Introduction
Piracy has existed since the beginning of history. It has always been practiced when conditions favored, its requirements being suitable bases from which to operate, an unprotected commerce, and convenient and open markets for the disposal of the plunder. Over a great part of the ocean routes it is no longer to be found—not because the nature of man has changed, but because the conditions, largely through the introduction of steam, have become prohibitory; yet occasional instances are reported, as in Chinese and other Eastern waters, even to-day.
For the purpose of this study, only that form of piracy will be considered which manifested itself in attacks on vessels navigating the seas by other vessels or by armed boats. Many cases of so-called piracy were, in reality, mutiny, although the guilty persons, if convicted, were duly hanged as pirates. Again, a band of ruffians might take passage or secrete themselves on board a vessel and, when opportunity offered, rise, overpower the captain and the crew and take possession of the ship and her cargo. Such occurrences, as well as piratical attacks on vessels under other than the American flag, are not touched upon in these pages.
While the navy of the United States can be shown, from its record, to have done much in the suppression of piracy in the more remote parts of the world, as, for example, in the Mediterranean Sea, in Chinese waters and in the south seas, the present investigations are restricted to acts of piracy, and the action taken by our navy in suppressing them, which occurred in the West Indies or off our own coast.
The reason for this work—and it is well to assign a reason for adding to the already voluminous literature of the naval profession—lies in the fact that, with one exception, this particular chapter of our naval history has never, so far as I know, been dealt with as an isolated subject, having been merged in the general history of the navy. The exception referred to is an article, entitled "The Repression of Piracy in the West Indies, 1814-1825," printed in the United States Naval Institute Proceedings for December, 1911. Being written by Captain C.G. Calkins, U.S. Navy, it is, of course, masterly in every way. Dealing as it does with a part of the epoch under construction here, it offers the particular advantage of presenting the subject from a point of view different from my own.
As far as possible, my information is drawn from contemporaneous publications, chiefly newspapers, and from official documents bearing on the case, with but infrequent drafts upon standard histories. Moreover, the story is told, whenever practicable, in the language of the original accounts, even the spelling being carefully preserved.
The period covered is, roughly speaking, from the adoption of the Constitution of the United States to about 1832. Those who desire to extend their researches over wider limits of time and place can do not better than consult what may be called the "Bible of Piracy," viz.: "The Buccaneers of America," by Esquemeling; "History of the Buccaneers of America," by Captain Burney; and "Privateers and Pirates of the West Indies," by Violet Barbour, in the American Historical Review for April, 1911.
A good idea of individuals can be obtained from Charles Johnson’s "History of the Pyrates," and from Frank R. Stockton’s "Buccaneers and Pirates of Our Coast," a small book written in his deliciously humorous vein and giving the main facts with which he deals. All these treat of pirates and piracy prior to the American Revolution.
"Captain Brand of the Schooner Centipede," by the late Captain H.A. Wise, U.S. Navy, is thought by many to be the best pirate story ever written. Its plot is laid in the time and localities of this study.
Of piracy in general, a brief summary can be found in the latest edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, by the competent hand of Mr. David Hannay. To Dr. Gardner W. Allen we are indebted for excellent accounts of the operations of that time in "Our Navy and the Barbary Corsairs," and for graphic descriptions of certain special episodes in West Indian waters, in "Our Naval War with France," by the same writer. The latter book covers a small portion of the period with which we are now concerned. Francis Warriner, in "The Cruise of the Potomac," tells the story of Quallah Battoo from the standpoint of an eye witness.
It is well, at the outset, to understand exactly what piracy is, technically speaking, and what were the methods by which it was carried on.
Sir J. Fitzjames Stephen, in his "Digest of Criminal Law," defines piracy as:
Taking a ship on the high seas or within the jurisdiction of the Lord High Admiral from the possession or control of those who are lawfully entitled to it and carrying away the ship itself or any of its goods, tackle, apparel or furniture, under circumstances which would have amounted to robbery if the act had been done within the body of an English county.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica quotes Sir Thomas Barclay as saying:
Piracy, being a crime not against any particular state, but against all mankind, may be punished in the competent court of any country where the offender may be found or into which he may be carried. But whilst the practice of nations gives to every one the right to pursue and exterminate pirates without any previous declaration of war (pirates holding no commission or delegated authority from any sovereign state), it is not allowed to kill them without trail except in battle.
Our own statuses on this subject, besides defining the crime itself, prescribe the penalty in case of conviction.
Under the law of the United States, piracy embraces:
- The crime of piracy as defined by the law of nations.
- The laying violent hands upon his commander, by any seaman, with intent to hinder and prevent his fighting in defence of his vessel or goods entrusted to him.
- The commission of the crime of robbery, in or upon any vessel, or upon any ship’s company of any vessel, or the lading thereof by any person, upon the high seas, or in any open roadstead, or in any haven, basin, or bay, or in any river where the sea ebbs and flows.
- The commission of robbery on shore by persons landing from a vessel engaged in any piratical cruise or enterprise, or members of the crew of any piratical vessel.
- Commission of murder or robbery (which if committed within the body of a county would be punishable by death under the laws of the United States), upon the high seas, or in any river, harbor, basin or bay out of the jurisdiction of any particular state.
- The commission of murder or robbery, or any act of hostility against the United States, or against any citizen thereof, by a citizen under color of any commission from any foreign prince or state, or on pretense of authority from any person.
- Every subject or citizen of any foreign state, who is found and taken on the sea making war upon the United States, or cruising against the vessels and property thereof, or of the citizens of the same, contrary to the provisions of any treaty existing between the United States and the state of which the offender is a citizen or subject, when by such treaty such acts are declared to be piracy, is guilty of piracy and shall suffer death.
- Piracy under the law of nations is a robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas without lawful authority, done animo furandi, in the spirit and intention of universal hostility.
- A pirate is considered an enemy to the human race and his acts may not only be predicated on the purpose of robbery, but may arise from hatred, animosity, revenge, or mere wanton abuse of power.
- Under the Act of March 2, 1819 (U.S. Comp. Stat. 1901, page 2950), to protect the commerce of the United States and punish the crime of piracy, any armed vessel may be seized and brought in, or any vessel, the crew whereof may be armed, and which shall have attempted or committed any piratical aggression, search, restraint, depredation or seizure upon any vessel. The act extends to all armed vessels which commit the unlawful acts specified therein; over all vessels guilty of piratical aggressions upon vessels of the United States or the citizens thereof, or upon any other vessel. (The Marianna Flora, 11 Wheaton 1; The Chapman, 5 Fed. Cas. No. 2602, 4 Sawy. 501.)
- The firing by one vessel into another without any previous act of hostility or menace would be a piratical aggression. (9 Op. Atty. Gen. 455.)
- It is not necessary that there should be either actual plunder or an intent to plunder; if the act be committed from hatred or an abuse of power, or a spirit of mischief, it is sufficient. (U.S. vs. the Malek Adhel Howard 210.)
- A piratical aggression, search, restraint, or seizure is as much within the act as a piratical depredation.
- Under this act, with its supplement of August 5, 1861, it is not necessary that the vessel, in order to be liable to seizure, should have been fitted out by American citizens, or in American ports, nor that the intended aggressions should be upon American vessels. (The Chapman, 5 Fed. Cas. 2602, 4 Sawy. 501.)
- Piracy is usually committed under the flag of some known government; but the crew of any vessels committing it thereby casts off its national character and so the guilty persons, though the acknowledged subjects of some known government, may be apprehended and punished by the authorities of any nation.
- U.S. vs. Pirates, 5 Wheaton 154; Adams vs. The People, 1 Coms. 173; The Marianna Flora, 11 Wheaton 1, 40; U.S. vs. Gilbert, 2 Sumner 19; 4 Bl. Comm. 71; U.S. vs. Demarchi, 5 Blatchford 84; Wheat. International Law 185, 6th ed.; Dole vs. N. Eng. Ins. Co., 2 Cliff. 394, in re Ternan, 9 Cox C.C. 522; Atty. Gen. vs. Kwok-a-Sing, 8 Eng. R. 143.
- A vessel loses her national character by assuming a piratical character; and a piracy committed by a foreigner from on board such a vessel upon any other vessel whatever is punishable under Sec. 8 of the Act of April 30, 1790. (U.S. vs. Pirates, 5 Wheaton 184; U.S. vs. Gilbert, 2 Sumner 19.)
To complete the list of crimes which our law pronounced to be piracy, it is well to add, although not exactly pertinent to our inquiry, that persons engaged in the slave trade were by statute declared to be pirates. Heavy punishment was also decreed to persons aiding and abetting pirates.
Convicted pirates were, by earlier statutes, condemned to death, but in 1897 Congress changed this to imprisonment for life. It would be interesting to learn the reason for this questionable act of clemency towards ruffians who deserved the worst of fates.
From countless sources, mostly fictional, a harrowing picture has been derived of the appearance and behavior of these ruffians, which will survive for all time. Ugly of countenance, heavily bearded, hawk-like features, piercing black eyes, long-black locks, high boots with trousers stuck into them, a broad scarlet sash over velvet garments, the spoil of some wealthy victim, carrying a whole arsenal of daggers and pistols on the person—such is the pirate in his conventional stage setting. I have no desire to challenge or destroy this popular conception, although, were the facts known, the pirates would doubtless have been often found scantily clad and even ill provided with weapons other than knives.
"Walking the plank" is seldom, if ever, mentioned in authentic reports of their treatment of captives; nor were they always so bloodthirsty as represented. Cruel they were, but their cruelty had, generally, for its object the extorting of a confession as to the whereabouts of concealed money, for this, with jewels, was primarily the subject of their quest. Occasionally, indeed rarely, vessels which had fallen into their hands were released after yielding up their treasure; more often, however, the ships were carried into an obscure port and their cargoes sold to merchants and others who rejoiced in an opportunity to acquire goods at an absurdly low rate.
As will be perceived later on, this business, on a large scale, was only possible through the connivance of the local authorities, a circumstance which made its suppression extremely difficult and, incidentally, at times threatened to affect unfavorably the friendly relations existing between the United States and Spain.
To show the depths of brutality to which the pirates on occasion could descend, a few pertinent instances are quoted, out of the large number available. A letter received at Charleston, from a gentleman at Matanzas, dated 27th September, 1821, says:
Three horrible events have just taken place. Three American vessels—two of them coming in, viz. the brig John Smith, and the schooner Milo, of Bristol; the other the sloop Collector, of Rhode Island, bound out—have been captured at the entrance of this harbor by a launch fitted out here and manned by nine villains, viz., one Portuguese, six Spaniards and two Englishmen. They have killed the captain and two men of the schooner and then ordered her to the northward; they murdered all the crew of the brig, opened their entrails, hanged them by the ribs to the masts, and afterwards set fire to the vessel and all were consumed! The sloop was more fortunate: the pirates contented themselves with severely beating the crew and plundering her of the most valuable articles on board—they then collected the combustibles and set them on fire and left her, hoping, as in the case of the brig, to consume the vessel and crew together, but these last, fortunately, had strength sufficient to take to her long boat, and have safely got back to Matanzas.
On their arrival, they applied to the governor for protection, and after some delay, he allowed the Americans in the place to arm in pursuit of the pirates. Three boats full set out in quest of them, and after a cruise of 36 hours, have just returned without success.
We are becoming disgusted by feeling bound to notice the doings of the wretched men who infest the coasts of Cuba, especially in the neighborhood of Cape Antonio. The brig Hannah, of Philadelphia, has been plundered of 460 bags of coffee, $5000 worth of tortoise shell, and $1000 in specie. The crew were most horribly treated—the captain, his brother and five passengers, were nearly roasted to death, to make them confess that money was on board, by building a large fire around them, they being tied; they were also nearly killed by being beaten with swords! These pirates rendezvous at a place called Feureas, 30 or 40 miles to windward of Cape Antonio. They have daily communications with Havana, which is the market for their spoils.
We hear of several cases every week, like those noticed above.
Our cruisers in these seas do not appear to want activity—but the pirates, keeping close to the coast, have so many hiding places in shoal water, that it is almost impossible to get at them.
Commodore David Porter, writing to the Secretary of the Navy from Matanzas, under date of March 28, 1823 says:
Since my arrival here I have heard of the most horrid atrocities committed by them (pirates). They now spare no one; whole ships’ crews are indiscriminatingly burnt with their vessels, and there has been an instance recently of the murder of a crew under the walls of the Moro.
The brig Bellisarius, of Kennebunk, has arrived at the Balize, for New Orleans. When on her voyage from Port au Prince for Campeachy, she was boarded off the harbor of the latter by a piratical schooner, of about 40 tons, and manned by 30 or 40 men, who asked for money, but the captain (Perkins) denied having any. They then stabbed him in several places and cut off one of his arms, when he told them where the money was (200 doubloons), which they took, and proceeded to murder him in the most inhuman manner. He was first deprived of the other arm and one of his legs. They then dipped oakum in oil, put some in his mouth and under him—set it on fire, and thus terminated his sufferings! The mate was stabbed with a sabre in the thigh. They also robbed the brig of anchors and cables, sails, riggings, quadrants, charts, books, papers, and nearly all the provisions and water. On the passage from Campeachy to the Balize she was providentially supplied with provisions, etc., by several vessels which she fell in with, or her people must inevitably have perished.
Mr. Mountain, acting consul of the United States at Havana, to Mr. Warner, the consul:
Havana, October 30, 1824.
The following is an extract of a letter from Mr. Lattin, with whom you are acquainted, dated:
Matanzas, 27th October, 1824.
I am sorry to say the pirates have committed the most horrid depredations last Thursday and Friday between this and your port. The Laura Ann, of New York, belonging to Griswold, of that place, from Montevideo, with a cargo of jerked beef, was taken, all the crew except one hung, the vessel set on fire, when Jack, who had hid away among the beef, crawled out, jumped overboard, and got ashore.
A newspaper gives us the following:
We have a horrible account of a piracy committed on the brig Attentive, Capt. Crozer, of Boston, a few hours’ sail from Matanzas, on her way home, and of the probable murder of all the crew except one man, the 2d mate, who concealed himself. The narrative is thus given by this person, Alfred Hill, before the U.S. commercial agent at Matanzas, on oath.
After describing the sailing of the vessel on Feb. 22, and the crew, consisting of the captain, 2 mates, 3 seamen and a cook, he says: "Off point Yacos, was boarded and brought to by a piratical schooner, of about 60 or 70 tons burthen, full of men, armed with cutlasses, and having two large guns, who ordered the boat to be lowered and sent on board of the schooner, which was done, having on board Capt. Crozer and two men, Joseph Blanday and John Robinson; that as soon as the boat got alongside of the schooner, a number of men jumped on board, took out the two seamen, and immediately shoved alongside the brig and boarded her, and ordered all hands, except the captain, into the fore peak; after shutting the scuttle over, they waited about 10 minutes, and ordered all hands on deck again; that at this time, he, the said Alfred Hill, was stowed away amongst the cargo for the purpose of secreting himself; that the crew were called on deck separately; that he then heard a heavy groan from the captain, and heard him distinctly repeat these words, ‘Lord, have mercy on my soul!’ and heard a scuffling on deck, and groans of the people; that after the noise had ceased, they commenced searching, as he supposed, for money, that about 4 o’clock, in the afternoon, they knocked out her bow port, when she immediately began to fill with water. Hearing a noise on deck at the time, he supposed that the pirates had not left her, and was afraid to go upon deck; that having discovered the noise to proceed from the flapping of the sails, after having remained below until twilight, he went upon deck, and got some blankets, with which he endeavored to stop up the bow port, but found it no use, as the force of the sea washed them in again; that he then filled the topsails, to endeavor, if possible, to get her back into the harbor; that about three miles and a half from the shore she sunk.
It would not be fair to the gentlemen of the Jolly Roger to assert that the cases just cited are wholly typical. Rather do they illustrate the extreme of their brutality. Nevertheless, the fate of these unfortunate victims was that which might be expected by others under like circumstances. There is hardly a capture of which the report does not charge the pirates with cruelty, fiendish torture, or murder. Surely, a sea life in those days was not without its thrill of expectation, and too often of realization.
Tradition has always painted a long, low, rakish-looking schooner, painted black and flying either a red flag or the customary skull and crossbones on a black ground. Escape by flight, unless aided by darkness, was generally hopeless because of superior speed on the part of the piratical schooner, due not so much to her lines as to the slowness of the prey occasioned by deep draft through heavy loading. As will be frequently seen in the following pages, a favorite and effective form of piracy was the attack on vessels becalmed by armed men putting off from shore in boats or barges.
It seems remarkable that so few cases of resistance are on record. Some there be, however, which deserve mention as a tribute to the brave sailors who preferred, if they had to perish, to die fighting. The imagination must fill in the outlines of the following brief notice:
August, 1821, schooner Evergreen, Isaac Pool, captain, of Edgecomb, Maine, was captured by a piratical vessel; soon thereafter the captain retook his schooner and made prisoners of the prize crew; arrived in Boston, Mass., on September 22, 1821.
Under the caption, "A Desperate Fight," was printed the following:
The brig Patriot, of New York, Horace T. Jacobs, master, on her voyage from Port au Prince to New Orleans, on the 7th of September, being off Cape Antonio, and in a dead calm, was attacked by a piratical schooner of about 60 tons, with a crew of from 45 to 50 men. After noticing the approach of the enemy, we find the following account of the engagement in a New Orleans paper: "Capt. Jacobs then tacked to the south and eastward and hauled up the course, and ordered preparations to be made for action, which were readily and unanimously obeyed; the universal good spirits which pervaded all hands (consisting of 10 men and a boy) were truly conspicuous. When the schooner was close under the stern, Capt. Jacobs hailed her, upon which she fired a whole volley of musketry into the brig—and we in return commenced upon the schooner by firing the stern gun, which was under the direction of Mr. Johnson, the chief mate, which, with the musketry, did great execution amongst them. This gun was, however, dismounted the third round, and our colors were shot away at the same time, upon which the schooner set up a terrible shout to board from the bowsprit end—her boarders were covered by an abundance of musketry, but notwithstanding their vast superiority they were very gallantly repulsed. She then set fire to the brig astern, by throwing fired wads in at the cabin windows and into the stern boat, which was happily extinguished without damage. She then made another attempt to board, but was equally unsuccessful. By this time her fire considerably abated, and we could perceive an almost clear deck on board of her, and that she manifested a willingness to get clear of us. She asked for quarter repeatedly, but it was suspected to be a trick (and regarded as such), to get a sight of the people and knock them off. She had much difficulty in getting clear of the brig, as her jib boom and some of her ropes forward had got foul of the brig’s davit and the stern boat’s bow. Seven men could only be counted on her deck with the glass when she was a half mile off. The brig’s rigging and sails are very much cut up; Capt. Jacobs was wounded in the head by a musket ball and is supposed to have fractured his skull. He died of a lockjaw and violent convulsive fits on the night of the 12th inst. He has left a wife, who was on board in the action, to lament his loss; he had only been married a little more than three months. Mr. Johnson, chief mate, to whom reference has already been made, is the only surviving officer of the brig, and was wounded in the thigh by a musket ball; he is much to be praised for his good and persevering conduct. Mr. J.D. Walker, of New York, doing second mate’s duty, was killed in the action.
The following persons, comprising the crew of the said brig, to wit: Robert Greenoh, Thomas Stanley, Robert Mins, Henry Wilson, alias John Cotton, Henry Brown, Wm. Brown and Jerry Dedon, are deserving of every encouragement for their intrepid conduct against so unequal a force, as well as their dutiful obedience throughout to Mr. Johnson, in the brig hither.
A still better piece of work is thus described:
The brig Bowdoin, Captain Carr, has arrived at Newport, R.I., from Matanzas. Four hours after leaving the latter, Captain C. was approached by a piratical schooner from the land and full of men, rowing fourteen sweeps. On coming up, they hoisted the red flag, and called upon Captain C. to strike or die. He was not quite willing to do either, but waited until the scoundrels arrived within range, when he let loose at them four carriage guns and a number of muskets. The deck of the schooner was completely raked, and she instantly hauled off with all possible speed, rowing, however, only three sweeps instead of 14. Captain C. supposes that he might easily have sunk the pirates, had it not been calm, which enabled them to escape.
It is to be regretted that such gallant resistance was the exception, rather than the rule. Our government, when asked that merchant vessels be ordered to arm for self-defence, declined to do so but replied to the effect that there was no law against it. Rather a frigid encouragement, it must have appeared, to those vitally interested.
Official action, in a restricted sense, was taken in the Act of Congress of June 25, 1798, which authorized merchant vessels purely on the defensive to "repel by force any assault" committed upon them by French cruisers or privateers, capture the aggressors, and recapture American vessels taken by the French, while that of July 9, the same year, provided for the issuing letters of marque against the French.
There were many sporadic cases of piracy in the West Indies all through the period under discussion, but twice, owing to special causes, the depredations on American shipping became epidemic, rather, however, as the consequence of disturbed international relations than of the active pursuit of piracy itself.
During the maritime war between Great Britain and France, from 1793 to 1815, many of our vessels were seized on various pretexts, either by belligerents or by privateers fitted out under French and British flags. Such a state of affairs very naturally created the opportunity for individual efforts, with or without legitimate authority, which practically amounted to piracy in a great number of instances.
Our so-called naval war with France, at the close of the 18th century, afforded excellent opportunity for assaults on American commerce, not only by French privateers, but by pirates as well, opportunities that were largely and indiscriminately utilized.
Again, in the early part of the 19th century, after the various Central and South American republics had declared their independence of Spain, the latter country proclaimed a blockade of all such coasts and enforced it against neutral vessels without mercy, and, indeed, without right. In this period, piracy again flourished, reaching a culmination in the early twenties of that century, after which time, largely through the efforts of the United States Navy, it gradually decreased in volume and disappeared save in a few exceptional cases.
It follows, as a matter of course, that the study of this subject will pass rather rapidly over the opening phases of these operations on the part of our navy, but will necessarily have to deal in greater detail as the years go by and until the causes for these activities diminish to practically nil.
1791-1809
One of the earliest cases of piracy during the period we are considering is that of the Polly, of Baltimore, David Porter, master. The schooner touched on a reef at Cat Island, but managed to get off and to make her way to a port of the north side of Cuba for repairs. On December 8, 1791, she was about to proceed "when a small Spanish schooner, having five men on board, came down and anchored alongside, close to us. Three of her people came alongside and asked for an axe to cut some wood with to put under their hides, which I gave them, and inadvertently permitted them to come on board. After asking some questions and their telling a pitiful story of being taken by a Guarda Costa a little while before, all of a sudden, hangers, pistols, and knives were drawn by them. One of my men was knocked down by the axe which they had borrowed, another drove overboard and third escaped by getting into the hold. I was cut in several places of my jacket in endeavoring to escape; at last I surrendered and begged my life which was given with seeming reluctance…They drove us over into the boar with six pieces of meat, a small keg of bread and no water." The party ranged along the coast until they met a sloop from New Providence. "Some people in a Spanish launch advised me by no means to go to the town (Puerto, Principe), as I would certainly be murdered that a claim might be prevented."
After the outbreak of hostilities between France and Great Britain in 1793, insolence and violence to American vessels and crews by British and French privateers became humiliatingly frequent. Craft that fell into their hands might almost as well, so far as treatment was concerned, have been captured by pirates. The men-of-war, as a rule, were more considerate.
At this time it was very difficult to draw the line between privateers and pirates, and therefore reported cases of piracy may have sometimes fallen under the category of legitimate or quasi-legitimate captures.
In 1793, so far as the files of the Philadelphia Commercial Advertiser are concerned, but two instances of piracy have been found recorded. The brig William, Captain Prince, which left Port au Prince November 1, for Salem, was boarded the following day by Spanish pirates, who "robbed the vessel and passengers of everything valuable and handy." A similar fate befell the schooner Port au Prince, of Baltimore, about the same time.
In 1794, no piracies, strictly speaking, are found reported in the files of the newspapers of that time, but American vessels are taken by cruisers and privateers of the belligerents everywhere and on all pretexts. It is possible that there were too many vessels of war about to make it prudent for real pirates to engage in their operations. Complaint was made almost daily of the annoyances to which American commerce was subjected by privateers of all parties.
In 1795, again we read that American vessels were taken indifferently by French and Spanish and British privateers. They were practically always condemned, their cargoes being declared the enemy’s, no matter what were the facts. In the press of that year, frequent stories are printed describing the grievous treatment of their crews at the hands of the captors. This alone would seem to indicate that most of the depredations were committed by privateers, or vessels purporting to be privateers.
There seems to have been no very good raison d’être for pirates in those days, as the nefarious trade could be carried on with quite as much success and far greater safety under a belligerent flag.
In 1796, the merry game continued, and literally hundreds of American ships were taken. One that first fell into French and then into British hands, or vice versa, was sure to be plucked pretty clean. In addition, officers and crew were generally beaten and maltreated.
There arrived in Baltimore, February 10, 1797, "the ship Juliana, Captain Hayward, from Hamburg, but last from Porto Rico, into which port she was carried, after being within two days’ sail of Cape Henry, by a French privateer and detained several days. It luckily happened that the privateer had no commission and the Juliana was suffered to depart without further detention." Technically, the captor was a pirate.
One vexatious feature of these captures was common to perhaps the majority. It is illustrated in the case of the Juliana, which, although allowed to go free, was ordered by the French Prize Court to pay all expenses!
The dreary catalogue of these offences is occasionally enlivened, as in the case of the ship Ruby, taken on January 27, 1797, by a French privateer. A prize crew, a master and eight men, were put on board and the ship was ordered to San Domingo. Captain Smith and five of his men seized the prize crew on February 1, recaptured the ship and sent the scoundrels off in a small boat to San Domingo.
Also the schooner Mary, Hackett, master, from Philadelphia to Pensacola, taken in this way about this time, was also recaptured by her crew.
It is interesting, however humiliating, to note that in the newspapers of that epoch consulted, there is a marked absence of editorial strictures on these matters. Apparently, such losses, and the indignities accompanying them, were of so frequent occurrence as to have been quite universally regarded as all in the day’s work. The seafaring community, so it would appear, accepted and recognized the existence of these risks and was prepared to abide the consequences when unfortunate enough to become a prize.
The melancholy story continues in the following year of 1798. Whether the case be typical or not, it is hard to say, but the facts speak volumes for themselves. An American ship, taken by a French privateer, retaken by a British privateer, was sold to cover the salvage! Surely, the lot of the seaman then was not a happy one.
It will be remembered that the quasi war with France broke out about this time through the abrogation by Congress on July 7, 1798, of the treaties and conventions between the United States and France following the latter’s predatory warfare on American commerce. The following vessels were ordered into West Indian waters: United States, 44; Constitution, 44; Constellation, 36; George Washington, 32; Merrimack, 24; Ganges, 24; Delaware, 24; Baltimore, 22; Montezuma, 22; Herald, 18; Pickering, 16; Norfolk, 18; Richmond, 16; and seven revenue cutters.
Very few, if any, American ships were captured in the early part of this year by the French, and only an occasional one by the British. It was remarked at the time that our activity in the West Indies largely helped to protect British commerce. On the coming of summer it is probable that our fleet left those waters and returned north since we read that the "French of Guadeloupe are making many captures of American vessels."
The disturbed state of affairs in Hayti at the close of the eighteenth and the opening of the nineteenth century, due to the revolt of Toussaint l’Ouverture, vitally affected our commerce in adjacent waters.
The authority of Toussaint in San Domingo was disputed by the mulatto chieftain Rigaud, who held the southwestern part of the island, except Port Republicain, with the small island of Gonaive. He carried on actively a piratical form of warfare in the waters of that region. In the Gulf of Gonaive, then known as the Bight of Leogane, the vessels employed were large barges manned by crews of about 40 men and armed with two or three swivels. They would lie in wait for their prey by the shore, and when unsuspecting vessels appeared would put out from their hiding places and attack them. When becalmed, vessels even of considerable force had little chance of escape. They were taken by their captors into one of the ports controlled by Rigaud, their crews having generally been murdered. Trade with Port Republicain was beset with difficulty and danger through the operations of these picaroons.
An early report of a sharp affair in this locality is the following:
The following information is given by Captain Boden, arrived at Baltimore on the 6th inst. from Cape Francois, which place he left the 15th ult.: "The U.S. schooner Experiment, Captain Maley, with a convoy off the east end of Gonaives, in the Bight of Leogane, was attacked about the 10th of January, by 12 of Rigaud’s barges; during the action, 3 of them went on shore and renewed their crew; the day being calm, they had every advantage of the schooner, but after she had sunk three of them, the remainder sheered off: they however took possession of a northern brig, Captain Chipman, whom they instantly murdered—part of the crew saved themselves by jumping overboard. She was afterwards retaken by one of Toussaint’s barges. Dr. Stephens was on board the Experiment at the time of the engagement.
Cooper’s account of this affair is in these words:
The Experiment, 12, made her first cruise under the command of Lieutenant Commandant Maley, and was much employed in convoying through the narrow passages, where the vessels were exposed to attacks from large barges manned from the shores. About the close of the year 1799, or at the commencement of 1800, this schooner was becalmed in the Bight of Leogane, with several sail of American merchantmen in company and under convoy. While the little fleet lay in this helpless condition a good deal scattered, 10 of the barges mentioned, filled with negroes and mulattoes, came out against it. The barges contained from 30 to 40 men each, who were armed with muskets, cutlasses, and pikes, and in some of the boats were light guns and swivels. As the Experiment was partially disguised, the enemy came with reach of her grape before the assault was made, when Lieutenant Commandant Maley ran out his guns and opened his fire. This was the commencement of a long conflict, in which the barges were beaten off. It was not in the power of the Experiment, however, to prevent the enemy from seizing two of her convoy, which had drifted to such a distance as to be beyond protection. A third vessel was also boarded, but from her the brigands were driven by grape, though not until they had murdered her master and plundered the cabin.
The barges went twice to the shore, landed their killed and wounded, and took on board reinforcements of men. The second attack they made was directed especially at the Experiment, there being no less than three divisions of the enemy, each of which contained three heavy barges. But, after a protracted engagement, which, with the intermissions, lasted seven hours, the enemy abandoned further designs on this convoy, and retreated in disorder. The Experiment endeavored to follow, by means of her sweeps, but finding that some of the more distant barges threatened two of her convoy, that had drifted out of gunshot, she was obliged to give up the chase.
In this arduous and protracted engagement the Experiment was fought with spirit, and handled with skill. The total absence of wind gave the enemy every advantage; but notwithstanding their vast superiority in numbers, they did not dare to close. Two of the barges were sunk, and their loss in killed and wounded was known to have been heavy, while the Experiment had but two wounded, one of whom was Lieutenant David Porter.
The episode just described is worthy of note because, notwithstanding, Cooper’s expressions, Maley is believed to have acted discreditably. Indeed, Admiral Porter, in the memoir of his father, states that Maley "spoke of surrendering" to superior force and that he actually turned the command of the Experiment over to his first lieutenant—Porter.
Lieutenant Porter was unanimously applauded for the determined stand he took against the weakness of his commanding officer. This case shows the necessity of firmness in time of danger; and of not yielding until forced by superior numbers to do so…One of the officers of the Experiment, Joshua Blake, writing to Commodore Porter nearly 40 years after the affair, uses this language: "At that time and ever since I considered the safety of the vessel and the honor of the flag mainly to have depended on yourself, and that our situation would have been desperate indeed, had you been so disabled as to have been off duty."
To our cruisers in the West Indies at this time was assigned the duty of convoying American merchant vessels. This service, seen in the case of the Experiment, is further shown, by an extract from a letter to Captain George Little of the Frigate Boston addressed to him by Commodore Silas Talbot, the local commander-in-chief, to have been regulated under authority:
U.S. Frigate Constitution
1 March, 1800
Sir:
Ten days after the receipt of this letter you will appear off Cape Nich’s Mole and send your boat in to inform all American vessels (if any are there) that you are off the harbor and ready to take under convoy all such as are bound up to Port Republic, etc. And you must continue in like manner to appear off the Mole St. Nicholas every 14 days to convoy all such American vessels as may be bound up the bite; and also every 14 days to sail from Port Republic with such convoy as may choose to profit by your protection. When it is generally known in the United States, as I presume it will be soon, that this arrangement is made, it is likely that our merchant vessels will stop at the Mole and then wait a convoy up the bay.
Frequent seizures by French privateers were recorded in the newspapers during this period, but it was the "picaroons" who were responsible for the following terse entry in the log book of the Boston while Captain Little was carrying out Talbot’s orders:
March 11, at 4 p.m., saw 9 barges, full of men, from Gonaives, decoyed them by running in the guns; when within shot, a fire commenced which continued 5 glasses—disenabled 5 of them, when the others made off.
Cooper describes this action at greater length:
In March, the Boston, 28, Captain Little, being near the Point of St. Mark’s, having a merchant brig in tow, on her way to Port au Prince, nine barges were discovered pulling towards the vessels, coming from the small island of Gonaives, with every appearance of hostile intentions. The barges were large, as usual, pulled 20 oars, and contained from 30 to 40 men each. As soon as their characters were properly made out, the guns of the Boston were housed, and the ship was otherwise disguised. This stratagem succeeded so far as to draw the barges within gunshot; but discovering their mistake before they got as near as could be wished, they turned and began to retreat. The Boston now cast off her tow, made sail in chase, ran out her guns and opened her fire. For two hours, she was enabled to keep some of the barges within reach of her shot, and three of them, with all their crews, were sunk. The remainder did not escape without receiving more or less injury.
It was reported late in the year 1800 that the Experiment, under command of Lieutenant Charles Stewart, captured La Diana with "General Rigaud," the leader of the picaroons, on board.
Public attention in external affairs during the years 1801 and 1802 was mainly devoted to our navy’s work against the Tripolitan Corsairs. In comparison with the latter, the West Indian pirates seemed as pigmies to giants. None the less, as pigmies can and do use poisoned darts, so the pirates, masking as privateers, were not wholly idle, as one can see from the following:
The Golden Grove, from Porto Rico. She is a prize from the English. Mr. Joel Bradford (late mate of the schooner Polly, of Providence) came out in the Golden Grove. He informs us that the schooner Polly, bound from this port for St. Thomas, was captured on the 7th of August by a row boat mounting one swivel, under Spanish colors, and manned with 20 Frenchmen armed with knives. The Polly was carried into a small uninhabited place in the island of Porto Rico, and after the most barbarous and inhuman treatment, the crew were sent off without a cent of money. As a pretext for the condemnation of the Polly (which took place on the 30th of August), these piratical scoundrels swore in the most bitter manner that if the supercargo (John O.W. Carpenter) did not swear he was an Englishman, and that the property was English, they would cut his throat—to save his life, this oath was taken and the vessel condemned. The property, however, was bona fide American. Mr. Bradford further informs that he left at Porto Rico the schooner Two Sisters, Eatem, and sloop Two Brothers, Bliss, belonging to Philadelphia, waiting for new trials, on oaths which had been obtained as above stated. In the Golden Grove came six of the crew of the ship Zenobia, captured three days after she sailed from this port. The Zenobia was ordered for Porto Rico, but had not arrived when the Golden Grove sailed.
Restraints on American commerce, such as the foregoing, were almost as intolerable as piracy itself, from which it is difficult to distinguish them. While, happily, lacking in bloodshed, they did not fail to annoy. What could have been more vexatious than the "squeezing" mentioned in the notice:
New York, Feb. 11.—Brig Washington, Renegon, from Havana, left about 30 sail of American vessels. He informs that a number of American vessels had been sold there at liberal prices. Captain R. also informs that American vessels are occasionally permitted to enter the port of Havana, and, to use his own words, this is not done without previously greasing the hands of the Spaniards.
That a little resistance and firmness on the part of our captains would have proved salutary, is gathered from the following item:
Charleston, Nov. 13.—Arrived on the 11th instant, from the Havana, the brig Exchange, John Mainwaring, master, who sailed the 21st Oct., with one Spanish passenger on board, and on the 25th was boarded by a Spanish schooner, who took possession of the brig and ordered her for Metanzes, but the captain of the schooner finding Captain M. determined to apprehend him, abandoned the brig, and made sail for the Havana.
There was a temporary lull in affairs, as between Great Britain and France, after the Peace of Amiens in 1802, but, on the breaking out again of war in 1803, the seizures of American vessels began afresh. Many privateers were about who crews are reported to have behaved as badly as any pirates.
New York, Aug. 19.—At quarantine, schooner Diana, Cape Francois 15. A letter by her mentions that an American vessel has been captured by the brigands. They gave the crew the boat, who had arrived at the cape.
The specific instances of actual piracy during this and the next few succeeding years are comparatively infrequent, most of this work being done by privateers. A few, however, on record are mentioned in their order:
The Success, Twycross, arr. Boston March 31, 54 days from Kingston. Brought to anchor under Cape Antonio on the 11th Feb. by a pirate, a boat of about 15 tons, 1 6 pd., manned with 20 men, mostly Spaniards. They plundered the Success of $1200, all the clothing that was worth taking, rigging and sails to the amount of $600.
The newspapers of 1805 report many privateers hovering off our ports and seizing American vessels. Doubtless, not a few of these so-called privateers were, in fact, pirates. One wonders why our government did not send out cruisers, overhaul them, and make them show their letters of marque or other papers of authorization. A slight ray of hope is perceived in the statement that on the 30th of August of that year the frigate Adams, Murray commanding, sailed on a cruise, rumor reporting that "his limits are to be within three leagues of our coast and for the purpose of releasing any American vessels unlawfully taken." This falls very short of what would appear to have been the government’s duty. The reading of such spoliations is by no means pleasant, making, as it does, the blood boil even today over the injuries and insults inflicted by these sea robbers, legitimate or otherwise.
The French were admittedly the worse in their behavior, but the British cannot be entirely acquitted of brutality on their part.
The situation is officially made clear in President Jefferson’s Fifth Annual Message to Congress, December 3, 1805, as follows:
Since our last meeting the aspect of our foreign relations has considerably changed. Our coasts have been infested and our harbors watched by private armed vessels, some of them without commission, some with illegal commissions, others with those of legal form, but committing piratical acts beyond the authority of those commissions. They have captured, in the very entrance of our harbors as well as on the high seas, not only the vessels of our friends coming to trade with us, but our own also. They have carried them off under pretense of legal adjudication; but not daring to approach a court of justice, they have plundered and sunk them by the way, or in obscure places, where no evidence could arise against them; maltreated the crews, and abandoned them in boats in the open sea, or on desert shores, without food or covering. These enormities appearing to be unreached by any control of their sovereigns, I found it necessary to equip a force to cruise within our own seas, to arrest all vessels of these descriptions found hovering on our coasts, within the limits of the Gulf Stream, and to bring the offenders in for trial as pirates.
The New York Evening Post, at the close of 1805 and the beginning of 1806, published a series of notable articles on the infringement of our neutral rights. While conceived in the very best spirit, it cannot be asserted that they had any noticeable effect.