Captain Elout — the son of the Dutch minister of Finance Elout — was the young naval officer who acted as courier and messenger between the Dutch plenipotentiaries in London and the Dutch court at The Hague during the final weeks of the negotiations leading to the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of London of 17 March 1824. In P. H. van der Kemp’s 1900 article he is a minor but pivotal figure: it was Captain Elout who, having assisted the negotiators in London, was entrusted with the draft treaty and with an oral message concerning the Treaty of Pedir (1819) — a message whose tendentious representation of that treaty at The Hague opened the way to the most consequential single error of the 1824 settlement.
Assistance to the London Negotiators
Van der Kemp introduces Captain Elout in the context of the dispatch of the draft treaty to The Hague. The Dutch plenipotentiaries, Falck and Fagel, were “assisted in the work of the negotiations in London by Captain Elout, son of the then minister of Finance, the former commissioner-general.” The choice of Elout’s son for this delicate task was not accidental: he combined the technical competence of a naval officer (the draft had to be carried swiftly and securely) with the political advantage of being the son of the very minister whose advice the King would seek.
The Oral Message on Acheh
The crucial episode of Captain Elout’s mission concerns the oral message he was instructed to convey. While he was on the point of departure with the draft treaty, the British plenipotentiaries unexpectedly revealed that “yes, indeed, a British treaty existed with Acheh” and that they would like to see it maintained; it was, they said, “nothing special, nothing other than a promise by Acheh to grant hospitality and assistance to British ships in case of shipwreck.” That was, “in other words, also an assurance of the most friendly reception.” Since the Dutch plenipotentiaries had not read the Acheh treaty, and could not form an independent judgement, they instructed Captain Elout, on his return to The Hague, to bring the new incident personally to the King’s attention and to request authorisation to add a provision on Acheh to the draft treaty on his return to London.
Van der Kemp underlines the irregularity: “This instruction was given, be it noted, without any of the plenipotentiaries having read the Acheh treaty itself!” Captain Elout’s role was thus that of an unwitting intermediary in a procedure whose implications neither he nor his principals understood.
The King’s Authorisation of 13 February 1824
At The Hague, Captain Elout presented the draft and the oral message. The King, on the advice of Minister Elout (Captain Elout’s father), authorised the negotiators to proceed, with the proviso — recorded in the royal authorisation of 13 February 1824 — that no objection should be made to the Acheh reservation “if it is true” that the Acheh treaty was only concerned with hospitality to shipwrecked sailors. Ridder Reinhold, then acting as head of Foreign Affairs, communicated the King’s decision to Elout and entrusted Captain Elout with the further instructions for the negotiators. The following day, Captain Elout wrote to his father: “Your note has been given in full. Otherwise no details have been entered into, referring to what I am to communicate orally.”
The Revelation of 23 February 1824
When Captain Elout returned to London and the Acheh treaty was at last read aloud, on 23 February 1824, the assembly was visibly startled: “the piece was by no means so innocent as originally supposed; rather, English sovereignty over Acheh was thereby established — for that Raffles had indeed provided.” The conditional formula — “if it is true” — proved, in Van der Kemp’s words, “not to be true.” Yet the King’s authorisation had been given, and the Dutch plenipotentiaries did not feel themselves free to repudiate the concession. The reservation on Acheh was therefore inserted by means of the supplementary notes exchanged at the signing of the treaty.
Significance
Captain Elout’s significance in Van der Kemp’s narrative is that of a useful but subordinate figure who, by acting as the bearer of an oral message he did not originate, became the unwitting instrument of a major diplomatic error. His personal integrity is not in question; the structural fault, in Van der Kemp’s reading, lay with the plenipotentiaries who failed to read the Acheh treaty before instructing him, and with the ministerial system at The Hague which, in the absence of a Foreign Affairs minister, left the question to be decided on the strength of an oral communication by a young captain.
See Also
- Elout
- Anton Reinhard Falck
- Hendrik Fagel
- Ridder Reinhold
- Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles
- Anglo-Dutch Treaty of London (1824)
- Acheh treaty of 1819
- Treaty of Pedir (1819)
- Elout’s advice of 12 February 1824
- King’s authorization of 13 February 1824
- Raising of the Acheh treaty in London negotiations
- Article 6 controversy
Source
Raffles’ Atjeh-overeenkomst van 1819, by P. H. van der Kemp, in Bijdragen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië, 6e Volgr., Deel VII (1900), pp. 159-239. Universiteitsbibliotheek Vrije Universiteit, LS.08781.
Captain Elout — the son of the Dutch minister of Finance Elout — was the young naval officer who acted as courier and messenger between the Dutch plenipotentiaries in London and the Dutch court at The Hague during the final weeks of the negotiations leading to the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of London of 17 March 1824. In P. H. van der Kemp’s 1900 article he is a minor but pivotal figure: it was Captain Elout who, having assisted the negotiators in London, was entrusted with the draft treaty and with an oral message concerning the Treaty of Pedir (1819) — a message whose tendentious representation of that treaty at The Hague opened the way to the most consequential single error of the 1824 settlement.
Assistance to the London Negotiators
Van der Kemp introduces Captain Elout in the context of the dispatch of the draft treaty to The Hague. The Dutch plenipotentiaries, Falck and Fagel, were “assisted in the work of the negotiations in London by Captain Elout, son of the then minister of Finance, the former commissioner-general.” The choice of Elout’s son for this delicate task was not accidental: he combined the technical competence of a naval officer (the draft had to be carried swiftly and securely) with the political advantage of being the son of the very minister whose advice the King would seek.
The Oral Message on Acheh
The crucial episode of Captain Elout’s mission concerns the oral message he was instructed to convey. While he was on the point of departure with the draft treaty, the British plenipotentiaries unexpectedly revealed that “yes, indeed, a British treaty existed with Acheh” and that they would like to see it maintained; it was, they said, “nothing special, nothing other than a promise by Acheh to grant hospitality and assistance to British ships in case of shipwreck.” That was, “in other words, also an assurance of the most friendly reception.” Since the Dutch plenipotentiaries had not read the Acheh treaty, and could not form an independent judgement, they instructed Captain Elout, on his return to The Hague, to bring the new incident personally to the King’s attention and to request authorisation to add a provision on Acheh to the draft treaty on his return to London.
Van der Kemp underlines the irregularity: “This instruction was given, be it noted, without any of the plenipotentiaries having read the Acheh treaty itself!” Captain Elout’s role was thus that of an unwitting intermediary in a procedure whose implications neither he nor his principals understood.
The King’s Authorisation of 13 February 1824
At The Hague, Captain Elout presented the draft and the oral message. The King, on the advice of Minister Elout (Captain Elout’s father), authorised the negotiators to proceed, with the proviso — recorded in the royal authorisation of 13 February 1824 — that no objection should be made to the Acheh reservation “if it is true” that the Acheh treaty was only concerned with hospitality to shipwrecked sailors. Ridder Reinhold, then acting as head of Foreign Affairs, communicated the King’s decision to Elout and entrusted Captain Elout with the further instructions for the negotiators. The following day, Captain Elout wrote to his father: “Your note has been given in full. Otherwise no details have been entered into, referring to what I am to communicate orally.”
The Revelation of 23 February 1824
When Captain Elout returned to London and the Acheh treaty was at last read aloud, on 23 February 1824, the assembly was visibly startled: “the piece was by no means so innocent as originally supposed; rather, English sovereignty over Acheh was thereby established — for that Raffles had indeed provided.” The conditional formula — “if it is true” — proved, in Van der Kemp’s words, “not to be true.” Yet the King’s authorisation had been given, and the Dutch plenipotentiaries did not feel themselves free to repudiate the concession. The reservation on Acheh was therefore inserted by means of the supplementary notes exchanged at the signing of the treaty.
Significance
Captain Elout’s significance in Van der Kemp’s narrative is that of a useful but subordinate figure who, by acting as the bearer of an oral message he did not originate, became the unwitting instrument of a major diplomatic error. His personal integrity is not in question; the structural fault, in Van der Kemp’s reading, lay with the plenipotentiaries who failed to read the Acheh treaty before instructing him, and with the ministerial system at The Hague which, in the absence of a Foreign Affairs minister, left the question to be decided on the strength of an oral communication by a young captain.
See Also
- Elout
- Anton Reinhard Falck
- Hendrik Fagel
- Ridder Reinhold
- Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles
- Anglo-Dutch Treaty of London (1824)
- Acheh treaty of 1819
- Treaty of Pedir (1819)
- Elout’s advice of 12 February 1824
- King’s authorization of 13 February 1824
- Raising of the Acheh treaty in London negotiations
- Article 6 controversy
Source
Raffles’ Atjeh-overeenkomst van 1819, by P. H. van der Kemp, in Bijdragen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië, 6e Volgr., Deel VII (1900), pp. 159-239. Universiteitsbibliotheek Vrije Universiteit, LS.08781.