Editing Navigation Acts (section)

==Navigation Act 1651==
{{Further|First Anglo-Dutch War}}
{{Infobox UK legislation
| short_title           = 
| type                  = Act
| parliament            = Parliament of England
| long_title            = An Act for increase of Shipping, and Encouragement of the Navigation of this Nation.
| year                  = 1651
| citation              = 
| royal_assent          = 9 October 1651
| territorial_extent    = [[England and Wales]]
| commencement          =
| expiry_date           =
| repeal_date           = 
| amends                = 
| replaces              = 
| amendments            = 
| repealing_legislation = 
| related_legislation   = 
| status                = Revoked
| original_text         = 
}}

The Navigation Act 1651, [[long title]]d ''An Act for increase of Shipping, and Encouragement of the Navigation of this Nation,'' was passed on 9 October 1651<ref>{{cite book|author=Blair Worden|title=The Rump Parliament 1648–53|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=c_KVaGF6k2oC&pg=PA299|year=1977|publisher=Cambridge UP|page=299|isbn=9780521292139}}</ref> by the [[Rump Parliament]] led by [[Oliver Cromwell]]. It authorized the Commonwealth to regulate England's international trade, as well as the trade with its colonies.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Pestana|first1=Carla Gardina|title=The English Atlantic in an Age of Revolution: 1640–1661|date=2004|publisher=Harvard University Press|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England|page=120}}</ref> It reinforced long-standing principles of national policy that English trade and fisheries should be carried in English vessels.

The act banned foreign ships from transporting goods from Asia, Africa or America to England or its colonies; only ships with an English owner, master and a majority English crew would be accepted. It allowed European ships to import their own products, but banned foreign ships from transporting goods to England from a third country elsewhere in the European sphere. The act also prohibited the import and export of salted fish in foreign ships, and penalized foreign ships carrying fish and wares between English posts. Breaking the terms of the act would result in the forfeiture of the ship and its cargo.<ref>[http://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/acts-ordinances-interregnum/pp559-562 October 1651: An Act for increase of Shipping, and Encouragement of the Navigation of this Nation.], in Acts and Ordinances of the Interregnum, 1642–1660, ed. C H Firth and R S Rait (London, 1911), pp. 559–562. British History Online [accessed 7 July 2018].</ref> These rules specifically targeted the [[Dutch Republic|Dutch]], who controlled much of Europe's international trade and even much of England's coastal shipping. It excluded the Dutch from essentially all direct trade with England, as the Dutch economy was competitive with, not complementary to the English, and the two countries, therefore, exchanged few commodities. This Anglo-Dutch trade, however, constituted only a small fraction of total Dutch trade flows.

Passage of the act was a reaction to the failure of the English diplomatic mission (led by [[Oliver St John]] and [[Walter Strickland]]) to [[The Hague]] seeking a political union of the Commonwealth with the [[Republic of the Seven United Netherlands]], after the [[States of Holland]] had made some cautious overtures to Cromwell to counter the monarchical aspirations of [[stadtholder]] [[William II of Orange]].<ref>Godwin, William (1827). [https://books.google.com/books?id=7jRDAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA372 History of the Commonwealth of England Vol. 3.] H. Colburn. pp. 372–382.</ref> The stadtholder had suddenly died, however, and the States were now embarrassed by Cromwell taking the idea too seriously. The English proposed the joint conquest of all remaining Spanish and Portuguese possessions. England would take America and the Dutch would take Africa and Asia. But the Dutch had just ended their war with Spain and already taken over most Portuguese colonies in Asia, so they saw little advantage in this grandiose scheme and proposed a [[free trade]] agreement as an alternative to a full political union. This again was unacceptable to the English, who would be unable to compete on such a level playing field, and was seen by them as a deliberate affront. The act is often mentioned as a major cause of the [[First Anglo-Dutch War]], and though there were others,<ref>Anderson, (1762), [https://books.google.com/books?id=chpPAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA415 pp.&nbsp;415–416]</ref> it was only part of a larger English policy to engage in war after the negotiations had failed. The English naval victories in 1653 (the [[Battle of Portland|Battles of Portland]], [[Battle of the Gabbard|the Gabbard]] and [[Battle of Scheveningen|Scheveningen]]) showed the supremacy of the Commonwealth navy in home waters. However, farther afield the Dutch predominated and were able to close down English commerce in the Baltic and the Mediterranean. Both countries held each other in a stifling embrace.<ref>Israel (1997), p. 316</ref>

The [[Treaty of Westminster (1654)]] ended the impasse. The Dutch failed to have the act repealed or amended, but it seems to have had relatively little influence on their trade. The act offered England only limited solace. It could not limit the deterioration of England's overseas trading position, except in the cases where England herself was the principal consumer, such as the [[Canary Islands|Canaries]] wine trade and the trade in [[Apulia|Puglian]] olive oil. In the trade with America and the West Indies, the Dutch kept up a flourishing "smuggling" trade, thanks to the preference of English planters for Dutch import goods and the better deal the Dutch offered in the sugar trade. The Dutch colony of [[New Netherlands]] offered a loophole (through intercolonial trade) wide enough to drive a shipload of Virginian tobacco through.<ref>Israel (1997), pp.&nbsp;310–311</ref>