CUTTERS' EQUIPMENT
In an earlier chapter we quoted from Marryat a passage which showed
that the mariners of a Revenue cutter were dressed in red flannel
shirts and blue trousers, and also wore canvas or tarpaulin
petticoats. The reason for the last-mentioned was appreciated by
smuggler and Preventive men alike, and if you have ever noticed the
Thames River Police dodging about in their small craft you will have
noticed that at any rate the steersman has in cold weather some sort
of apron wrapped round his legs. But in the period of which we are now
speaking the attached apron or petticoat was very useful for keeping
the body warm in all weather, especially when the sitter of the
Preventive boat had to be rowed out perhaps in the teeth of a biting
wind, for several miles at night. And the smugglers found their task
of landing tubs through the surf a wet job, so they were equally glad
of this additional protection.[11]
The period to which Marryat referred was the end of the eighteenth
century. As to the uniform of the Revenue officers we have the
following evidence. Among the General Letters of the Customs Board was
one dated June 26, 1804, from which it is seen that the commanders of
the cruisers petitioned the Board for an alteration in their uniform
and that also of the mates, this alteration to be made at the expense
of the officers. The commanders suggested for their own dress:--
"A silver epaulette, the button-holes worked or bound with silver
twist or lace, side-arms, and cocked hats with cockades, and the
buttons set on the coat three and three, the breeches and waistcoats
as usual:
"For the undress, the same as at present.
"For the mates, the addition of lappels, the buttons set on two and
two, and cocked hats with cockades."
The Board consented to these alterations with the exception of the
epaulettes, "the adoption of which we do not approve, lest the same
should interfere with His Majesty's Naval Service." Now in reading
this, it is important to bear in mind that between the Revenue and
Navy there was a great deal of jealousy.[12] It went so far, at least
on one occasion, as to cause a Naval officer to go on board a Revenue
cutter and haul the latter's flag down. The reason these epaulettes
were disallowed may be explained by the fact that it was only nine
years before the above date that epaulettes had become uniform in the
Navy, for notwithstanding that epaulettes had been worn by officers
since 1780, yet they were not uniform until 1795, although they were
already uniform in the French and Spanish navies.[13] Since,
therefore, these adornments had been so recently introduced into the
Navy, it was but natural that with so much jealousy existing this
feature should not be introduced into the Revenue service. Just what
"the undress, the same as at present" was I have not been able to
discover, but in the Royal Navy of that time the undress uniform for a
captain of three years' post consisted of a blue coat, which was
white-lined, with blue lappels and cuffs, a fall-down collar,
gold-laced button-holes, square at both ends, arranged regularly on
the lappels. For a captain under three years the uniform was the same,
except that the nine buttons were arranged on the lappels in threes.
For master or commander it was the same, except that the button-holes
were arranged by twos.[14]
It was in January 1807 that the Customs Board took into consideration
the appointment of several Revenue cruisers and the expediency of one
general system for manning them according to the tonnage and
construction of the vessel, the service and station on which she was
to be employed. They therefore distinctly classed the different
cruisers according to their tonnage, description, and number of men
originally allowed and since added, whether furnished with letters of
marque or not. And believing that it would be beneficial to the
service that the complement of men should be fixed at the highest
number then allotted to cutters in each respective class, they
accordingly instructed the commanders of the different cruisers to
increase their respective complements "with all practicable dispatch."
We now come to an important point concerning which there exists some
little uncertainty. By a letter dated July 17, 1807, Revenue officers
were reminded that they were by law bound to hoist the Revenue colours
and fire a gun as a signal "before they in any case fire on any
smuggling vessel or boat."
"We direct you to convene the officers of the Waterguard belonging to
your port," write the Commissioners to the Collector and Controller at
each station, "including the officers and crew of the cruiser
stationed there, and strictly to enjoin them whether on board cruisers
or boats in no instance to fire on any smuggling vessel or boat,
either by night (whether it be dark or light), or by day, without
first hoisting the colours and firing a gun as a signal, as directed
by law, and to take care that on any boat being sent out armed either
from the shore or from a cruiser, in pursuit of seizures or any other
purpose, such boat be furnished with a proper flag." Two years later,
on April 11, 1809, it was decided that cruisers could legally wear a
pendant "conformable to the King's Proclamation of the 1st January
1801," when requiring a vessel that was liable to seizure or
examination to heave-to, or when chasing such a vessel, but "at no
other time." It is important to bear in mind that the flags of chase
were special emblems, and quite different from the ceremonial flags
borne on the Customs buildings, hulks, and vessels not used actually
in the chasing of smugglers.
In addition to my own independent research on this subject I am
indebted for being allowed to make use of some MS. notes on this
interesting subject collected by Mr. Atton, Librarian of the Custom
House; and in spite of the unfortunate gaps which exist in the
historical chain, the following is the only possible attempt at a
connected story of the Custom House flag's evolution. We have already
explained that from the year 1674 to 1815 the Revenue Preventive work
was under a mixed control. We have also seen that in the year 1730 the
Board of Customs called attention to the Proclamation of December 18,
1702, that no ships were to wear a pendant except those of the Royal
Navy, but that the sloops employed in the several public offices
might wear Jacks with the seal of the respective office.
From a report made by the Harwich Customs in 1726 it is clear that the
King's colours were at that date hoisted when a Revenue cruiser chased
a suspect. But as to what the "King's Colours" were no one to-day
knows. Among the regulations issued to the Revenue cruisers in 1816
the commanders were informed that they were not to wear the colours
used in the Royal Navy, but to wear the same pendants and ensigns as
were provided by the Revenue Board. By 24 George III. cap. 47, certain
signals of chase were prescribed. Thus, if the cruiser were a Naval
vessel she was to hoist "the proper pendant and ensign of H.M. ships."
If a Custom House vessel she was to hoist a blue Customs ensign and
pendant "with the marks now used." If an Excise vessel, a blue ensign
and pendant "with the marks now used." After this had been done, and a
gun fired (shotted or unshotted) as a warning signal, she might fire
if the smuggler failed to heave-to. And this regulation is by the
Customs Consolidation Act of 1876 still in force, and might to-day be
made use of in the case of an obstinate North Sea cooper. What one
would like to know is what were the marks in use from 1784 to 1815.
Mr. Atton believes that these marks were as follows:--
At the masthead: a blue pendant with the Union in canton and the
Customs badge of office (a castellated structure with portcullis over
the entrance, and two barred windows and two port-holes, one barred
and one open, the latter doubtless to signify that through which the
goods might enter) in the fly.
At the gaff: a blue ensign similarly marked.
The English Excise, the Scottish Customs, Scottish Excise, and the
Irish Revenue signals of chase were blue pendants and ensigns
similarly flown, but as to the badges of office one cannot be certain.
The matter of English Customs flags has been obscured by the quotation
in Marryat's _The King's Own_, where a smuggler is made to remark on
seeing a Revenue vessel's flag, "Revenue stripes, by the Lord." It has
been suggested that the bars of the castle port and portcullis in the
seal were called "stripes" by the sailors of that day, inasmuch as
they called the East India Company's flag of genuine stripes the
"gridiron." But to me it seems much more likely that the following is
the explanation for calling a Revenue cutter's flag "stripes." The
signal flags Nos. 7 and 8, which were used by the Royal Navy in 1746
to order a chase both consisted of stripes.[15] No. 7 consisted of
eleven horizontal stripes, viz. six red and five white. Flag No. 8 had
nine horizontal stripes, viz. red, white, blue repeated three times,
the red being uppermost. I submit that in sailor's slang these
signals would be commonly referred to as "stripes." Consequently
whatever flags subsequently would be used to signal a chase would be
known also as "stripes." Therefore whatever signal might be flown in
the Revenue service when chasing would be known as "stripes" also.
But by an Order in Council of the 1st of February 1817, the pendant
and ensign were to be thus:--
The pendant to have a red field having a regal crown thereon at the
upper part next the mast. The ensign to be a red Jack with a Union
Jack in a canton at the upper corner next the staff, and with a regal
crown in the centre of the red Jack. This was to be worn by all
vessels employed in the prevention of smuggling under the Admiralty,
Treasury, Customs or Excise.
Now during an interesting trial at the Admiralty Sessions held at the
Old Bailey in April of 1825, concerning the chasing of a smuggler by a
Revenue cruiser, Lieutenant Henry Nazer, R.N., who was commanding the
cutter, stated in his evidence that when he came near this smuggling
vessel the former hoisted the Revenue pendant at the masthead, which
he described as "a red field with a crown next the mast at the upper
part of it." He also hoisted the Revenue ensign at the peak-end, the
"Union at the upper corner in a red field," the field of the ensign
being also red. It had a Jack in the corner. This, then, was exactly
in accordance with the Order in Council of 1817 mentioned above.
But my own opinion relative to the firing of the _first_ gun is in
favour of the proposition that this was not necessarily unshotted. I
shall refer in greater detail to the actual incidents, here quoted, on
a later page, but for our present purpose the following is strong
proof in favour of this suggestion. During a trial in the year 1840
(Attorney-General _v_. William Evans) it transpired that Evans had
entered the Medway in a smack without heaving-to, and the following
questions and answers respectively were made by counsel and Richard
Braddy, a coastguard who at the time of the incident was on duty at
Garrison Fort (Sheerness):--
_Question._ "Is the first signal a shot always?"
_Answer._ "A blank cartridge we fire mostly."
_Q._ "Did you fire a blank?"
_A._ "No, because she was going too fast away from me."
_Q._ "Did you hit her?"
_A._ "No."
To me it seems certain from this evidence of the coastguard that
though the first signal was "mostly" blank, yet it was not always or
necessarily so.
It was frequently discovered that smuggling vessels lay off the coast
some distance from the shore and unshipped their cargoes then into
smaller craft by which they were brought to land, and this practice
was often observed by the Naval officers at the signal stations. Thus,
these smuggling runs might be prevented if those officers were enabled
to apprise the Admiralty and Revenue cruisers whenever observed, so
the Treasury put themselves in communication with the Customs Board
with regard to so important a matter. This was in the year 1807. The
Admiralty were requested to appoint some signals by which Naval
officers stationed at the various signal-posts along the coasts might
be able to convey information to his Majesty's and the Revenue
cruisers whenever vessels were observed illegally discharging cargoes.
The Admiralty accordingly did as requested, and these signals were
sent on to the commanders of the cutters. This, of course, opened up a
new matter in regard to the apportioning of prize-money, and it was
decided that when any vessel or goods discharged therefrom should be
seized by any of the cruisers in consequence of information given by
signal from these stations, and the vessel and her goods afterwards
were condemned, one-third of the amount of the King's share was to be
paid to the officer and men at the signal-post whence such information
was first communicated. The obvious intention of this regulation was
to incite the men ashore to keep a smart look-out.
The coast signal-stations[16] had been permanently established in the
year 1795, and were paid off at the coming of peace but re-established
when the war broke out again, permission being obtained from the
owners of the land and a code of signals prepared. The establishment
of these signal-stations had been commenced round the coast soon after
the Revolutionary war. Those at Fairlight and Beachy Head were
established about 1795.[17] Each station was supplied with one red
flag, one blue pendant, and four black balls of painted canvas. When
the Sea Fencibles, to whom we referred some time back, were
established, the signal-stations were placed under the district
captains. This was done in March 1798, and the same thing was done
when the Sea Fencibles had to be re-established in 1803. The
signal-stations at Torbay and New Romney (East Bay, Dungeness) had
standing orders, says Captain Hudleston, to report all arrivals and
departures direct to the Admiralty.
The Customs Board advanced another step forward when, in the year
1808, they considered whether "benefit might not arise to the service
by establishing certain signals by which the commanders of the several
cruisers in the service of the Revenue might be enabled to make their
vessels known to each other, on meeting at sea, or to distinguish each
other at a distance, and also to make such communications as might be
most useful, as well as to detect any deception which might be
attempted to be practised by the masters of vessels belonging to the
enemy, or of smuggling vessels." They therefore consulted "the proper
officers on the subject," and a code of tabular signals was drawn up
and approved and sent to the commanders of the cruisers in a
confidential manner. Each commander was enjoined to pay the most
strict attention to such signals as might be made under the
regulations, and to co-operate by every means in his power for the
attainment of the objects in view. These commanders were also to
apprise the Customs Board of any matter which might arise in
consequence thereof "fit for our cognisance." These signals were also
communicated to the commanders of the several Admiralty cruisers. And
we must remember that although naval signalling had in a crude and
elementary manner been in vogue in our Navy for centuries, and the
earliest code was in existence at any rate as far back as 1340, yet it
was not till the eighteenth century that it showed any real
development. During the early years of the nineteenth century a great
deal of interest was taken in the matter by such men as Mr. Goodhew,
Sir Home Popham, Captain Marryat, and others. It was the atmosphere of
the French and Spanish wars which gave this incentive, and because the
subject was very much in the Naval minds at that time it was but
natural that the Revenue service should appreciate the advantage
which its application might bestow for the prevention of smuggling.
Further means were also taken in the early nineteenth century to
increase the efficiency of the cruisers. In 1811, in order that they
should be kept as constantly as possible on their stations, and that
no excuses might be made for delays, it was decided that in future the
Inspecting Commanders of Districts be empowered to incur expenses up
to £35 for the repairs which a cutter might need, and £5 for similar
repairs to her boats. The commanders of the cruisers were also
permitted to incur any expenses up to £20 for the cutter and boats
under their command. Such expenses were to be reported to the Board,
with information as to why this necessity had arisen, where and by
what tradesmen the work had been done, and whether it had been
accomplished in the most reasonable manner. At the end of the
following year, in order still further to prevent cruisers being
absent from their stations "at the season of the year most favourable
for smuggling practices, and when illegal proceedings are generally
attempted," _i.e._ in the dark days of autumn and winter and spring,
and in order, also, to prevent several cutters being in the Port of
London at the same time, "whereby the part of the coast within their
respective districts would be left altogether without guard," the
commanders of these cruisers were to give warning when it was apparent
that extensive repairs were needed, or a general refit, or any other
cause which compelled the craft to come up to London. Timely notice
was to be given to the Board so that the necessity and propriety
thereof should be inquired into. It was done also with a view to
bringing in the cruisers from their respective stations only as best
they might be spared consistent with the good of the service. But they
were to come to London for such purposes only between April 5 and
September 5 of each year. By this means there would always be a good
service of cruisers at sea during the bad weather period, when the
smugglers were especially active.
In our quotation from _The Three Cutters_ in another chapter we gave
the colours of the paint used on these vessels. I find an interesting
record in the Custom House dated November 13, 1812, giving an order
that, to avoid the injury which cruisers sustain from the use of iron
bolts, the decks in future were to be fastened with composition bolts,
"which would eventually prove a saving to the Revenue." After ordering
the commanders to cause their vessels to be payed twice every year
either with paint or bright varnish, and not to use scrapers on their
decks except after caulking, and then only to remove the unnecessary
pitch, the instruction goes on to stipulate the only paint colours
which are to be employed for cruisers. These are such as were then
allowed in the Navy, viz. black, red, white, or yellow.
But apart from all the manifold difficulties and anxieties, both
general and detailed, which arose in connection with these cruisers so
long as they were at sea or in the shipwrights' hands, in commission
or out of commission, there were others which applied more strictly to
their crews. Such an incident as occurred in the year 1785 needed very
close attention. In that year the English Ambassador at the Court of
France had been informed by Monsieur de Vergennes that parties of
sailors belonging to our Revenue cruisers had recently landed near
Boulogne in pursuit of some smugglers who had taken to the shore.
Monsieur de Vergennes added that if any British sailors or other armed
men should be taken in such acts of violence the French Government
would unhesitatingly sentence them immediately to be hanged.
Of course the French Government were well within their rights in
making such representations, for natural enough as no doubt it was to
chase the smugglers when they escaped ashore, yet the trespass was
indefensible. The Board of Customs therefore instructed their
cruisers, as well as those of the Admiralty "whose commanders are
furnished with commissions from this Board," to make a note of the
matter, in order that neither they nor their men might inadvertently
expose themselves to the severity denounced against them by the
French laws upon acts of the like nature.
In 1812 one of the mariners belonging to a cruiser happened to go
ashore, and whilst there was seized by the press-gang for his
Majesty's Navy. Such an occurrence as this was highly inconvenient not
only to the man but to the Board of Customs, who resolved that
henceforth the commanders of cruisers were not to allow any of their
mariners shore leave unless in case of absolute necessity "until the
protections which may be applied for shall have been received and in
possession of such mariners."
Another matter that required rectification was the practice of taking
on board some of their friends and relatives who had no right to be
there. Whether this was done for pleasure or profit the carrying of
these passengers was deemed to be to the great detriment of the
service, and the Board put a stop to it. It was not merely confined to
the cruisers, but the boats and galleys of the Waterguard were just as
badly abused. The one exception allowed was, that when officers of the
Waterguard were removing from one station to another, they might use
such a boat to convey their families with them provided it did not
interfere with the duties of these officers. So also some of the
commanders of the cruisers had even taken on board apprentices and
been dishonest enough to have them borne on the books as able seamen,
and drawn their pay as such. The Board not unnaturally deemed this
practice highly improper, and immediately to be discontinued. No
apprentices were to be borne on the books except the boy allowed to
all cruisers.
After a smuggling vessel's cargo had been seized and it was decided to
send the goods to London, this was done by placing the tobacco,
spirits, &c., in a suitable coaster and despatching her to the Thames.
But in order to prevent her being attacked on the sea by would-be
rescuers she was ordered to be convoyed by the Revenue cutters. The
commander of whatever cruiser was in the neighbourhood was ordered "to
accompany and guard" her to the Nore or Sea Reach as the case might
be. Every quarter the cruisers were also to send a list of the
seizures made, giving particulars of the cruiser--her name, burthen,
number of guns, number of men, commander's name, number of days at sea
during that quarter, how many days spent in port and why, the quantity
of goods and nature of each seizure, the number and names of all
smuggling vessels captured, both when and where. There was also to be
sent the number of men who had been detained, how they had been
disposed of, and if the men had not been detained how it was they had
escaped.
"Their Lordships are induced to call for these returns," ran the
instruction, "in order to have before them, quarterly, a comparative
view of the exertions of the several commanders of the Revenue
cruisers.... They have determined, as a further inducement to
diligence and activity in the said officers, to grant a reward of £500
to the commander of the Revenue cruiser who, in the course of the year
ending 1st October 1808, shall have so secured and delivered over to
his Majesty's Naval Service the greatest number of smugglers; a reward
of £300 to the commander who shall have secured and delivered over the
next greatest number, and a reward of £200 to the commander who shall
be third on the list in those respects." That was in September of
1887.
During the year ending October 1, 1810, Captain Gunthorpe, commander
of the Excise cutter _Viper_, succeeded in handing over to his
Majesty's Navy thirteen smugglers whom he had seized. As this was the
highest number for that year he thus became entitled to the premium of
£500. Captains Curling and Dobbin, two Revenue officers, were together
concerned in transferring six men to the Navy, but inasmuch as Captain
Patmour had been able to transfer five men during this same year it
was he to whom the £300 were awarded. Captain Morgan of the Excise
cutter and Captain Haddock of the Custom House cutter _Stag_ each
transferred four men during that year.
"But my Lords," states a Treasury minute of December 13, 1811,
"understanding that the nature of the service at Deal frequently
requires the Revenue vessels to co-operate with each other, do not
think it equitable that such a circumstance should deprive Messrs.
Curling and Dobbin of a fair remuneration for their diligence, and are
therefore pleased to direct warrants likewise to be prepared granting
to each of those gentlemen the sum of £100." In spite of the above
numbers, however, the Treasury were not satisfied, and did not think
that the number of men by this means transferred to the Navy had been
at all proportionate to the encouragement which they had held out.
They therefore altered the previous arrangement so as to embrace those
cases only in which the exertions of the cruisers' commanders had been
of an exceptionally distinguished nature. Thus during 1812 and the
succeeding years, until some further provision might be made, it was
decided that "the sum of £500 will be paid to such person commanding a
Revenue cutter as shall in any one year transfer to the Navy the
greatest number of smugglers, not being less than twenty." The sum of
£300 was to be paid to the persons commanding a Revenue cutter who in
any year should transfer the next greatest number of smugglers, not
being less than fifteen. And £200 were to be paid to the commander who
in one year should have transferred the third largest, not being less
than ten. This decision was made in January of 1812, and in the
following year it was directed that in future the rewards granted to
the commanders of the Revenue cruisers for delivering the greatest
number of smugglers should be made not exclusively to the commanders
but distributed among the commander, officers, and crew according to
the scale which has already been given on an earlier page in this
volume. At the end of the year 1813 it was further decided that when
vessels and boats of above four tons measurement were seized in
ballast and afterwards broken up, not owing to their build, their
construction, or their denomination, but simply because they had been
engaged in smuggling, the seizing officers should become entitled to
30s. a ton.
There was also a system instituted in the year 1808 by which the
widows of supervisors and surveyors of Riding officers and commanders
of cruisers were allowed £30 per annum, with an additional allowance
of £5 per annum for each child until it reached the age of fifteen.
The widows of Riding officers, mates of cutters, and sitters of boats
specially stationed for the prevention of smuggling were allowed £25
per annum and £5 for each child until fifteen years old. In the case
of the widows of mariners they were to have £15 a year and £2, 10s.
for each child till the age of fifteen. And one finds among those thus
rewarded Ann Sarmon, the widow, and the three children of the
commander of the _Swan_ cutter stationed at Cowes; the one child of
the mate of the _Tartar_ cutter of Dover; the widow of the mate of the
_Dolphin_ of St. Ives; the widow of the Riding officer at Southampton;
the widow and children of the commander of the cutter _Hunter_ at
Yarmouth; and likewise of the _Hunter's_ mate.
After the 10th of October 1814 the allowance for victualling the crews
of the Revenue cruisers was augmented as follows:--For victualling
commander and mate, 3s. a day each and 1s. 6d. per lunar month for
fire and candle. For victualling, fire, and candle for mariners, 1s.
10d. a day each. The daily rations to be supplied to each mariner on
board the cruisers were to consist of 1-1/2 lbs. of meat, 1-1/2 lbs.
of bread, and two quarts of beer. If flour or vegetables were issued
the quantity of bread was to be reduced, and if cheese were supplied
then the amount was to be reduced in proportion to the value and not
to the quantity of such articles. And, in order to obtain uniformity,
a table of the rations as above was to be fixed up against the fore
side of the mast under the deck of the cruiser, and also in some
conspicuous place in the Custom House.
Very elaborate instructions were also issued regarding the use of the
tourniquet, which "is to stop a violent bleeding from a wounded artery
in the limbs till it can be properly secured and tied by a surgeon."
The medicine chest of these cruisers contained the following twenty
articles: vomiting powders, purging powders, sweating powders, fever
powders, calomel pills, laudanum, cough drops, stomach tincture, bark,
scurvy drops, hartshorn, peppermint, lotion, Friar's balsam, Turner
cerate, basilicon (for healing "sluggish ulcers"), mercurial ointment,
blistering ointment, sticking-plaster, and lint.
In short, with its fleet of cruisers well armed and well manned, well
found in everything necessary both for ship and crew; with good wages,
the offer of high rewards, and pensions; with other privileges second
only to those obtainable in the Royal Navy; the Customs Board
certainly did their best to make the floating branch of its Preventive
service as tempting and efficient as it could possibly be. And that
there were not more captures of smugglers was the fault at any rate
not of those who had the administration of these cutters.
[Illustration: H.M. CUTTER _WICKHAM_
Commanded by Captain John Fullarton, R.N. From a contemporary painting
in the possession of Dr. Robertson-Fullarton of Kilmichael.]
A very good idea as to the appearance of a nineteenth century Revenue
cruiser may be obtained by regarding the accompanying photographs of
his Majesty's cutter _Wickham_. These have been courteously supplied
to me by Dr. Robertson-Fullarton of Kilmichael, whose ancestor,
Captain Fullarton, R.N., had command of this vessel. The original
painting was made in 1806, and shows a fine, able vessel with ports
for seven guns a-side, being painted after the manner of the
contemporary men-of-war. To facilitate matters the central portion of
the picture has been enlarged, and thus the rigging and details of
the _Wickham_ can be closely examined. It will be observed that this
cutter has beautiful bows with a fine, bold sheer, and would doubtless
possess both speed and considerable seaworthiness essential for the
west coast of Scotland, her station being the Island of Arran. In the
picture before us it will be seen that she has exceptionally high
bulwarks and appears to have an additional raised deck forward. The
yard on which the squaresail was carried when off the wind is seen
lowered with its foot-ropes and tackle. The mainsail is of course
loose-footed, and the tack is seen well triced up. Two things
especially strike us. First, the smallness of the yard to which the
head of the gaff-topsail is laced; and secondly, the great size of the
headsail. She has obviously stowed her working jib and foresail and
set her balloon jib. When running before a breeze such a craft could
set not merely all plain sail, but her squaresail, square-topsail and
even stun'sls. Therefore, the smuggling vessel that was being chased
must needs be pretty fleet of foot to get away.
[Illustration: H.M. Cutter Wickham
This shows an early Nineteenth Century King's Cutter (_a_) running
before the wind with square sails and stuns'ls set, (_b_) on a wind
with big jib set.]
Campbeltown in those days was the headquarters of no fewer than seven
large Revenue cruisers, all being commanded by naval officers. They
were powerful vessels, generally manned by double crews, each having a
smaller craft to act as tender, their chief duties being to intercept
those who smuggled salt, spirits, and tea from the Isle of Man. The
officers and men of the cutters made Campbeltown their home, and the
houses of the commanders were usually built opposite to the buoys of
the respective cutters. The merits of each cutter and officer were the
subject of animated discussion in the town, and how "old Jack
Fullarton had carried on" till all seemed to be going by the board on
a coast bristling with sunken rocks, or how Captain Beatson had been
caught off the Mull in the great January gale, and with what skill he
had weathered the headland--these were questions which were the
subjects of many a debate among the enthusiasts.
This Captain John Fullarton had in early life served as a midshipman
on a British man-of-war. On one occasion he had been sent under Lord
Wickham to France on a certain mission in a war-vessel. The young
officer's intelligence, superior manners, and handsome appearance so
greatly pleased Lord Wickham, that his lordship insisted on having
young Fullarton alone to accompany him ashore. After the mission was
over Lord Wickham suggested procuring him some advancement in the
service, to which Fullarton replied, "My lord, I am sincerely grateful
for your undesired kindness, and for the interest you have been
pleased to show in regard to my future prospects. Since, however, you
have asked my personal views, I am bound to say I am not ambitious
for promotion on board a man-of-war. I have a small property in
Scotland, and if your lordship could obtain for me the command of one
of his Majesty's cutters, with which I might spend my time usefully
and honourably in cruising the waters around my native island of
Arran, I should feel deeply indebted to you, and I should value such
an appointment above all others."
Soon afterwards, the cutter _Wickham_ was launched, and Mr. Fullarton
obtained his commission as captain, the mate being Mr. Donald
Fullarton, and most of the crew Arran men.[18]
FOOTNOTES:
[11] The use of the petticoat as a seaman's article of attire dates
back to the time of Chaucer:
"A Shipman was ther, woning fer by weste:
For aught I woot, he was of Dertemouthe.
He rood up-on a rouncy, as he couthe,
In a gowne of falding to the knee."
"Falding" was a coarse cloth.
[12] See Appendix VIII.
[13] See Captain Robinson's, _The British Fleet_, p. 503.
[14] _Ibid._, p. 502.
[15] I am indebted to a suggestion made on p. 183, vol. i. No. 7 of
_The Mariner's Mirror_.
[16] See article by Captain R. Hudleston, R.N., in _The Mariner's
Mirror_, vol. i. No. 7.
[17] _Victoria County Hist.: Sussex_, vol. ii. p. 199.
[18] For these details I am indebted to the kindness of Dr.
Robertson-Fullarton, who has also called my attention to some
information in an unlikely source--_The Memoirs of Norman Macleod,
D.D._, by Donald Macleod, 1876.