THE EARLIEST SMUGGLERS
It is no part of our intention to trace the history of the levying of
customs through different reigns and in different ages, but it is
important to note briefly that the evading of these dues which we
designate smuggling, is one of the oldest offences on record.
The most ancient dues paid to the English sovereigns would seem to
have been those which were levied on the exportation and importation
of merchandise across the sea; and it is essential to emphasise at the
outset that though nowadays when we speak of smuggling we are
accustomed to think only of those acts concerned with imports, yet the
word applies equally to the unlawful manner of exporting commodities.
Before it is possible for any crime to be committed there must needs
be at hand the opportunity to carry out this intention; and throughout
the history of our nation--at any rate from the thirteenth
century--that portion of England, the counties of Kent and Sussex,
which is adjacent to the Continent, has always been at once the most
tempted and the most inclined towards this offence. Notwithstanding
that there are many other localities which were rendered notorious by
generations of smugglers, yet these two between them have been
responsible for more incidents of this nature than all the rest put
together.
What I am anxious at first to emphasise is the fact that, although
smuggling rose to unheard-of importance as a national danger during
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (and this is the period to
which we shall especially address ourselves presently as affording the
fullest and the most interesting information on an ingenious phase of
human energy), yet it was not a practice which suddenly rose into
prominence during that period. Human nature is much the same under
various kings and later centuries. Under similar circumstances men and
women perform similar actions. Confronted with the temptation to cheat
the Crown of its dues, you will find persons in the time of George V.
repeating the very crimes of Edward I. The difference is not so much
in degree of guilt as in the nature of the articles and the manner in
which they have been smuggled. To-day it may be cigars--centuries ago
it was wool. Although the golden age (if we may use the term) of
smuggling has long since passed, I am by no means unconvinced that if
the occasions of temptation recurred to carry on this trade as it was
pursued during the eighteenth and the first half of the nineteenth
centuries, there would not be found many who would be ready to apply
themselves to such a task. To some extent the modern improvements in
living, in education, and increased respect for lofty ideals would
modify this tendency; and long years have awakened so keen a regard
for the benefits of law and order that the nefarious practice might
not break out immediately on a large scale. But when we speak of
smuggling it is perhaps more correct to speak of it as a disease which
has not been exterminated from the system, but is, as it were, a
microbe that is kept well under control and not allowed to spread.
Everyone who is familiar with English history is aware of the
important position which was occupied by the wool trade. Because of
the immense value to the nation of the fleece it was necessary that
this commodity should be kept in the country and not sent abroad. If
in the present day most of our iron and coal were to be despatched
abroad regardless of what was required by our manufacturers it would
not be long before the country would begin to suffer serious loss. So,
in the thirteenth century, it was with the wool. As a check to this a
tax was levied on that wool which was exported out of the country, and
during the reign of Edward III. attempts were made by the threat of
heavy penalties to prevent the Continent from becoming the receptacle
of our chief product. But the temptation was too great, the rewards
were too alluring for the practice to be stopped. The fleece was
carried across from England, made into cloth, and in this state sent
back to us. Even in those days the town of Middleburgh, which we shall
see later to have been the source of much of the goods smuggled into
our country in the grand period, was in the fourteenth century the
headquarters abroad of this clandestine trade. We need not weary the
reader with the details of the means which were periodically taken to
stop this trade by the English kings. It is enough to state that
practically all the ports of Sussex and Kent were busily engaged in
the illegal business. Neither the penalties of death, nor the fixing
of the price of wool, nor the regulating of the rate of duty availed
in the long-run. Licences to export this article were continually
evaded, creeks and quiet bays were the scenes where the fleece was
shipped for France and the Low Countries. Sometimes the price of wool
fell, sometimes it rose; sometimes the Crown received a greater amount
of duty, at other times the royal purse suffered very severely. In the
time of Elizabeth the encouragement of foreign weavers to make their
homes in England was likely to do much to keep the wool in the
country, especially as there began to be increased wealth in our land,
and families began to spend more money on personal comforts.
Even in the time of Charles I. proclamations were issued against
exporting wool, yet the mischief still went on. In the time of
Charles II. men readily "risked their necks for 12d. a day."[1] The
greatest part of the wool was sent from Romney Marsh, where, after
nightfall, it was put on board French shallops with ten or twenty men
to guard it, all well armed. And other parts of Sussex as well as Kent
and even Essex were also engaged in similar exportations.
But it is from the time of King Charles II. that the first serious
steps were taken to cope with the smuggling evil, and from here we
really take our starting-point in our present inquiry. Prior to his
time the Customs, as a subsidy of the king, were prone to much
variability. In the time of James I., for instance, they had been
granted to the sovereign for life, and he claimed to alter the rates
as he chose when pressed for money. When Charles I. came to the throne
the Commons, instead of voting them for the extent of the sovereign's
life, granted them for one year only. At a later date in the reign of
that unhappy king the grant was made only for a couple of months.
These dues were known as tonnage and poundage, the former being a duty
of 1s. 6d. to 3s. levied on every ton of wine and liquor exported and
imported. Poundage was a similar tax of 6d. to 1s. on every pound of
dry goods.
It was not till after the Restoration that the customs were settled
and more firmly established, a subsidy being "granted to the king of
tonnage and poundage and other sums of money payable upon merchandise
exported and imported." Nominally the customs were employed for
defraying the cost of "guarding and defending the seas against all
persons intending the disturbance of his subjects in the intercourse
of trade, and the invading of this realm." And so, also, there was
inaugurated a more systematic and efficient method of preventing this
export smuggling. So far as one can find any records from the existing
manuscripts of this early Preventive system, the chronological order
would seem to be as follows: The first mention of any kind of marine
service that I can trace is found in a manuscript of 1674, which shows
the establishment of the Custom House organisation in that year for
England and Wales. From this it is clear that there had been made a
beginning of that system which was later to develop into that of the
Revenue cutters. And when we recollect how extremely interested was
Charles II. in everything pertaining to the sea and to sloop-rigged
craft especially, it seems very natural to believe that this monarch
inspired, or at any rate very considerably encouraged, the formation
of a small fleet of Custom House sailing craft. Elsewhere I have
discussed this matter at length, therefore it may suffice if attention
is called to the fact that to Charles was due the first yacht into
England, presented to him by the Dutch; while from his encouragement
were born the sport of yachting and the building of English yachts. He
was very much concerned in the rig of sloops, and loved to sail in
such craft, and his yacht was also most probably the first vessel of
that rig which had ever been employed by English sailors. Further
still, he was something of a naval architect, the founder of the
Greenwich Royal Observatory and the _Nautical Almanac_, and under his
rule a fresh impulse was given to navigation and shipbuilding
generally.
At any rate by the year 1674 there were among the smaller sailing
craft of England a number of sloops and smacks employed doubtless for
fishing and coasting work. As a kind of marine police, the Custom
House authorities determined to hire some of these to keep a watch on
the "owlers," as the wool-smugglers were termed, so called, no doubt,
because they had to pursue their calling always by night. Whatever
efforts had been adopted prior to his reign probably had consisted for
the most part, if not entirely, of a land police. But under this
second Charles the very sensible and obvious idea of utilising a
number of sailing craft was started. In the above MS. volume the first
reference is to "Peter Knight, Master of ye smack for ye wages of him
self and five men and boy, and to bear all charges except wear and
tear ... £59." "For extraordinary wear and tear," he was to be paid
£59. His vessel was the Margate smack. In the same volume there is
also a reference to the "Graves End smack," and to "Thomas Symonds for
wages and dyett [diet] for himself, master and six men ... £56, 5s.
0d." And for the "wear and tear to be disposed as ye Commrs. direct
... £14, 15s. 0d." There was yet a third vessel stationed a few miles
away, the "Quinborrough smack," and a reference to "Nicholas Badcock
for hire of ye smack, two men, and to bear all charges ... £23." These
vessels were not known as Revenue cutters at this time, but as Custom
House smacks. They were hired by the Commissioners of the Customs from
private individuals to prevent the owlers from smuggling the wool from
Kent, Essex, and Sussex. But it would seem that these smacks, even if
they modified a little the activities of the owlers, did not succeed
in bringing about many convictions. Romney Marsh still sent its
contribution across to France and Holland, much as it had done for
generations.
But in 1698 the attack on the men of Kent and Sussex was strengthened
by legislation, for by 7 & 8 William III. cap. 28, it was enacted that
"for the better preventing the exportation of wool and correspondence
with France ... the Lord High Admiral of England, or Commissioners for
executing the office of Lord High Admiral for the time being, shall
from time to time direct and appoint one ship of the Fifth Rate, and
two ships of the Sixth Rate, and four armed sloops constantly to
cruise off the North Foreland to the Isle of Wight, with orders for
taking and seizing all ships, vessels, or boats which shall export any
wool or carry or bring any prohibited goods or any suspected persons."
It was due to William III.'s Government also that no person living
within fifteen miles of the sea in those counties should buy any wool
before he entered into a bond, with sureties, that all the wool he
might buy should be sold by him to no persons within fifteen miles of
the sea, and all growers of wool within ten miles of the sea in those
counties were obliged within three days of shearing to account for the
number of fleeces, and where they were lodged.
Instructions were duly issued to captains of sloops, and a scheme
drafted for surrounding the whole of the coast with sloops, the crews
consisting of master, mate, and mariners. But from an entry in the
Excise and Treasury Reports of 1685, it is clear that a careful regard
even at that date was being had for the import smuggling as well. The
reference belongs to September 24, and shows that a "boarding" boat
was desired for going alongside vessels in the Downs, and preventing
the running in of brandies along the coast in that vicinity. The
charge for building such a boat is to be £25. In another MS. touching
the Customs, there is under date of June 1695 an interesting reference
to "a Deale yoghall to be built," and that "such a boat will be here
of very good use." She is to be "fitt to go into ye roads for boarding
men or other ocations when ye sloops may be at sea."
So much, then, for the present as to the guarding by sea against the
smugglers. Let us now turn to look into the means adopted by land. The
wool-owners of Romney Marsh were still hard at their game, and the
horses still came down to the beach ladened with the packs ready to be
shipped. If any one were sent with warrants to arrest the delinquents,
they were attacked, beaten, and forced to flee, followed by armed gangs
on horseback. But it was evident that the Crown was determined not to
let the matter rest, for a number of surveyors were appointed for
nineteen counties and 299 riding officers as well, though they made few
seizures, and obtained still fewer condemnations, but at great expense
to the State. In 1703 it was believed that the owling trade, especially
in Romney Marsh, was broken if not dead, although the smuggling by
import was on the increase, especially as regards silks, lace, and such
"fine" goods. At that time for the two hundred miles of coast-line
between the Isle of Sheppey and Emsworth--practically the whole of the
Kentish and Sussex shore--fifty officers were being employed at a
salary of £60 per annum, with an allowance to each of another £30
annually for a servant and horse to assist them during the night. And
there was authority also for the employment of dragoons to aid the
riding officers, especially in the neighbourhood of Romney Marsh; but
there was a number of "weak and superannuated" men among the latter, who
did not make for the efficiency of the service.
We need not say much more about the wool-exportation. In spite of all
the efforts of the Custom House smacks and the assistance of his
Majesty's ships of war, in spite, too, of further legislation, it
still continued. It went on merrily at any rate till the end of the
eighteenth century, by which time the smuggling by imports had long
since eclipsed its importance. It was the wars with France during the
time of William and Mary which increased and rendered more easy the
smuggling into England of silk and lace. And by means of the craft
which imported these goods there used to be smuggled also a good deal
of Jacobite correspondence. As Kent and Sussex had been famous for
their export smuggling, so these counties were again to distinguish
themselves by illicit importation. From now on till the middle of this
eighteenth century this newer form of smuggling rose gradually to
wondrous heights. And yet it was by no means new. In the time of
Edward III. steps had to be taken to prevent the importation of base
coin into the realm, and in succeeding reigns the king had been
cheated many a time of that which ought to have come to him through
the duties of goods entering the country.
It was impossible instantly to put down a practice which had been
pursued by so many families for so many hundreds of years. But the
existing force was not equal to coping with the increase. As a
consequence the daring of the smugglers knew no bounds--the more they
succeeded the more they ventured. A small gang of ten would blossom
forth into several hundreds of men, there would be no lack of arms nor
clubs, and adequate arrangements would be made for cellar-storage of
the goods when safely brought into the country. Consequently violence
became more frequent than ever--bloodshed and all sorts of crimes
occurred.
In the year 1723 several commissions or deputations were issued by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to captains of his Majesty's sloops to
make seizures, and the following year the Treasury authorised the
construction of seven sloops for service off the coast of Scotland.
The smugglers had in fact become so desperate, the English Channel was
so thoroughly infested with them, and the Revenue service was so
incapable of dealing with them in the manner that was obviously
essential for effectiveness, that the Admiralty ordered the captains
and commanders of His Majesty's ships to assist the Revenue officers
all they could in order to prevent the smuggling trade, and to look
out and seize all vessels employed in illegally exporting wool; for
the Admiralty had been informed by the Commissioners of Customs that
the Revenue officers frequently met with insults from French smuggling
luggers manned by armed crews, who carried on a brisk smuggling trade
by force and even dared the Revenue men to come aboard them.
But as the Revenue service afloat was assisted now by the Navy, so the
Revenue land guard was also aided by the Military. In 1713
arrangements had been made that dragoons should co-operate with the
riding officers in their operations against the owlers, and there are
plenty of skirmishes recorded showing that the dragoons were actually
so employed. Originally these soldiers were employed under the
direction of the riding officers, but, as can well be expected, there
was a good deal of jealousy and friction caused through the sharing of
the soldiers in the rewards for seizures, and after the year 1822 this
military assistance was not utilised to any great extent, although
legally Army officers can still be called upon to render assistance
against smuggling. And, in passing, one might mention that this
co-operation afloat between the Customs men and the Navy was equally
noticeable for a certain amount of ill-feeling, as we shall mention
on a later page.
Before the first quarter of the eighteenth century was completed,
smuggling between England and the Continent was proceeding at a brisk
pace, and by the middle of that century it had well-nigh reached its
climax for fearlessness. We have already alluded to the establishment
of hired smacks and sloops inaugurated towards the end of the
seventeenth century. The sloop rig, as I have shown in another
volume,[2] had probably been introduced into England from Holland soon
after the accession of Charles II., but from that date its merits of
handiness were so fully recognised that for yachts, for fishing craft,
for the carrying of passengers and cargo up and down the Thames and
along the coast as well as across to Ireland and the Continent, the
rig was adopted very readily in place of the lug-sails. The smack was
also a sloop-rigged vessel. We need not enter here into a discussion
as to the comparative merits of sloops and cutters and smacks. It is
enough if we state that when it was realised that a vessel of say 100
tons, sloop-rigged, with her one mast, mainsail, and two headsails and
square topsail (set forward of the mast on a yard) could be handled
with fewer men and therefore less expense than a lugger of similar
size; was also more suitable for manoeuvring in narrow channels,
and for entering and leaving small harbours, the fishermen, coasters,
and so on took to this improvement. Thus most naturally the larger
smuggling craft were till well on into the nineteenth century sloops
or cutters, and equally natural was it that the Revenue availed
themselves of this rig first by hiring smacks, and, later, by building
for themselves. These sloops, whether hired or owned, were given each
a particular station to guard, and that plan was followed by the
Revenue cruisers for many years to follow. Among the Exeter documents
of the Customs Department is included an interesting document dated
July 10, 1703, wherein the Board of Customs informs the collector at
the port of Dartmouth of the list of vessels appointed by the
Commissioners to cruise against owlers, the district comprised
extending from Pembroke in the west to the Downs in the east. The
following is the list of these vessels with their respective cruising
territories:--
NAME OF CRUISER LIMITS OF HER SPHERE
_Rye_ Pembroke to Lundy Island
_Discovery_ Milford to Swansea
_Dolphin_ Milford to Exmouth
_Hastings_ " " "
_Woolwich_ Downs to Falmouth
_Swan_ " " "
_Fly_ Off Folkestone
_Dispatch_ " "
This fairly well covered the region to which goods were likely to be
run from the Continent as well as that from which the owlers were wont
to export their wool. From an entry among the documents preserved in
the Custom House at Newcastle, dated September 1729, we can see that
also the north-east coast was guarded thus:--
NAME OF CRUISER LIMITS OF HER SPHERE
_Cruiser_ Flamborough Head to Newcastle
_Deal Castle_ Newcastle to Leith
_Spy_ Firth of Forth to Newcastle
And about the last-mentioned date the _Deal Castle_ had succeeded in
capturing four French smuggling craft and brought them into Shields.
To the other side of England the Isle of Man, which was a veritable
contraband depôt, used to send quantities of dutiable goods, Liverpool
being the favourite destination, and it was a more difficult matter
here to deal with than in many other ports. On October 9, 1713, the
Collector at Liverpool writes to the Board of Customs that he thinks a
sloop would be of little service for that port. Some time ago they had
one, which was not a success "by reason of ye dangerousness and
difficulty of the harbour and ye many shoales of sand, which often
shift in bad weather." The Manxmen were a thoroughly lawless,
desperate species of smugglers, who stopped at nothing, and were
especially irate towards all Revenue and public officials,
recognising no authority other than might and a certain respect for
the Duke of Atholl, the owner of the Isle of Man.
Among the letters to Southampton there is a record dated June 14, 1729,
which shows that a number of his Majesty's sloops were appointed by the
Admiralty to cruise off the coasts of the kingdom to prevent the
exporting of wool and the running of goods by the import-smugglers. For
instance, the Admiralty sloop _Swift_ was appointed to cruise between
Portland, Poole, and Jack-in-the-Basket off the entrance to Lymington
Harbour, Hants, her commander being a Captain Cockayne. Similarly the
sloop _Success_ (Captain Thomas Smith, commander) was to cruise between
Portland and Spithead, and the _Rye_ (Captain John Edwards) between the
Isle of Wight and Beachy Head to the eastward. It was part of the duty
of the Revenue officers at Southampton to see that these three ships
constantly cruised on their station, and if their commanders were found
negligent of this duty the matter was to be reported to the Board of
Customs. The Revenue craft were apparently not above suspicion, for in
November of 1729 the Southampton officers of the Customs reported to
headquarters that this very sloop, the _Swift_, every time she went
across to Guernsey in connection with her duties of prevention, used to
bring back quantities of wine, brandy, and other dutiable goods under
the pretence that they were the ship's stores. The intention, however,
was nothing less than that which dominated the actions of the smugglers
themselves--the very class against which the _Swift_ was employed--for
Captain Cockayne's men used to find it no very difficult matter to run
these goods ashore clandestinely under the very eyes of the unsuspecting
Customs officers. The Commissioners of the Customs therefore sent down
strict instructions that the _Swift_ was to be rummaged every time she
arrived at Southampton from Guernsey. We shall have reason presently to
refer more especially to the Channel Isles again, but it may suffice for
the present to state that they were in the south the counterpart of the
Isle of Man in the north as being a depôt whence the import smugglers
fetched their goods across to England.
Additional to the Naval sloops just mentioned, there were two other
cutters belonging to the Southampton station under the Revenue and
not, of course, Admiralty-owned craft. These vessels were respectively
the _Calshot_ and the _Hurst_, and it is worth noting that at the time
we are thinking of (1729) these vessels are referred to generally as
"yatchs" or "yachts." It was not quite seventy years since the first
yacht--that presented to Charles II., named the _Mary_--had arrived in
England, and it was only in 1720 that the first yacht club had been
established, not in England, but in Cork. If we may judge from
contemporary paintings of yachts we can visualise the _Hurst_ and
_Calshot_ as being very tubby, bluff-bowed craft with ample beam. But
what would especially strike us in these modern days would be the
exceptionally long bowsprit, the forward end of which was raised
considerably above the water than its after end, both jib and foresail
each working on a stay.
The commander of the _Calshot_ yacht was a Captain Mears, and there is
an entry in the Southampton documents to the effect that he was paid
the sum of £2, 12s. 6d. for piloting his vessel from Southampton to
Guernsey and back in connection with the Preventive duties. This trip
took him five days, his pay being half a guinea a day. It is clear
from a record of the following year that Mears was employed by special
arrangement, for on July 18, 1730, the Board of Customs decided that
it was necessary that Captain John Mears, commander of the _Calshot_
yacht at Southampton, should now be placed on the same footing as the
other commanders of the Revenue sloops and smacks in regard to the
matter of wear and tear. Henceforth the sum of 30s. per ton was to be
allowed him instead of £47 per annum. Both yacht and her boats were to
be kept in good repair, but the commander was first to give security
to have the vessel and her boats generally in good order and
reasonable repair, loss by violence of the sea or other unavoidable
accidents excepted. The commander was also to find the sloop and her
boats with all manner of necessaries and materials, so that the Crown
was to be at no charge on that account in the future; and every
quarter the Comptroller and Collector of the port were to certify to
the Board as to whether the yacht and boats were in good repair.
It would appear that these two vessels were not actually owned by the
Customs but hired from Captain Mears; and less than a month before the
above order the Surveyor-General of the Customs for Hampshire
represented to the Board that it would be necessary to allow the
commander of the _Hurst_ half-a-dozen muskets, two pairs of pistols,
half-a-dozen swords or cutlasses, and these were accordingly ordered
to be sent, together with two swivel guns, from Weymouth to Captain
Mears "by the first coast vessel bound to" Southampton. There was
certainly need for a strict vigilance to be kept in that
neighbourhood, for there was a good deal of smuggling then being
carried on along the Hampshire shore in the vicinity of Hurst Castle
and Beaulieu.
In another chapter we shall go into the important matter touching the
flags that were worn by the vessels employed in looking after
smuggling, but, in passing, we may call attention to a letter which
the Board sent to Southampton at this time referring to the
proclamation of December 18, 1702, by which no ships whatsoever were
allowed to wear a pendant excepting those engaged in the service of
the Royal Navy, but that the sloops employed in the several public
offices (as, for instance, the Customs and the Excise) should wear
Jacks, whereon was to be described the seal used in the respective
offices. And Captain John Mears, senior, of the _Calshot_, and Captain
John Mears, junior, of the _Hurst_, were to be informed that they must
deliver up their pendants to the Customs' office at Southampton and
for the future forbear wearing a pendant. Instead thereof they are to
wear a Jack and ensign with the seal of office therein, "but the mark
in the ensign is to be twice as large as that in the Jack; and if the
captain should hereafter find that the not wearing a pendant will be
any obstruction or hindrance to the service," the Board of Customs is
to be informed.[3]
We have now seen something of the sloops and cutters on the south, the
west, and the north-east coasts. Let us take a glance at the district
to the southward of Flamborough during this same period. From the Hull
letter book we find that in September of 1733 the Admiralty appointed
Captain Burrish of the _Blandford_ and Sir Roger Butler of the
_Bonetta_ to cruise between Flamborough and Newcastle; but Captain
Oates of the _Fly_ and Captain Rycant of the _Tryal_ were to cruise
between Flamborough and Yarmouth. There is also a reference to the
Revenue sloop _Humber_ employed in this neighbourhood on Preventive
work. She was a somewhat expensive craft to keep up, as she was
frequently needing repairs and renewals. First, she was to have a new
cable which was to cost £20, 14s. 3-1/2d.; and it is a striking
reminder of those days of hemp and sail that this bill was paid to the
"ropemakers." A few months later she had to undergo repairs which
amounted to £31, 10s. 6-1/4d., and less than six months afterwards she
had to be given a new anchor which cost £18, 8s. 9d. Three years later
she was given a new suit of sails which came to £25, 17s. 1d. but her
old suit was sold for the sum of eight guineas. And finally, in 1744,
as she had begun to cost so much for repairing, the Board determined
to sell her.
Notwithstanding that the south coast, by reason of its proximity to
the Continent and the Channel Isles, was a convenient and popular
objective for the smugglers running their goods from France and
Holland, yet the Yorkshire coast was by no means neglected. From
Dunkirk and Flushing especially goods poured into the county. There
was a small sloop, for instance, belonging to Bridlington, which was
accustomed to sail across the North Sea to one of the ports in
Zealand, where a cargo was taken aboard consisting of the usual
dutiable articles such as tea, tobacco, and gin. The return voyage was
then made and the goods landed clandestinely at some convenient spot
between the Spurn Lighthouse and Bridlington.
Similarly, farther south than the Humber smuggling by illegal
importation went on extensively in the early eighteenth century.
Sometimes a Dutch vessel would arrive in Grimsby Roads and succeed in
quietly running her goods to the shore. In the autumn of 1734 the
master of the Dutch schuyt _The Good Luck of Camphire_, alias _The
Brotherly Love_, had succeeded in running as many as 166
half-ankers[4] of brandy and 50 lbs. of tea on the coast near Great
Yarmouth, the skipper's name being Francis Coffee. He was a notorious
smuggler. But on this occasion both he and his vessel were captured.
Still, matters were not always satisfactory on board the Revenue
sloops and smacks, for whenever, at this time, there was an encounter
with the smugglers afloat the latter were so violent and desperate
that the captors went about their work with their lives in their
hands. Furthermore, it was not altogether a pleasing business to have
to fire at fellow-countrymen, many of whom they had known from
boyhood. Then, again, there was not the space on these sloops and
cutters, nor the amount of deck room to be found on the men-of-war;
and to be cooped up in these comparatively small vessels always on the
_qui vive_, usually near the shore but able to have shore-leave all
too rarely, was calculated to make for restlessness. Added to which a
very considerable portion of the crews of these Revenue craft was
composed of men who had spent years of their lives as smugglers
themselves. Consequently it was not altogether surprising that
mutinies and refusals to obey their commander's orders were of
frequent occurrence. After a time it was decided that those members of
the crew which had to be dismissed for such offences were to be handed
over to the commander of the next man-of-war that should come along,
and be pressed into the service of the Navy, though, it may be added,
this was not always a welcome gift to the Naval commander compelled to
receive a handful of recalcitrant men aboard his ship. Then, again,
when at last a handful of smugglers had been captured it was the duty
of the Revenue officers to prosecute them before the magistrate at
their own expense. This was regarded as an unfair hardship, and in
1736 the system was modified by the Treasury allowing an officer a
third of whatever amount was recovered, the prosecution to be carried
on at the King's expense. At the same time it was undeniable that some
commanders of these sloops and cutters were not quite as active as
they might be on their station. There was too ready an excuse to run
in from the sea and too great an inclination to spend valuable time in
port. They were accordingly now enjoined not to presume to lay up for
the purpose of giving the ship's bottom a scrub, or for a refit,
without previously giving the Collector and Comptroller of the port
ten days' notice. This was not to occur unless the cruiser really
needed such attention; but if it was essential then to prevent the
station remaining unguarded some other smack or vessel was to be sent
out to take her place for the time being. For the smugglers were kept
so well informed of the movements of the Revenue ships that a
contraband cargo of goods would soon be found approaching the shore
during the night when the watch had been relaxed.
But from an early date--at any rate as far back as 1694--the East
India ships were notorious also for smuggling into the country a
considerable amount of goods that ought to have paid duty. We shall
bring forward instances presently of East Indiamen, homeward bound,
being boarded as they come up Channel, or while waiting in the Downs
and putting some of their cargo on board smuggling cutters and Deal
boats, which was subsequently quietly and secretly brought into the
country. Silks were especially popular among the smugglers in this
connection. In those days, too, the more wealthy passengers coming
home by these East Indiamen used to leave the ship at Spithead, where
they came in for that purpose. These passengers would then be put
ashore at Portsmouth, and, proceeding by coach to London, thus
shortened their sea journey. But notwithstanding their ample means,
many of these travellers were constantly found endeavouring to land
dutiable articles. In short, rich and poor, high and low, there was no
class that did not endeavour to engage in smuggling either directly or
indirectly. Even if the party never ventured on the sea, he might be a
very active aider and abettor in meeting the boat as it brought the
casks ashore, or keeping a look out for the Preventive men, giving the
latter false information, thus throwing them on the wrong scent. Or
again, even if he did not act the part of signaller by showing warning
lights from the cliff, he could loan his cellars, his horses, or his
financial support. In fact there were many apparently respectable
citizens who, by keeping in the background, were never suspected of
having any interest in these nefarious practices, whereas they were in
fact the instigators and the capitalists of many a successful run. And
as such they were without doubt morally responsible for the deaths by
murder which occurred in those incidents, when violence was used after
the Revenue men had come on to the scene.
But as to morality, was there ever a period when the national
character was so slack and corrupt as in the eighteenth century?
FOOTNOTES:
[1] "Smuggling in Sussex," by William Durrant Cooper, F.S.A., in vol.
x. of the _Sussex Archæological Collection_, to which I am indebted.
[2] _Fore and Aft: The Story of the Fore-and-Aft Rig._ London, 1911.
[3] "Southampton Letters," November 6, 1730. But in 1719, the Customs
Commissioners had, _inter alia_, agreed to provide Captain Mears with
"a suit of colours" for the _Calshot_. This provision was, therefore,
now cancelled in the year 1730.
[4] A half-anker held 3-1/4 gallons.