles, again without payment of export duties, to any other foreign port where a favorable outlet might appear. Dutch commerce which used to import into private storehouses directly after arrival and upon immediate payment of the customs duties, was thus deprived of even the few opportunities offered for exportation from the national market.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1935 Martinus Nyhoff, the Hague, Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Westermann, J.C. (1935). Navigation and Commerce between the United States and the Netherlands, from 1814 to 1820. In: The Netherlands and the United States. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0999-2_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0999-2_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-015-0397-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-0999-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive