Page 76 - INDIANNAVYV1

44 HISTORY OF THE INDIAN NAVY.
guese are but slenderly thaiikfnl." He also soon found how
illusory were the sanguine anticipations expressed in a letter from
Ispahan to his masters in England, " that their dear infant," (a
term applied to their commercial factory at Gombroon) " would
receive new life if the King would but keep his word ;" and,
after the fall of Ormuz, we find the same gentleman stating that
no benefit whatever can be expected from that possession unless
it be held exclusively by the English. But any expectation of
even partial advantage, was soon dispelled by the positive
refusal of Abbas to allow the English either to fortify Ormuz or
any harbour in the Gulf, though the Persian monarch renewed
the treaty made in 1G15 by Mr. Connock, and granted an
additional firman, allowing the English to purchase Persian
silks and bring them to Ispahan without payment of duties.
The chief advantage, therefore, gained by the Company in the
destruction of Ormuz, beyond the grant of half the customs
levied at the port of Gombroon,—which, in 1632 yielded £1,650,
though it gradually decreased in amount—lay in their having
broken the power of a hated rival in the Persian Gulf, in the
waters of which they were now supreme ; for they were only
permitted to occupy two houses at Gombroon " lest they should
give a building the strength of a castle." In other respects,
the great success achieved by the Company's sailors, brought
their masters much trouble and pecuniary loss, for a general
impression prevailed in England that vast booty had been
acquired by the Company and their officers at the capture of
Ormuz, wdiich had been carried to their account by their factors
at Surat. When, therefore, the Company's home fleet of seven
ships was fitting out for the venture of 1623, claims were made
by the King, as " droits of the crown," and by the Duke of
Buckingham, Lord High Admiral, for a proportion of the
prize money which their ships were supposed to have obtained
at Ormuz and elsewhere. For the purpose of establishing a
ground for these claims, references were made by the King and •
the Duke of Buckingham to Sir Henry Martin, Judge of the
Admiralty, and other civilians, to ascertain the King's and the
Lord Admiral's rights ; the former to a proportion of prize
money belonging to the Crown, the latter to one-tenth of the
prize money in right of his office. The first question appears
to have been admitted, the governor and directors not feeling it
to be their duty to dispute any point with His Majesty ; the
second demand they resisted on the plea that they had not acted
under any letters of marque from the Lord High Admiral, but
only under their charter, and contended that he had not any
right to a tenth of the prize money, which had arisen from their
having made prizes of ships, or taken plunder from their
enemies.
In order, however, to substantiate the claims, both of the King