But additional to these comparatively large vessels there were smaller craft—open boats, yawls, and little sloops—which in fine weather were wont to run across from the south coast of England to Boulogne, Guernsey, and from the west of England to the Isle of Man. They also loaded up with as much cargo as they could carry, and, since they were able to be beached, the process of discharging their contents as soon as they returned was much simpler. These smaller craft also were in the habit of running out well clear of the land and meeting Dutch vessels, from which they would purchase similar kinds of goods and run them in by the usual methods. In these lesser craft were frequently carried a great many stones, anchors, and heavy weights by means of which the half-ankers of brandy could be sunk near the shore and afterwards taken up as required. The exact way in which this was done we shall discuss fully in a later chapter.

Some of the cobbles, "hovelings," and small fishing craft that were accustomed to run out to big sailing merchantmen under pretence of shipping pilots to take them into the next port, were actually engaged in smuggling all sorts of goods out of these ships. Perhaps it was a lurking sympathy with the men engaged in a trade with which his earlier years had been so intimately associated that made Captain Cockburn suggest that it was because the Dutchmen brought such large quantities of fish into Billingsgate that the English fishermen found their work unprofitable, and were accordingly driven to devote themselves to smuggling. But from evidence in other documents it would certainly seem that Cockburn was speaking the truth and that the fishing industry was not a very good livelihood at that time.

Then, secondly, there was the smuggling that was carried on by the trading sailing ships from abroad. Great quantities of goods were being run into the country by colliers—they were usually brig-rigged—by corn-ships, packet-boats from the Continent and other vessels trading with Holland. At least, one thousand five hundred vessels were engaged in this trade, "and," added Cockburn, "he scarcely ever knew one of them return without some prohibited or high duty goods." The smuggling from these vessels was done in various ways. There were the pilot-boats and fishing craft which frequently met them near the coast, as already explained. Another way was for the merchantmen to put into harbours, roadsteads, and rivers, where they lay at anchor under pretence of waiting for orders. Another method still, that was as simple as it was successful, consisted of landing their goods at outports on such holidays as the King's birthday, &c., when the Revenue officers were absent. Cockburn admitted that he had done this himself and had run great quantities of brandies, teas, and Spanish liquorice even as much as nearly a ton of the latter at a time. But besides these two classes there was a third. The whole of the coasting trade in those days was of course done in sailing ships; and inasmuch as there were no railways for carrying merchandise there was a good deal more encouragement for the sailing ship owner than there is to-day. The methods of smuggling adopted by these coasters was a little more complicated, and this was done by such means as fraudulently obtaining permits, by cockets clandestinely obtained, by false entry of one sort of goods for another, and by corrupting the Customs' officers. To prove his case the captain gave the following examples, all of which he had himself employed since the year 1738!

As regards the obtaining of permits fraudulently, he said that he had gone to Dunkirk, taken aboard 2040 gallons of French brandy and cleared for North Bergen in Norway. Of course he had no intention whatever of steering for that port, but in case he met any of the Custom House sloops as he approached the English coast, it would be convenient to show this clearance and so prevent his brandy being seized. From Dunkirk, then, he sailed across the North Sea and ran up the river Humber. There, by previous arrangement, one of those keels which are so well known in the neighbourhood of the Humber and Trent met him. The keel had been sent from York down the Ouse with permits to cover the brandy. The keel was cleared by a merchant at York, who obtained permits for conveying to Gainsborough a quantity of French brandy equal to that which Cockburn had on board his ship, though in fact the keel, notwithstanding that she obtained these permits, set forth with no brandy in her at all.

It was the point where the Ouse crosses the Trent at right angles that had been arranged as the trysting-place, and there the keel took on board from Cockburn the brandy which had come from Dunkirk. Cockburn himself nailed the permits on to the heads of the casks, which in due course were taken by the keel, when the flood tide made again, to Gainsborough some distance up the Trent. Arrived there the casks were properly taken into stock and entered in the Custom House books as if the brandy had been actually brought down from York and had previously paid duty. On this one venture the garrulous skipper admitted that he cleared a profit by the brandy of L250 per cent., which was a remarkably handsome reward for so short a voyage as from Dunkirk.

Port wines, he said, were purchasable at Dunkirk because these had been taken from English merchantmen by privateers; and since there was little or no market for such wines in Spain they were brought into Dunkirk, whither resorted the smugglers eager to buy them. He proceeded also to explain another method of cheating the customs. Large quantities of very inferior British brandy were taken on board a ship and clearance was obtained for some other English port, but instead of proceeding to the latter the vessel would run across to Dunkirk or Holland, where she would unload the cheap brandy, and in its place take on board some high-priced French brandy equal in quantity to the British commodity which had been put ashore at the French port. After this, with now a much more valuable cargo, the vessel would put to sea again and make for that British port for which originally she had cleared. And as to the practice of bribery, he himself had several times bought permits from the Excise officers to cover smuggled brandy and tea. On one occasion he had paid an officer fifty guineas for a permit to cover a certain quantity of tea and brandy about to be run into the country.

Next came Captain Ebenezer Hartley, who had also formerly commanded a ship that was engaged in smuggling. He had known of large quantities of muslins and silks brought into the country on board East Indiamen. These goods were smuggled by throwing them through the port-holes at night into boats waiting below, alongside the ship, or whilst the Custom officer was being entertained on board with food and drink. Sometimes, he said, this was even done under the very eyes of the Revenue officer, who took no notice of it. He recalled an incident in an earlier part of his life when he had sailed from England to Holland, in which country he had filled up with twenty-six casks of oil. After that his orders were to cross the North Sea and meet a certain vessel which would await him off Aldborough. This last-mentioned craft would give Hartley's vessel the signal by lowering her jib three times.

A more tragic story was related by George Bridges, a tidesman of the Port of London. He showed that it did not always "pay" to be diligent in one's duty, for he quoted the case of a Captain Mercer, in the employ of the Custom House, who did now and then make a seizure, but he "was broke for doing his duty"; and when Mercer came into Cork on the occasion in question, the mob set upon him so that he was compelled to escape into the sheriff's house. The mob then surrounded the house in their thousands until the sheriff interceded with them. They were wild with fury and threatened to pull the house down, until the sheriff gave them his oath that Captain Mercer should never again be guilty of seizing the wool which the smugglers had endeavoured to export. But the mob afterwards went to Passage and took hold of a Custom House officer named May. They brought him forth from his house, cut out his tongue, and cut off his ears, one of which the witness said he remembered seeing nailed on to the Cork Exchange. They dragged the man with a rope round his neck, gave him several blows, hurled him into the river, and finally the poor fellow died of his ill-treatment. Although handsome rewards were offered for the discovery of the offenders, yet no one ever came forward.

One could quote similar instances of the vehemence of the smugglers from other sources. For instance, on February 2, 1748-49, the Collector of the Port of Penzance wrote to the Board to give them some idea of the people among whom he had to work. "The insolence," he said, "of some of the smuglers [sic] and wreckers in this neighbourhood is run to such a heighth, that tho our officers have from time to time secured severall Hogsheads, it has been by force taken from them [again], 'and the officers forced to save their lives.'" Writing again on the 14th December, the same correspondent added that "the smugglers never behaved with more insolence than at present, or was it ever known to be carried on with more audaciousness," mentioning also that the previous night the snow[5] Squirrel of North Yarmouth had driven ashore loaded with a cargo of brandy. The country-folk had immediately boarded her, stripped the master of everything valuable, and then carried off all the brandy they could lay their hands on, and, in their haste, had set fire to the rest of the cargo, so that at the time of writing the whole ship was in flames. He mentioned also a couple of months later the difficulty he had to secure arrests of smugglers, for even when he had obtained warrants for the apprehension of eight most notorious men, the constables excused themselves from doing their duty in serving the warrants, and pretended that the eight men had absconded.

And anyone who cares to examine the Treasury Books and Papers for this period will find similar cases. In July of 1743 some smugglers had seized the Custom House boat at Dover and coolly employed her for their own purposes in running tea. The Custom officers deemed matters to be in such a state that they begged that a man-of-war might be stationed on that coast to prevent smuggling. Similarly in January of 1743-44, during a skirmish near Arundel between the preventive men assisted by some dragoons against a band of smugglers, the latter had wounded three of the soldiers and carried off an officer and two other dragoons on board the smugglers' cutter. This was no unique occurrence, for sometimes the contraband runners, when infuriated, captured the would-be captors, hurried them out to sea, and then, having bound the unfortunate victims with a bit of spare rope and having tied a piece of ballast to their live bodies, they would be hurled overboard into the sea, and the soldier or preventive man would never be seen or heard of again unless his lifeless body were cast upon the beach. At Folkestone, about this time, three men were carried off by the smugglers in trying to effect an arrest, and the supervisor at Colchester had been also carried off, but afterwards he had been released on promising not to mention the smugglers' names. It was bad enough, therefore, for the Revenue men when they had the assistance of the dragoons, but it was infinitely worse when they had to contend alone. There is an almost pathetic petition from the Folkestone riding-officers sent on New Year's Day 1744-45, begging for military assistance against the smugglers, as although there were soldiers stationed at Dover yet they were unobtainable, since they refused to march more than five miles.

And it was just as bad, if not worse, about this time in the Isle of Man, for the latter's inhabitants consisted almost exclusively of smugglers and their families, some of whom had long since been outlawed from England and Ireland. So rich and prosperous, indeed, had these Manxmen become by means of smuggling that they were recognised with a degree of importance which was almost ludicrous. The two deemsters (or deputy-governors) of the island even countenanced and protected the men, who would often assemble together to scheme and drink to the damnation of His Britannic Majesty. Unhindered in their nefarious work, able to obtain all the cargo they required from France and the Channel Isles; able, too, to run their contraband into the west of England, they waxed exceedingly independent and wealthy. At Douglas they had built themselves a good quay for the shelter of their ships and for convenience in landing their cargoes, the only drawback being that the harbour dried out at low water.

It happened that on the 26th of June 1750, that Captain Dow, commanding H.M. cruiser Sincerity[6] was, according to the orders received from the Board of Customs, on duty in Douglas Roads. A notorious Irish smuggling wherry came in from Ireland and ran under the Sincerity's stern, while the smugglers "with opprobrious, treasonable, and abusive language abused His Majesty King George and all that belonged to or served under him." This, of course, was too much for any naval officer to endure, and Captain Dow immediately caused the ship to come alongside, and, after being rummaged, she was found to have concealed in a jar of butter-milk twenty-five English guineas tied up in a bag. There were also papers on board which proved that this money was to be expended in the purchase of brandies and tea, &c., and that, having obtained these articles, she was then to return to Ireland. The English captain therefore promptly seized both money and papers.

On the same day that this incident occurred a Dutch dogger[7] also came into Douglas Roads loaded with prohibited goods from Holland. As soon as he had noticed her come to anchor Dow sent his boat to board her with his mate and six men, and to examine and see if she had the prohibited goods on board which were suspected. If she had, then she was to be seized. At the same time Dow had requested Mr. Sidebotham, his Majesty's officer in the Isle of Man, to cast off the Sincerity's headfast and sternfasts from the shore. But thereupon a riotous and angry mob, fearing that the cruiser should be able to get under weigh and seize the Dutch dogger, refused to allow Sidebotham to let go the ropes. Armed with bludgeons, muskets, swords, and stones they rushed down on to the quay, and did all they could to force the cruiser on shore by aiming showers of stones at the cruiser's men and restraining Sidebotham in his endeavour to help the Sincerity. They even carried the latter away by force, and beat and bruised him in the most brutal manner.

Captain Dow, realising that the intention of the mob was to get the Sincerity stranded, determined to cut his cable and exhorted them in his Majesty's name to disperse, to which they paid not the slightest attention except to send more showers of stones on to the cruiser's decks. Seeing from afar what was happening, the mate and six men who had been sent to board the dogger now returned to the Sincerity. Whereupon the dogger, perceiving her chance, promptly got under way. As the crowd on shore still continued to pelt his ship with stones and had already wounded two of his crew, the cruiser's commander fired amongst them. For a time, at least, this dispersed them, and so Dow was able to get his vessel clear. He immediately proceeded to follow the Dutch dogger, and chased her until she had, perforce, to run herself on to the sands at Ramsey to the north of the island. Determined not to be beaten, Dow now sent his mate and ten men on board her, seized her, and marked her in several places with the sign of a broad arrow to denote her capture.



But when the mate came to open the hatches several of the islanders who had been secreted on board, with the assistance of two boat-loads of armed men who had rowed off from the shore, seized the mate and his men, and threatened that if they resisted they would kill them. Being completely overpowered, the eleven naval men were compelled to yield and be carried ashore, where they were shut up in cellars and finally carried down to Castletown Castle. Meanwhile, the smugglers set to work on the dogger's cargo and landed it safely. A few days later six of the eleven were released, but the other five were detained until Captain Dow should refund the twenty-five guineas he had seized from the Irish wherry. In order to give him a fright they also sent word that the five men should be tried before one of their Courts of Judicature on the following Thursday, were he to fail to send the money. As the captain declined to accede to their demands, the five prisoners were on July 5 brought up and remanded till a month later. Finding it was impossible to obtain their release the commander of the Sincerity weighed anchor and ran back to Ramsey to take in the six released men, and then, sailing away to Whitehaven, arrived at that place on the 10th of July.

We need not say more. The story is sufficient to indicate the utter state of lawlessness which prevailed there. Peopled by outlaws and by the scum of France, Holland, Ireland, Scotland, and England, they were a pretty tough proposition. Their violence was rivalled only by their impudence; and fleets of wherries[8] would sail in company into Ireland and Scotland loaded with cargoes of cheap brandy, which had been brought from Holland for that purpose. As a means of checking these Manx smugglers it was suggested that the English Government should employ a number of tenders in this neighbourhood, since they drew less water than the sloops-of-war and so would be more useful for a locality that was not well supplied with deep harbours. Moreover, these tenders would be well able to take the ground in the harbours which dried out. Such craft as the latter were of about 160 tons, mounted twelve to fourteen carriage guns, and were manned by a captain, second officer, two mates, two quartermasters, a gunner, a boatswain, carpenter, surgeon, and forty seamen.

From the south-east corner of England came reports not much better. Just before the close of the year 1743 the Surveyor at Margate and his men were out on duty along the coast one night when five of them came upon a gang of about twenty-five smugglers. An encounter quickly ensued, and as the latter were well armed they were, by their superior numbers, able to give the officers a severe beating, especially in the case of one unfortunate "whose head is in such a miserable condition that the Surveyor thought proper to put him under the care of a surgeon." Both this Surveyor and the one at Ramsgate asserted that the smugglers were accustomed to travel in such powerful gangs, and at the same time were so well armed, that it was impossible to cope with them, there being seldom less than thirty in a gang "who bid defiance to all the officers when they met them."

On the 7th April 1746, the Collector and Controller of the Customs at Sandwich wrote to the Board:

"We further beg leave to acquaint your Honours that yesterday about four o'clock in the afternoon a large gang of near 100 smuglers [sic] with several led horses went thro' this town into the island of Thanet, where we hear they landed their goods, notwithstanding that we took all possible care to prevent them.

"P.S.—This moment we have advice that there is a gang of 200 smugglers more at St. Peter's in the Isle of Thanet."

Seven months later in that year, at nine o'clock one November morning, a gang of 150 smugglers managed to land some valuable cargo from a couple of cutters on to the Sandwich flats. Several Revenue officers were despatched into the country for the purpose of meeting with some of the stragglers. The officers came into collision with a party of these men and promptly seized two horse-loads of goods consisting of five bags of tea and eight half-ankers of wine. But they were only allowed to retain this seizure for half-an-hour, inasmuch as the smugglers presently overpowered the Revenue men and wrested back their booty. The preventive men were also considerably knocked about, and one of them had his thumb badly dislocated. The officers declared that they knew none of the people, the latter being well supplied not with firearms but with great clubs. A fortnight later, just a few miles farther along the coast, a gang of 150 smugglers succeeded in landing their goods at Reculvers near Birchington; and ten days later still another gang of the same size was able to land their goods near Kingsgate, between the North Foreland and Margate. But it cannot be supposed that the Revenue officers were not aware of the approach of these incidents. The fact was that they were a little lacking in courage to face these problems on every occasion. Indeed, they were candid enough to admit that they dared not venture near these ruffians "without the utmost hazard of their lives." But the riding-officers were not solely to blame, for where were the Custom House sloops? How was it they were always absent at these critical times? Indeed, the Collector and Controller informed the Commissioners that not one of these sloops had been seen cruising between Sandwich and Reculvers for some months past.

This complaint about the cruisers was made in March 1747, and in that same month another gang, two hundred strong, appeared on the coast, but this time, after a smart encounter, the officers secured and placed in the King's warehouse a ton of tea as well as other goods, and three horses. A day or two later a gang of smugglers threatened to rescue these goods back again. The property formed a miscellaneous collection and consisted of fifty pieces of cambric, three bags of coffee, some Flemish linen, tea, clothes, pistols, a blunderbuss, and two musquetoons. To prevent the smugglers carrying out their intention, however, a strong guard was formed by an amalgamation of all the officers from Sandwich, Ramsgate, and Broadstairs, who forthwith proceeded to Margate. In addition to these, it was arranged that Commodore Mitchell should send ashore from the Downs as many men as he could spare. This united front was therefore successful, and for once the smugglers were overmatched. And but for a piece of bad luck, or sheer carelessness, a couple of years later a smart capture might well have been brought about. It was one day in August when the officers had received information that a gang of twenty men and horses had appeared near Reculvers to receive goods from a cutter that was seen to be hovering near the coast. The smugglers on shore were cute enough to locate the officers, and by some means evidently signalled to the cutter, for the latter now put to sea again and the gang cleared off. Although for some time after this incident both officers and dragoons patrolled the coast in the neighbourhood no one was ever fortunate enough to gather information either as to the cutter or the people who had vanished into the country with such rapidity.

And yet in spite of the very numerous sympathisers which these illicit importers possessed, yet of course there were some individuals who were as much against them as any officer of the Customs. In the neighbourhood of Plymouth legitimate trade had suffered a great deal owing to these practices. The mayor, aldermen, and merchants of Saltash were at last compelled to send a memorial to the Lords of the Treasury complaining that in the rivers adjacent to that place there were several creeks and inlets which were being made of considerable use by the smugglers for landing their goods. Especially was this the case up the river Tamar, and all this had been and was still "to the great prejudice of the fair traders and merchants." They pointed out that a great deal of it consisted of clandestine running from ships in the Sound, Hamoaze, and other anchorages round about there. Large quantities of French linings, wines, and brandies were being run ashore with impunity and speedily sold in the adjacent towns or conveyed some distance into Devonshire. The mayor therefore begged the Treasury for three additional Custom officers consisting of an inspector of roads and two tide-waiters to be established at Saltash, but the Treasury could not see their way to grant such a request.

But in other parts of the country the roads were kept carefully watched to prevent goods being brought inland. The coaches which ran from Dover to London with passengers who had come across from the Continent were frequently stopped on the highway by the riding-officers and the passengers searched. Harsh as this mode of procedure may seem to us to-day, yet it was rendered necessary by the fact that a good many professional carriers of contraband goods were wont to travel backwards and forwards between England and abroad. Some years later, for example, when the Dover coach was stopped at "The Half-Way House," a foreigner, who was travelling by this conveyance and had been able to evade the Customs' search at Dover, was found to be carrying two gold snuff-boxes set with diamonds, four lockets also set with diamonds, eighteen opals, three sapphires, eight amethysts, six emeralds, two topazes, and one thousand two hundred torquoises—all of which were liable to duty.

And thus the illegal practices continued all round the coast. From Devonshire it was reported that smuggling was on the increase—this was in the autumn of 1759—and that large gangs armed with loaded clubs openly made runs of goods on the shore, the favourite locale being Torbay, though previously the neighbourhood of Lyme had been the usual aim of these men who had sailed as a rule from Guernsey. All that the Collector could suggest was that an "impress smack" should be sent to that district, as he promised that the notorious offenders would make excellent seamen.

There was an interesting incident also off the north-east coast of England, where matters were still about as bad as ever. We referred some pages back to the capture of a Dutch dogger off the Isle of Man; we shall now see another of these craft seized in the North Sea. Captain Bowen of the sloop Prince of Wales, hearing that the dogger Young Daniel was running brandy on the coast near to Newcastle, put to sea in search of her. He came up with a number of those cobbles—open boats—which are peculiar to the north-east coastline, though at one time they were used as far south as Great Yarmouth. The cobbles which he was able to intercept had just been employed in transferring the contraband from the dogger to the shore. Bowen captured one of these small craft with a dozen casks aboard. Another was forced ashore and secured by the land officers. Meanwhile, the Dutchman stood out to sea so that he might be able to draw off the spirits from large casks into smaller ones, which were the better fitted for running ashore. It was found afterwards that he had large numbers of these lesser casks, and during that evening she put about and crept stealthily in towards the shore again until she approached within about a mile of the mouth of the Tees. Her intention was to run the rest of her cargo under cover of darkness, and her skipper had arranged for large numbers of men to be on that coast ready to receive and carry off these casks. But Bowen was determined to head her off this project. An exciting chase followed, during which—to quote an official report of the time—the dogger did her best "to eat the sloop out of the wind," that is to say sailed as close to the wind as she could travel in the hope of causing her adversary to drop to leeward. For seven hours this chase continued, but after that duration the Prince of Wales captured the Young Daniel eight leagues from the shore. This is not a little interesting, for inasmuch as the chase began when the dogger was a mile from the mouth of the river, the vessels must have travelled about 23 statutory miles in the time, which works out at less than 3-1/2 miles an hour. Not very fast, you may suggest, for a Revenue cutter or for the Dutchman either. But we have no details as to the weather, which is usually bad off that part of the coast in February (the month when this incident occurred), and we must remember that the doggers were too bluff of build to possess speed, and the time had not yet arrived when those much faster Revenue cutters with finer lines and less ample beam were to come into use.

FOOTNOTES:

[5] A snow was a vessel with three masts resembling the main and foremast of a ship with a third and small mast just abaft the mainmast, carrying a sail nearly similar to a ship's mizzen. The foot of this mast was fixed in a block of wood or step but on deck. The head was attached to the afterpart of the maintop. The sail was called a trysail, hence the mast was called a trysail-mast. (Moore's Midshipman's Vocabulary, 1805.)

[6] It was the frequent custom at this time to speak of sloops as cruisers.

[7] A dogger was a two-masted Dutch fishing-vessel usually employed in the North Sea off the Dogger Bank. She had two masts, and was very similar to a ketch in rig, but somewhat beamy and bluff-bowed.

[8] These, of course, were not the light rowing-boats of the kind that were in use on the Thames and elsewhere. The term wherry was applied to various decked fishing-vessels belonging to England, Ireland, and the Isle of Man.



CHAPTER V

THE HAWKHURST GANG

We come now to consider the desperate character of a band of men who rendered themselves for all time notorious in the domestic history of our country by acts of unbridled violence and consummate cruelty.

But before we proceed to relate as fully as our limited space will allow the details of these incidents, it is necessary to remind ourselves once again of the great, solid mass of sympathy, both active and passive, that was always at the back of the smugglers. Without this such daring runs by night could never have occurred: doubtful of the assistance which could be whole-heartedly given by the people on shore, the seafaring men would never have dared to take such enormous risks of life and goods. Not merely did the villagers come down to the shore to help to bring the goods inland, not only did they lend their horses and carts, but they would tacitly suffer the smugglers to hide casks of spirits in wells, haystacks, cellars, and other places. In Cornwall, for instance, fifty-five tubs of spirits were found concealed in a well, over the top of which a hay-stack had been built. This was near Falmouth, one of the most notorious of the smuggling localities. And there is actual record of at least one instance where the natives charged a rent of a shilling a tub for stowing away the smuggled goods. In another county a cavern had most ingeniously been hollowed out under a pond big enough to hold a hundred casks, the entrance being covered over with planks carefully strewed with mould. So clever and original was this idea that it was never discovered for many years.

But the most notorious, the most formidable, and certainly the most abominably cruel gang of smugglers which ever achieved notice was the Hawkhurst contingent. The "Hawkhurst Gang," as they were known, were a terror to whatever law-abiding citizens existed in the counties of Kent and Sussex. They feared neither Custom officers nor soldiery, they respected neither God nor man, and in the course of attaining their aims they stopped at no atrocity nor brooked any interference from anyone. By the year 1747 smugglers had become so daring and committed such terrible crimes that the only course left open for decent people was to band together in mutual protection. The inhabitants of one locality joined together under the title of the "Goudhurst Band of Militia," their leader being a man named Sturt, a native of Goudhurst, who had recently obtained his discharge from the Army. But this union became known to the smugglers, who waylaid one of the militia, and by means of torture the whole of the defenders' plans were revealed. After a while he was released and sent back to inform the militia that the smugglers on a certain day would attack the town, murder all its inhabitants, and then burn the place to the ground.

The day arrived and both forces were prepared. Sturt had gathered his band, collected fire-arms, cast balls, made cartridges, and arranged entrenchments, when, headed by one Thomas Kingsmill, the Hawkhurst gang appeared in order to make the attack. But after a smart engagement in which three were killed and many wounded, the smugglers were driven off, whilst others were captured and subsequently executed.

Kingsmill escaped for a time, and became the leader of the famous attack on the Poole Custom House in October 1747. Another of the gang was named Perin and belonged to Chichester. Perin was really a carpenter by trade, but after being afflicted with a stroke of the palsy, he became attached to the smugglers, and used to sail with them to France to purchase goods that were to be smuggled, such as brandy, tea, and rum. Now in September of 1747 Perin went across the Channel in a cutter called The Three Brothers, loaded up with the above commodities, and was approaching the English coast when he was met with a rebuff. For Captain William Johnson, who held a deputation from the Customs to seize prohibited goods, got to know of Perin's exploit, and on the 22nd of this month, whilst cruising in the Poole Revenue cutter, sighted The Three Brothers to the eastward of Poole. Whereupon the smuggler began to flee, and, running before the wind, fled to the N.N.W. From five in the afternoon till eleven at night the Revenue cutter, with every stitch of canvas set, chased her, and after firing several shots caused her to heave-to. Johnson then boarded her, and found that the tea was in canvas and oil-skin bags, but Perin and the crew of six had escaped in The Three Brothers boat. However, Johnson captured the cutter with her cargo and took the same into Poole. The two tons of tea, thirty-nine casks of brandy and rum, together with a small bag of coffee, were conveyed ashore and locked up safely in the Poole Custom House. Such was the introduction to the drama that should follow.

Enraged at their bad luck, the smugglers took counsel together. They assembled in Charlton Forest, and Perin suggested that they should go in a body and, well-armed, break open the Poole Custom House. So the next day they met at Rowland's Castle with swords and firearms, and were presently joined by Kingsmill and the Hawkhurst gang. Till night had fallen they secreted themselves in a wood, and eventually reached Poole at eleven o'clock at night. Two of their members were sent ahead to reconnoitre, and reported that a sloop-of-war lay opposite to the quay, so that her guns could be pointed against the doors of the Custom House; but afterwards it was found that, owing to the ebb-tide, the guns of the sloop could not be made to bear on that spot. The band, numbering about thirty, therefore rode down to spot, and while Perin and one other man looked after their horses, the rest proceeded to the Custom House, forced open the door with hatchets and other implements, rescued the tea, fastening packages of the latter on to their horses, with the exception only of 5 lbs. The next morning they passed through Fordingbridge in Hampshire, where hundreds of the inhabitants stood and watched the cavalcade. Now among the latter was a man named Daniel Chater, a shoemaker by trade. He was known to Diamond, one of the gang then passing, for they had both worked together once at harvest time. Recognising each other, Diamond extended his arm, shook hands, and threw him a bag of tea, for the booty had been divided up so that each man carried five bags of 27 lbs.



After the Poole officers discovered what had happened to their Custom House, there was not unnaturally a tremendous fuss, and eventually the King's proclamation promised a reward for the apprehension of the men concerned in the deed. Nothing happened for months after, but at last Diamond was arrested on suspicion and lodged in Chichester Gaol. We can well imagine the amount of village gossip to which this would give rise. Chater was heard to remark that he knew Diamond and saw him go by with the gang the very day after the Custom House had been broken open. When the Collector of Customs at Southampton learned this, he got into communication with the man, and before long Chater and Mr. William Galley were sent with a letter to Major Battin, a Justice of the Peace for Sussex. Galley was also a Custom House officer stationed at Southampton. The object of this mission was that Chater's evidence should be taken down, so that he might prove the identity of Diamond.

On Sunday February 14, then, behold these two men setting out for Chichester. On the way they stopped at the White Hart Inn, Rowland's Castle, for refreshment. But the landlady suspecting that they were going to hurt the smugglers, with the intuition of a woman and the sympathy of a mother decided to send for two men named Jackson and Carter. For this Mrs. Paine, a widow, had two sons herself, who though nominally blacksmiths were in fact smugglers. Jackson and Carter came in, to whom the widow explained her suspicions, and these two men were presently followed by others of the gang. Before very long they had got into conversation with Galley and Chater, and plied them with drink, so that they completely gave away the nature of their mission, and after being fuddled and insulted were put to bed intoxicated. After a while, they were aroused by Jackson brutally digging his spurs on their foreheads and then thrashing them with a horse-whip. They were then taken out of the inn, both put on to the same horse, with their legs tied together below the horse's belly. They were next whipped as they went along, over the face, eyes, and shoulder, till the poor victims were unable to bear it any longer, and at last fell together, with their hands tied underneath the horse, heads downwards. In this position the horse struck the head of one or the other with his feet at every step. Afterwards the blackguardly tormentors sat the two men upright again, whipped them, and once more the men fell down, with heels in air. They were utterly weak, and suffering from their blows.



We need not enlarge upon the details, some of which are too outrageous to repeat. After a while they thought Galley was dead, and laid him across another horse, with a smuggler each side to prevent him falling. They then stopped at the Red Lion, at Rake, knocked up the landlord, drank pretty freely, and then taking a candle and spade dug a hole in a sand-pit where they buried him. But at a later date, when the body was exhumed, it was seen that the poor man had covered his eyes with his hands, so there can be little doubt but that Galley was buried alive.

As for Chater, they delayed his death. Throughout Monday they remained drinking at the Red Lion, discussing what to do with him, Chater being meanwhile kept secured by the leg with an iron chain, three yards long, in a turf-house. At dead of night they agreed to go home separately so that the neighbours might not be suspicious of their absence. On Wednesday morning they again repaired to the Red Lion, after having left Chater in the charge of two of their number. Then, having discussed what should be done with Chater, some one suggested that a gun should be loaded with two or three bullets, and after having tied a long string to the trigger, each member of the gang should take hold of the string together, and so become equally guilty of the poor man's death. But this idea was unwelcomed, as it was thought it would put Chater too quickly out of his sufferings. Meanwhile, Chater was visited at various times, to receive kicks and severe blows, and to be sworn at in the vilest and most scurrilous language.



One of the gang now came up to him, and uttering an oath, brandishing aloft a large clasp-knife, exclaimed: "Down on your knees and go to prayers, for with this knife I will be your butcher." Terrified at the menace, and expecting momentarily to die, Chater knelt down on the turf and began to say the Lord's Prayer. One of the villains got behind and kicked him, and after Chater had asked what they had done to Galley, the man who was confronting him drew his knife across the poor man's face, cut his nose through, and almost cut both his eyes out. And, a moment later, gashed him terribly across the forehead. They then proceeded to conduct him to a well. It was now the dead of night, and the well was about thirty feet deep, but without water, being surrounded with pales at the top to prevent cattle from falling in. They compelled him to get over, and not through these pales, and a rope was placed round his neck, the other end being made fast to the paling. They then pushed him into the well, but as the rope was short they then untied him, and threw him head foremost into the former, and, finally, to stop his groanings, hurled down rails and gate-posts and large stones.



I have omitted the oaths and some of the worst features of the incident, but the above outline is more than adequate to suggest the barbarism of a lot of men bent on lawlessness and revenge. Drunk with their own success, the gang now went about with even greater desperation. Everybody stood in terror of them; Custom officers were so frightened that they hardly dared to perform their duties, and the magistrates themselves were equally frightened to convict smugglers. Consequently the contraband gangs automatically increased to great numbers. But, finally, a reward of L500 was offered by the Commissioners of Customs for the arrest of everyone of the culprits, and as a result several were arrested, tried, convicted, and executed. The murderers were tried at a special assize for smugglers held at Chichester, before three judges, and the seven men were sentenced to death. William Jackson died in prison a few hours after sentence. He had been very ill before, but the shock of being sentenced to death, and to be hung afterwards in chains and in ignominy, rapidly hastened his death, and relieved the executioner of at least one portion of his duty. He had been one of the worst smugglers in his time, and was even a thief among thieves, for he would even steal his confederates' goods. Between the sentence and the hour for execution a man came into the prison to measure the seven culprits for the irons in which their bodies were subsequently to be hung by chains. And this distressed the men more than anything else, most of all Jackson, who presently succumbed as stated.

Mills, senior, had gradually been drawn into the smuggling business, though previously he had been quite a respectable man. After giving up actual smuggling, he still allowed his house to be used as a store-place for the contraband goods. His son, Richard, also one of the seven, had been concerned in smuggling for years, and was a daring fellow. John Cobby, the third of the culprits, was of a weaker temperament, and had been brought under the influence of the smugglers. Benjamin Tapner was especially penitent, and "hoped all young people would take warning by his untimely fate, and keep good company, for it was bad company had been his ruin." William Carter complained that it was Jackson who had drawn him away from his honest employment to go smuggling, but John Hammond was of a more obdurate nature, and had always hated the King's officers.

According to the testimony of the Rev. John Smyth, who visited them in gaol, all the prisoners received the Holy Communion at ten o'clock, the morning after being sentenced to death. All the prisoners except the two Mills admitted that they deserved the sentence, but all the surviving six acknowledged that they forgave everybody. On January 19, 1748-9, they were executed. The two Mills were not hung in chains, but having neither friend nor relation to take them away their bodies were thrown into a hole near the gallows, into which also was placed Jackson's body. Carter's body was hung in chains on the Portsmouth Road, near Rake; that of Tapner on Rook's Hill, near Chichester; those of Cobby and Hammond on the sea coast near Selsey Bill; so that from a great distance they could be observed across the sea by the ships as they went by east and west. Later on, John, the brother of Richard Mills, and one of the gang, was also arrested. When the above three judges were travelling down to Chichester for the trial of the seven men, John had intended waylaying their lordships on Hind Heath, but his companions had refused to support him. But soon after his father's and brother's execution he met with a man named Richard Hawkins, whom he accused of having stolen two bags of tea. Hawkins denied it, and was brutally and unmercifully thrashed to death in the Dog and Partridge Inn at Slindon Common, his body being afterwards carried a dozen miles, thrown into a pond, with stones attached, and then sunk. John Mills was convicted and hanged at East Grinstead, and afterwards remained hanging in chains on Slindon Common. Other members of the gang were also arrested, tried at the same assizes as highwaymen, and then executed.

* * * * *

Later on, two of the smugglers who had given evidence against the men that were hanged at Chichester, gave information also, which led to the arrest of Kingsmill, Perin, and two others who had been concerned in breaking open the Poole Custom House. Kingsmill, Perin, and one other were hanged at Tyburn in April of 1749; the other man, however, was pardoned. Thus at length this dreaded Hawkhurst Gang was broken up.



CHAPTER VI

THE REVENUE CRUISERS

We drew attention some time back to the assistance occasionally rendered by soldiers when the Riding officers were about to arrest smugglers. Early in the year 1740, or about the close of 1739, Thomas Carswell, one of the Revenue officers stationed at Rye, was murdered, and a corporal and three dragoons whom he had taken to his assistance were badly wounded, and a large quantity of tea that had been seized was rescued. It was after this incident that Revenue officers of this port—perhaps the most notorious of all the south-east smuggling territory—were ordered that in future when they went forth to make seizures they were to have with them an adequate military force, and to this end they were to make previous arrangements with the commanding-officer of the forces in that district.

But in spite of the seizures which the officers on land from time to time effected, and notwithstanding the shortcomings of the Custom House cruisers in regard to speed, and the frequent negligence of their commanders, it still remains true that these cutters and sloops, at any rate until about the year 1822 (when the Coastguard service was instituted) continued to be the principal and the most important of all the machinery set in motion against the smugglers. We have seen this service in working order as far back as the year 1674, at any rate, when the fleet consisted of only hired vessels. We have also seen that they were employed in sufficient numbers all round the coast, and that the Customs authorities, not content merely to hire such vessels, also presently obtained some of their own. It is possible that the smacks were used for such service even before the date 1674—perhaps very soon after Charles came to the throne—but there are no existing records of this to make the matter certain. The Revenue preventive work, in so far as the cruisers were employed, was carried on by a mixed control, and embraced six separate and distinct types:—

1. There were the English Custom House smacks, cutters, and sloops, some of which were hired vessels: others were actually owned by the English Customs Board.

2. There were the English Excise cruisers, which were controlled by the English Excise Board. They appeared to be very similar to the craft in the first class.

3. There were the Scottish Customs cruisers, under the control of the Scottish Customs Board. The official at the head of these was known as the Agent for yachts.

4. There were the Scottish Excise cruisers, controlled by the Scottish Excise Board.

5. There were the Irish Revenue cruisers, controlled by the Irish Customs and Excise.

6. And lastly, there were these vessels of the Royal Navy which were employed to assist the Revenue, such vessels consisting of ships of the fifth-rate, sixth-rate, and especially the armed sloops.

In the present volume it has been necessary, owing to the limits of our space, to restrict our consideration of cruisers chiefly to the most important of these, viz. those of the English Custom House and those of the Royal Navy. Under such a mixed rule it was obvious that many difficulties arose, and that the clashing of interests was not infrequent. For instance, between the English Custom House cruisers and the English Excise cruisers there was about as much friendship as there exists usually between a dog and a cat. Similarly between the former and the Naval cruisers there was considerable jealousy, and every display of that pompous, bombastic exhibition of character which was such a feature of the life of the eighteenth century, and the first years of the next.

Although the Revenue cruisers were employed primarily and ordinarily for the purpose of protecting the revenue, yet from time to time they were mobilised for coast defence. On different occasions during the eighteenth century they were lent to the Admiralty, and well supplied with men and arms in readiness for actual warfare. After the third quarter of the eighteenth century these Revenue cruisers seem to have been built in greater numbers and with some improvement as to design, which, seeing that they had so frequently been left well astern by the smuggling cutters, was more than necessary. There was issued in November of 1780, by the Board of Customs, an interesting letter that shows how closely these cruisers approximated to vessels of war, even when they were not under the jurisdiction of the Admiralty. This letter was sent to the Collector and Controller at the different English Customs ports, and began by referring to the fact that many applications had been made to the Board asking permission to take out Letters of Marque. It will be remembered that this was a time when wars seemed to go on interminably, and there had been only a few brief intervals of peace ever since the Anglo-Dutch wars began. The Commissioners replied that they had no objection to the commanders of the cruisers providing themselves with Letters of Marque, if done at the latter's own expense "during present hostilities": but the Board declined to bear any part of the expense for any damages that might be sustained in an engagement where no seizure had been made and brought into port for a breach of the Revenue laws, so long as a commander should continue to hold these Letters of Marque. It was, in fact, a basis of no cure no pay. Each commander was, further, strictly enjoined not to quit his station and duty as a Revenue officer "under pretence of looking for captures, it being our resolution to recall the permission hereby granted, as soon as it shall be discovered in any instance to be prejudicial to our service."

But this war-like and semi-war-like service was entirely subservient to their ordinary work. It is evident from the correspondence of the Customs Board of this same year, 1780, that their minds were very uneasy. The smugglers, far from showing any slackening, had become more active than ever. These men had, to quote the words of the Commissioners, considerably increased the size and force of their vessels; they had also added to their number of both men and guns. They had become so violent and outrageous, they had acquired so much audacity as to "carry on their illicit designs in sight of the Revenue cruisers," and "whenever they have appeared within a certain distance have actually fired into and threatened to sink them." In such cases as these, it was reported to the Board, the mariners on board these cruisers have frequently refused to bear down and repel their attacks, explaining their conduct by saying that no provision was made for their support in case they received injury during these encounters. To meet such objections as these the Board resolved to allow the sum of L10 per annum to every mariner employed on board their cruisers who should lose a hand or foot, or receive any greater injury by firearms "or other offensive weapons of the smugglers while in the actual execution of their duty so as to disable them from further service; and we have also resolved to pay the surgeons' bills for such of the mariners as may receive slighter wounds." But it was stipulated that no allowance was to be paid unless certificates were produced from the commanders of these cruisers.

And before we go any further with the progress of these cutters, let us afford actual instances of the kind of treatment which had led the Board to make this allowance to its men. Three years before the above resolution, that is to say on April 24, 1777, Captain Mitchell was cruising in command of the Revenue cutter Swallow in the North Sea. Off Robin Hood's Bay he fell in with a smuggling cutter commanded by a notorious contraband skipper who was known as "Smoker," or "Smoaker." Mitchell was evidently in sufficient awe of him to give him a wide berth, for the cruiser's commander in his official report actually recorded that "Smoker" "waved us to keep off"! However, a few days later, the Swallow, when off the Spurn, fell in with another famous smuggler. This was the schooner Kent, of about two hundred tons, skippered by a man known as "Stoney." Again did this gallant Revenue captain send in his report to the effect that "as their guns were in readiness, and at the same time waving us to go to the Northward, we were, by reason of their superior force, obliged to sheer off, but did our best endeavours to spoil his Market. There [sic] being a large fleet of colliers with him."

But that was not to be their last meeting, for on May 2, when off Whitby, the Swallow again fell in with the Kent, but (wrote Mitchell) the smuggler "would not let us come near him." The following day the two ships again saw each other, and also on May 13, when off Runswick Bay. On the latter occasion the Kent "fired a gun for us, as we imagined, to keep farther from him." The same afternoon the Swallow chased a large lugsail boat, with fourteen hands in her, and supposed to belong to the Kent. But the Swallow was about as timid as her name, for, according to her commander, she was "obliged to stand out to sea, finding that by the force they had in their boat, and a number of people on shore, we had no chance of attacking them with our boat, as they let us know they were armed, by giving us a volley of small arms." None the less the Swallow had also fourteen men as her complement, so one would have thought that this chicken-hearted commander would at least have made an effort to try conclusions.

No doubt, the Kent was a pretty tough customer, and both skipper and his crew likewise. But there was something wanting in Captain Mitchell. For consider another of the latter's exploits. It was the last week of September of that same year, and the scene had again the Yorkshire coast for its background. During the evening they espied what they rightly believed to be a smuggling cutter. They got as far as hailing her, but, as it was very dark, and the Swallow did not know the force of the cutter, Mitchell "thought it most prudent to leave her," and so came to anchor in Saltburn Bay. But the smuggler had not done with this enterprising gentleman; so the next day the smuggler came into the bay, stood down under full sail, and came charging down on to the poor Swallow, striking her on the quarter, the smuggler swearing terrible oaths the meanwhile, that if Mitchell did not promptly cut his cable—it was the days of hemp, still—and hurry out of that anchorage, he would sink him. What happened, do you ask? Of course the Swallow ought to have been under way, and should never have been lying there. She was acting contrary to the orders of the Board. But what must we think of a captain who calmly awaits the on-coming of a smuggler's attack? Why, so soon as the Swallow espied him approaching, did he not up anchor, hoist sails, and go to meet him with his crew at their stations, and guns all shotted? But even after this gross insult to himself, his ship, and his flag, was the commander of a Revenue sloop to obey?



Yes—it is shameful to have to record it—Mitchell did obey. True, he didn't cut his cable, but he soon tripped his anchor and cleared out as ordered. The poor Swallow had been damaged both as to her tail and her wings, for the smugglers had injured the stern, taken a piece out of the boom, and carried away the topping-lift. But evidently in those days the Revenue service attracted into its folds men of the type of Mitchell. Take the case of Captain Whitehead of the Revenue cruiser Eagle. Espying a smuggling vessel, he gave chase, and eventually came up with her, also off Saltburn. Whitehead hailed her, but the smuggler's skipper replied—one cannot resist a smile—"with a horrid expression," and called his men to arms. The smuggler then fired a volley with muskets, wounding one of the Eagle's crew. Presently they also fired their swivel-guns, "on which Captain Whitehead thought it prudent to get away from her as fast as he could, the greatest part of his people having quitted the deck."

The smuggler continued to fire at the retreating cruiser, and chased the Eagle for a whole hour after. The cutter turned out to be that which Mitchell had encountered on April 24, 1777, and her skipper was our friend "Smoker" again. This smuggling craft was described as a stout cutter of 130 tons, and a crew of upwards of forty men. She carried fourteen carriage guns, four three-pounders, as well as a great number of swivels. "Smoker's" real name was David Browning, and he was recognised by the Eagle's crew from his voice, which was familiar to several of them. During that affray the Revenue cruiser received about twenty shot in her sails, about a dozen in her boat, and half as many in her fore-and main-mast. She also had her mizzen halyards shot away. From these details it would seem that she was dandy-rigged, that is to say, she had a mizzen or jigger in addition to her cutter rig, and on this jigger would be set a small lugsail as was the old custom.

Following on Mitchell's meeting with the Kent, we have a record belonging to July of that same year—1777. This time a different result was to come about. For instead of acting single-handed, the sloops Prince of Wales and the Royal George—both being employed by the Scottish Excise Board, aided by H.M.S. Pelican and Arethusa—four of them—at last managed to capture this schooner. She was found to be armed with sixteen four-pounders and twenty swivel-guns, and also had a large stock of gunpowder, blunderbusses, and muskets. "Stoney" was taken out of her, and he was said to be an outlaw whose real name was George Fagg. The guns and ammunition were taken ashore and put in the King's warehouse at Hull, and the crew of thirty-nine were placed on board the Arethusa. Among these prisoners were those who had murdered a dragoon the previous year, while the latter was assisting a Custom officer at Whitby. The arrest of these men was all the more interesting for a reward of L100 for their capture had been long outstanding.

The capture of the Kent had been effected as follows: the two Excise cruisers were off St. Abb's Head on July 8, and hearing that the Kent had been seen off Flamborough Head they sailed south, and off Filey fell in with her. On being hailed, the smuggler beat to quarters, shouting to the cruisers. "Fire, you ——, and be —— to you." The battle at once commenced and continued smartly for an hour, when the Pelican came up to give assistance to the two cruisers. The Kent, big as she was, now used sweeps—it was reminiscent of the days of Elizabethan galleasses—and drew away. However the Pelican (a frigate) overhauled her, and the Arethusa which had also come up gave valuable aid as well. The two naval captains allowed the cruisers to seize the Kent, and to take her into Hull, but the prisoners were put on board the Arethusa as stated. The Kent's master and four of the men had been killed. It should be added that the day before this incident the Pelican had also chased the Kent out of Bridlington Bay, so the smuggler must have come further north in the meanwhile, thus meeting the two Scottish cruisers bound south. The hatches of the Kent were found to be unbattened, and her cargo in great disorder. The latter consisted of 1974 half-ankers, and a large amount of tea packed in oilskin-bags to the number of 554. This schooner had been built at that other famous home of smugglers, Folkestone. She was specially rigged for fast sailing, her mainmast being 77 feet long, and her main-boom 57 feet. It was found that her sails were much damaged by shot. Her mainmast was shot through in two places, and her main-boom rendered quite unserviceable. Ship and tackle were appraised at L1405, 16s., so with the addition of her cargo she represented a fair prize.

But "Smoker" was still at large even though "Stoney" was a prisoner. It was in April of 1777, when Captain Mitchell had fallen in with him off Robin Hood's Bay. A month later the Collector of Hull wrote up to the Board to say that a large lugger had been seen off Whitby, and well armed. She was described as "greatly an overmatch" for any of the Revenue cruisers, "or even for a joint attack of two of them": and that as long as she and the armed cutter commanded by Browning, alias "Smoker" continued so daringly to "insult" the coasts, there was little prospect of success. For six months past the Revenue cruisers had not been able to make any seizures, because these smuggling craft not only brought over vast quantities themselves, but protected the smaller ones from the attempts of the Revenue cruisers. A year later, and we find that Mitchell was every bit as slack as before. This is made quite clear from a letter which the Collector of Hull was compelled on November 12 (1778) to write. In this epistle he informs Mitchell that either he or his mate, one of them, must remain on board the Swallow at night, when lying in the Humber. For it appeared that two days earlier both were ashore. The mariner who had the midnight watch on board the cruiser saw a vessel, supposed to be a privateer, come right up the Humber into Hull Roads, sail around the naval tender there lying, then sail round the Swallow, and finally down the river again. Although there were twelve or fourteen men on the supposed privateer's deck, yet the Swallow's watchman did not even hail her, Mitchell and his mate being ashore all the while.

Such incidents as the above show that there undoubtedly was cause for the complaints of the Customs Board that the commanders of their cruisers were not doing all that might have been done towards suppressing the evil at hand. On the other hand, it was equally true that the delinquents with whom these commanders had to contest were of a particularly virulent and villainous type. Thus, between the negligence of the one side, and the enterprise of the other, his Majesty's revenue had to suffer very considerably. No better instance of the potency of this lawlessness could be afforded than by an event which happened in the summer of 1777. Everyone knows, of course, that those were the days when men had to be impressed into the service of the Navy, so that, when any of these hardy smugglers were captured, they were valuable acquisitions to the Service, and far more useful than many of the disease-stricken crews which so often had to be shipped to make up a man-of-war's complement. In the year we are speaking of a number of smugglers who had been captured on the North Sea were put on board H.M. tender Lively by Captain O'Hara of the Impress service, the intention being to convey these men to one of his Majesty's ships at the Nore. The tender got under way and was proceeding to her destination when the smuggler-prisoners mutinied, overpowered the Lively's crew, and carried the Lively into Flushing.

And similar examples of the impudence and violence of other North Sea smugglers could also be quoted. On the 7th of May 1778, Captain Bland, of the Mermaid Revenue cruiser, was off Huntcliff Fort, when he sighted a smuggling shallop.[9] Bland promptly bore down, and as he approached hailed her. But the shallop answered by firing a broadside. The Revenue cruiser now prepared to engage her, whereupon the shallop hoisted an English pennant, which was evidently a signal for assistance, for a large armed cutter promptly appeared and came to the shallop's rescue. Seeing that he was overmatched, Bland, therefore, sheered off. During the same month Captain Whitehead, of the Eagle, to whom we have already referred, reported that he seldom went for a cruise without being fired on, and he mentioned that sometimes these smuggling vessels carried musket-proof breast-works—a kind of early armour-plating, in fact.

The principal rendezvous of the smuggling craft in the North Sea was Robin Hood's Bay. Whenever the cruisers used to approach that bight the smugglers would sail out, fire upon them, and drive them along the coast. Before firing, the smugglers always hoisted English colours, and on one occasion a smuggling craft had the temerity to run alongside a Revenue cruiser, hail her, and in a derisive manner ordered the commander to send his boat aboard. We spoke just now of the superior sailing qualities which these smuggling craft frequently possessed over the Revenue cruisers, and on one occasion, in the North Sea, the master of a smuggling shallop, when being pursued, impudently lowered his lugsail—that would be his mizzen—to show that the cruiser could not come up and catch him. And lest that dishonourable incident previously mentioned, of a cruiser being ordered out of Saltburn Bay, may be thought a mere isolated event, let us hasten to add that the cruiser Mermaid was lying at anchor off Dunstanburgh Castle, on the Northumbrian coast, when Edward Browning came alongside her in an armed shallop named the Porcupine, belonging to Sandwich. He insisted on the Mermaid getting up her anchor and leaving that region: "otherwise he would do him a mischief." Indeed, were these facts not shown unmistakably by actual eye-witnesses to be the very reverse of fiction, one might indeed feel doubtful as to accepting them. But it is unlikely that cruiser-commanders would go out of their way to record incidents which injured their reputation, had these events never in reality occurred.

Some idea of the degree of success which smuggling vessels attained during this eighteenth century may be gathered from the achievements of a cutter which was at work on the south coast. Her name was the Swift, and she belonged to Bridport. She was of 100 tons burthen, carried no fewer than 16 guns and a crew of fifty. During the year 1783 she had made several runs near Torbay, and on each occasion had been able to land about 2000 casks of spirits, as well as 4 or 5 tons of tea. Afterwards the whole of this valuable cargo had been run inland by about 200 men, in defiance of the Revenue officers. Then there was the Ranger, a bigger craft still, of 250 tons. She carried an enormous crew for her size—nearly 100—and mounted 22 guns. She had been built at Cawsand, that village which in smuggling days attained so much notoriety, and stands at the end of a delightful bay facing the western end of Plymouth Breakwater. This vessel had a successful time in landing cargoes to the east of Torbay without paying the lawful duty. And there were many fishing-boats of from 18 to 25 tons, belonging to Torbay, which were at this time accustomed to run across the Channel, load up with the usual contraband, and then hover about outside the limits of the land. When they were convinced that the coast was clear of any cruisers they would run into the bay and land, sink or raft their cargoes, according to circumstances.

And now, leaving for the present actual skirmishes and chases in which the Revenue cruisers were concerned, let us look a little more closely into their organisation. From the report by the Commissioners appointed to examine the Public Accounts of the kingdom, and issued in 1787, it is shown that the Custom House cruisers were of two classes: (1) Those which were owned by the Board, and (2) Those which were hired by contract. And as to this latter class there was a further subdivision into two other classes; for one section of these vessels was furnished by the Crown, no charge being made for the hire. But her outfit, her future repairs, in addition to the wages and victualling of the crew, and all other expenses, were paid out of the produce of the seizures which these cruisers effected. After this, if anything remained beyond these deductions, the residue was to be divided between the Crown and the contractor. Very often, of course, when a fine haul was made of a L1000 worth of cargo, there was quite a nice little sum for both parties to the contract, and a few other, smaller, seizures during the year would make the business quite a profitable undertaking. But when the amount of seizures was not sufficient to defray the expenses the deficiency was supplied by the contractor and Crown in equal proportions. That, then, was one of these two subdivisions of contracted cruisers.

But in the second of these the contractor provided the vessel, for which he was paid the sum of 4s. 6d. a ton per lunar month. It may seem at first that this was poor remuneration, especially when one recollects that to-day, when the Government hires liners from the great steamship companies, the rate of payment is L1 per ton per month. In the case of even a 10,000-ton liner there is thus a very good payment for about thirty days. But in the case of a cutter of 100 tons or less, in the eighteenth century, 4s. 6d. per ton may seem very small in comparison. However, we must bear in mind that although for this money the contractor was to find the outfit of the vessel, and be responsible for all repairs needed, yet the aforesaid contractor might make a good deal more in a lucky year. It was done on the following basis. From the produce of the seizures made by this subdivision of cruisers all remaining charges additional to those mentioned above were paid, but the surplus was divided between the Crown and contractor. Thus the latter stood to gain a large sum if only a moderate number of seizures had been made, and there was, by this method, every incentive for the hired cruisers to use their best endeavours to effect captures. Still, if there was a deficiency instead of a surplus, this was also shared by both contracting parties.

In the year 1784 there were, reckoning all classes, 44 cruisers employed, and 1041 men as crews. Of these cruisers the Commander, the Chief Mate and Second Mate, and, in certain vessels, the Deputed Mariners, were all officers of the Customs. In the case of the first class of cruisers—those which were on the establishment—these officers were appointed by the Board pursuant to warrants from the Treasury. In the case of the second—those which were hired by contract—the officers were appointed by the Customs Board. The captain of the cruiser was paid L50 per annum, the chief mate either L35 or L30, and the crew were each paid L15. But, as we shall see from a later page, the rate of pay was considerably increased some years afterwards. The victualling allowance was at the rate of 9d. per diem for each man on board, and an allowance of 1s. each was made by the lunar month for fire and candle. This last-mentioned allowance was also modified in the course of time. Some idea as to the seriousness, from a financial point of view, of this cruiser fleet may be gathered from the statement that these 44 vessels cost the Government for a year's service the sum of L44,355, 16s. 1d.

The largest of these forty-four cruisers was the Repulse, 210 tons. She carried 33 men and was stationed at Colchester. Her cost for this year (1784) was L1552, 16s. 8d. She was not one of the hired vessels, but on the establishment. Next in size came the Tartar, 194 tons, with 31 men, her station being Dover. She was on the establishment, and her annual cost was L1304, 6s. 2-1/2d. Of the same tonnage was the Speedwell, which cruised between Weymouth and Cowes. There was also the Rose, 190 tons, with 30 men, stationed at Southampton, being on the establishment likewise. Next to her in size came the Diligence, 175 tons, with 32 men. She cruised between Poole and Weymouth. She was one of the hired vessels, and was in 1784 removed from Weymouth to have her headquarters at Cowes. The smallest of all the cruisers at this time was the Nimble, 41 tons and a crew of 30. She also was a hired craft. Her station was at Deal, and her annual cost was L1064, 9s. 9d. for the year mentioned.

But though there was less expenditure needed at the outset, these contract ships were not altogether satisfactory: or rather it was the method than the cruisers themselves. For if we have any knowledge at all of human nature, and especially of the dishonest character which so frequently manifested itself in the eighteenth century, we can readily imagine that the contractor, unless he was a scrupulously honourable man, would naturally succumb to the temptation to economise too strictly regarding the keeping the ship in the best condition of repair; or he might gain a little by giving her not quite a sufficiently numerous crew, thus saving both wages and victuals. For the Crown allowed a certain number of men, and paid for the complement which they were supposed to carry.

Therefore, since this arrangement was marked by serious drawbacks, the contract system was discontinued, and at the beginning of 1788 fifteen contracts were ended, and five other cruisers' contracts were not renewed when they expired in that year. All the cruisers in the employment of the Customs Service were now placed on the establishment, and the practice of paying the charges and expenses out of the King's share of the condemned goods was rescinded. In the year 1797 the number of Customs cruisers was 37, the commanders being appointed by the Treasury; and it may be not without interest to mention the names, tonnage, and guns of some of those which were on the books for that year. There was the Vigilant, which was described as a yacht, 53 tons, 6 guns, and 13 men; the Vigilant cutter, 82 tons, 8 guns. During the winter season she cruised with ten additional hands off the coasts of Essex, Kent, and Sussex. There was another, the Diligence, given as of 152 tons; the Swallow, 153 tons and 10 guns; the Lively, 113 tons, 12 guns, and 30 men. The Swift, 52 tons and 8 men, used to cruise between the Downs and the Long Sand (to the North of the North Foreland at the mouth of the Thames). Some of the old names under the former dual system are seen to be commemorated in the Nimble (41 tons, 2 guns, 15 men). Her station was Deal, and she used to cruise between the Forelands. The Tartar of this period was of 100 tons, had 10 guns and 23 men. But the Greyhound, probably one of the fastest cruisers, was of 200 tons, mounted 16 guns, and carried 43 men. Her cruising ground was between Beachy Head and the Start, and her station at Weymouth. A much smaller craft was the cruiser Busy (46 tons and 11 men). Her cruising was in a much smaller area—around Plymouth Sound and Cawsand Bay.

Owing to the fact that commanders had been wont too often to run into port for real or imaginary repairs, the Commissioners decided that in future, when a cruiser put in, she was to inform the Collector and Controller of that port by means of her commander, and both to give his reasons for coming in, and to estimate the length of time he was likely to remain in port, before his being able to sail again.

With regard to the prize-money which these cruisers were able to make; before the year 1790 there had been a diversity of practice in the method of sharing. In allotting rewards to officers for seizing vessels which afterwards had been taken into the Revenue Service, it had formerly been the practice to deduct the whole of the charges out of the officers' moiety of the appraised value. But from April 14, 1790, "for the encouragement of the seizing officers," the charge was deducted from the total appraised value, and the seizing officers were to be paid a moiety of the net produce, if any. It had also been the custom to allow the commanders of Admiralty cruisers permission to use seized vessels as tenders. But from May 6, 1790, this practice was also discontinued by the Board, who ordered that in case any such vessels were so employed at the different ports, the commanders were to deliver them up "with their tackle, apparel, and furniture," to the Collector and Controller of Customs.

We referred some time back to the fact that these Revenue cruisers at times were mobilised for war, and also that to them were granted Letters of Marque. In this connection there is to be noted an interesting warrant, under the King's sign-manual, dated June 11, 1795, which reads:—

"Whereas the Commissioners of our Treasury have represented unto us that the cutters in the service of our Revenues of Customs have captured several Ships and Vessels belonging to the enemy, and have recommended it unto us to issue our warrant to grant the proceeds of the Prizes that have been or shall be taken by the cutters in the service of our Customs, granted to the cutters capturing such prizes respectively, and the expenses of the proceedings, in regard thereto, among officers and crews of the vessels in the search of our Customs, who made the said captures, together with the head-money, in all cases where head-money is or may be due by law....

"Our will and pleasure is that the proceeds of all such Prizes as have been or shall be taken from the enemy in the course of the present war, by the cutters in the service of our Revenue of Customs, after deducting all expenses of the Letters of Marque granted to the cutters capturing such Prizes respectively, and the expenses of the proceedings in regard thereto, together with the head-money in all cases where head-money is or may be due by law, shall be distributed in the manner following; that is to say":—

The Commander 14/32 ds. Mate 7/32 ds.

Deputed Mariner, or deputed } 3/32 ds., exclusive of their mariners if more than one } shares as Mariners.

Other Mariners 8/32 ds.

If there is no deputed Mariner, The Commander 1/2 The Mate 1/4 Mariners 1/4

It may be mentioned, in passing, that a "deputed" mariner was one who held a deputation from the Customs Board. Another warrant, similar to the above, and to the same effect, was issued on July 4, of that memorable year 1805. In July of 1797, the Customs Commissioners drew attention to the third article of the "Instructions for the Commanders and Mates of the Cruisers employed in the service of this Revenue," reminding them that the commanders, mariners, and mates were in no case to be allowed to participate in the officers' shares of seizures made by the crews of the cruisers unless the first-mentioned had been actually present at the time when the seizure was made, or could afford satisfactory proof that they were necessarily absent on some duty. Therefore the Board now directed that, whenever the crews of the cruisers made a seizure, a list of the officers who were not actually on board or in the boats of the cruisers at that time was to be transmitted to the Board with the account of the seizure. Then follows the other instruction which has already been alluded to. In order that the station of the aforesaid cruisers may never be left unguarded by their coming into port for provisions, or to be cleaned and refitted, or for any other necessary purpose, the commanders were instructed to arrange with each other "that nothing but absolute necessity shall occasion their being in Port at one and the same time."

It will be recognised that the object of this was, if possible, to keep the officers of the cruisers on board their vessels, and at sea, instead of ever running into port. For it would seem that by more than one of these gentlemen the work of cruising on behalf of the Revenue Service was regarded too much in the light of a pleasant, extended yachting trip, with an occasional chase and seizure of a smuggling craft to break the monotony of their existence and to swell their purses. But such a pleasant life was not that contemplated by the Customs authorities.

FOOTNOTES:

[9] "Shallop, a sort of large boat with two masts, and usually rigged like a schooner."—MOORE.



CHAPTER VII

CUTTERS AND SLOOPS

We have spoken during the preceding chapters of the revenue cruisers sometimes as cutters and sometimes as sloops. For the reason that will quickly become apparent let us now endeavour to straighten out any confusion which may have arisen in the mind of the reader.

Practically, sloops and cutters of these days were one and the same, with very minor differences. In a valuable French nautical volume published in 1783, after explaining that the cutter came to the French from England, the definition goes on to state that in her rigging and sail-plan she resembles a sloop, except that the former has her mast longer, and inclined further aft, and has greater sail-area. The cutter also has but little freeboard, and in order to carry her large sail-area she draws more water. This authority then goes on to mention that such craft as these cutters are employed by the smugglers of the English Channel, "and being able to carry a good deal of sail they can easily escape from the guardships. The English Government, for the same reason, maintain a good many of these craft so as to stop these smugglers." Our English authority, Falconer, described the cutter as having one mast and a straight-running bowsprit that could be run inboard on deck. But for this, and the fact that the cutter's sail-area was larger, these craft were much the same as sloops. Falconer also states that a sloop differs from a cutter by having a fixed steeving bowsprit and a jib-stay. Moore, who was also a contemporary, makes similar definitions in almost identical language. The real difference, then, was that the cutter could run her bowsprit inboard, but the sloop could not.

Now, in the year 1785, a very interesting matter occupied the attention of the Board of Customs in this connection. It appeared that in an important trial concerning a certain vessel the defence was set up that this vessel had changed her character by so altering her "boltsprit" that it became fixed and could not be run inboard. It was found that all which her owners had done was to pass an iron bolt through the bits and heel of the bowsprit, clenching it. The defendant insisted that thus he had rendered it a complete standing "boltsprit," and not a running one: and that, therefore, by such alteration, his vessel became transformed from a cutter to a sloop. And, according to the definitions which we have just brought forward, one would have thought that this was a good defence. However, the Crown thought otherwise, and contended that the alteration was a mere evasion of the Act in question, and that the vessel remained a cutter because such fastening could be removed at pleasure, and then the "boltsprit" would run in and out as it did before the alteration. The jury also took this view, and the cutter, which thought herself a sloop, was condemned. The Revenue officers and commanders of Admiralty sloops were accordingly warned to make a note of this. For a number of years the matter was evidently left at that. But in 1822 the Attorney and Solicitor-General, after a difficult case had been raised, gave the legal distinction as follows, the matter having arisen in connection with the licensing of a craft: "A cutter may have a standing bowsprit of a certain length without a licence, but the distinction between a sloop and a cutter should not be looked for in the rigging but in the build and form of the hull, and, therefore, when a carvel-built vessel corresponds as to her hull with the usual form of a sloop, she will not merely, by having a running bowsprit, become a cutter within the meaning of the Act of the 24 Geo. III. cap. 47, and consequently will not be liable to forfeiture for want of a licence." From this it will be seen that whereas Falconer and other nautical authorities relied on the fixing of the bowsprit to determine the difference, the legal authorities relied on a difference in hull. The point is one of great interest, and I believe the matter has never been raised before by any modern nautical writer.[10]

As to what a Revenue cutter looked like, the illustrations which have been here reproduced will afford the reader a very good idea. And these can be supplemented by the following description which Marryat gives in The Three Cutters. It should be mentioned that the period of which he is speaking is that which we have been contemplating, the end of the eighteenth century.

"She is a cutter," he writes, "and you may know that she belongs to the Preventive Service by the number of gigs and galleys which she has hoisted up all round her. She looks like a vessel that was about to sail with a cargo of boats: two on deck, one astern, one on each side of her. You observe that she is painted black, and all her boats are white. She is not such an elegant vessel as the yacht, and she is much more lumbered up.... Let us go on board. You observe the guns are iron, and painted black, and her bulwarks are painted red; it is not a very becoming colour, but then it lasts a long while, and the dockyard is not very generous on the score of paint—or lieutenants of the navy troubled with much spare cash. She has plenty of men, and fine men they are; all dressed in red flannel shirts and blue trousers; some of them have not taken off their canvas or tarpaulin petticoats, which are very useful to them, as they are in the boats night and day, and in all weathers. But we will at once go down into the cabin, where we shall find the lieutenant who commands her, a master's mate, and a midshipman. They have each their tumbler before them, and are drinking gin-toddy, hot, with sugar—capital gin, too, 'bove proof; it is from that small anker standing under the table. It was one that they forgot to return to the Custom House when they made their last seizure."

In 1786, by the 26 Geo. III. c. 40, section 27, it was made lawful for any commander of any of his Majesty's vessels of war, or any officer by them authorised, to make seizures without a deputation or commission from the Commissioners of the Customs. Those were curious times when we recollect that apart altogether from the men-of-war of varying kinds, there were large numbers of armed smuggler-cutters, Custom-House cutters with letters of marque, privateers, and even Algerine corsairs from the Mediterranean, in the English Channel. It is to-day only a hundred and fifty years ago since one of these Algerine craft was wrecked near Penzance in the early autumn.

We mentioned just now the Act of George III. which required craft to be licensed. This was another of the various means employed for the prevention of smuggling, and since the passing of this Act those luggers and cutters which engaged in the running of goods endeavoured to evade the Act's penalties by possessing themselves of foreign colours and foreign ship's papers. Now, as a fact, by far the greater part of such craft belonged to Deal, Folkestone, and other south-coast ports of England. Their masters were also from the same localities, and very few of them could speak Dutch or French. But for the purpose of evading the English law they got themselves made burghers of Ostend, and notwithstanding that their crews were for the most part English they designated their craft as foreign.

During the year 1785 it happened that two of these pseudo-foreign smuggling craft were chased by an English frigate. Owing to the fact that the frigate had no pilot on board, one of these vessels escaped, but the other, after a chase lasting five hours, realised that she would soon be overhauled. Her master, therefore, threw overboard his cargo as the frigate fast approached, and in company with a number of his crew took to his large boat. The lugger, after no fewer than twenty shots had been fired at her, hove-to. On taking possession of the lugger and examining her papers it appeared that her master's name was the very English-sounding Thomas March, and yet he described himself as a burgher of Ostend, the vessel being owned by a merchant. The master's excuse was that he was a pilot-boat cruising with a number of pilots on board, and for this reason it was decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and not detain him. But the frigate's captain had noticed that before the lugger had hove-to during the evening a part of the cargo had been thrown overboard. The following morning, therefore, he proceeded on board a Revenue cutter, "went into the track where the cargo was thrown overboard," and was able to find just what he had expected, for he located and drew out of the sea no fewer than 700 half-ankers of foreign spirits.

This precedent opened up an important question; for if a neutral vessel, or indeed any craft similarly circumstanced as the above, were to anchor off the English coast it was hardly possible to detect her in running goods, as it seldom took more than an hour to land a whole cargo, owing to the great assistance which was given from the people on the shore. For, as it was officially pointed out, as soon as one of these vessels was sighted 300 people could usually be relied on with 200 or more carts and waggons to render the necessary service. Therefore the commanders of the cutters sought legal advice as to how they should act on meeting with luggers and cutters without Admiralty passes on the English coast but more or less protected with foreign papers and sailing under foreign colours.

The matter was referred to the Attorney-General, who gave his opinion that vessels were forfeitable only in the event of their being the property in whole or part of his Majesty's subjects; but where the crew of such a vessel appeared all to be English subjects, or at any rate the greatest part of them, it was his opinion that there was a sufficient reason for seizing the vessel if she was near the English coast. She was then to be brought into port so that, if she could, she might prove that she belonged wholly to foreigners. "A British subject," continued the opinion, "being made a burgher of Ostend does not thereby cease to be a subject. Vessels hovering within four leagues of the British coast, with an illicit cargo, as that of this vessel appears to have been, are forfeited whether they are the property of Britons or foreigners."

It was not once but on various occasions that the Customs Board expressed themselves as dissatisfied with the amount of success which their cruisers had attained in respect of the work allotted to them. At the beginning of the year 1782 they referred to "the enormous increase of smuggling, the outrages with which it is carried on, the mischiefs it occasions to the country, the discouragement it creates to all fair traders, and the prodigious loss the Revenue sustains by it." The Board went on to state that "diligent and vigorous exertions by the cruising vessels employed in the service of the Customs certainly might very much lessen it." The Commissioners expressed themselves as dissatisfied with the lack of success, and ordered that the officers of the Waterguard were especially to see that the commander and mate of every Revenue vessel or boat bringing in a seizure were actually on board when such seizure was made.

A few days later—the date is January 16, 1788—the Board, having received information that great quantities of tobacco and spirits were about to be smuggled in from France, Flanders, Guernsey, and Alderney, warned the Preventive officers of the various ports, and directed the commanders of the Admiralty cruisers, which happened to be stationed near the ports, to be especially vigilant to intercept "these attempts of the illicit dealers, so that the Revenue may not be defrauded in those articles to the alarming degree it has hitherto been." And the officers were bluntly told that if they were to exert themselves in guarding the coast night and day such fraudulent practices could not be carried on in the shameful manner they now were. "And though the Riding officers may not always have it in their power to seize the goods from a considerable body of smugglers, yet if such officers were to keep a watchful eye on their motions, and were to communicate early information thereof to the Waterguard, they may thereby render essential service to the Revenue."

When the soldiers assisted the Revenue officers in making seizures on shore it was frequently the case that the military had difficulty in recovering from the Revenue men that share of prize-money which was their due. The Collector of each port was therefore directed in future to retain in his hands out of the officers' shares of seizures so much as appeared to be due to the soldiers, and the names of the latter who had rendered assistance were to be inserted in the account of the seizures sent up to headquarters. But the jealousy of the military's aid somehow never altogether died out, and ten years after the above order there was still delay in rendering to the army men their due share of the seizures.

The commanders of the Revenue cruisers were told to keep an especial watch on the homeward-bound East Indiamen to prevent "the illicit practices that are continually attempted to be committed from them." Therefore these cruisers were not only to watch these big ships through the limits of their own station, but also to keep as near them when under sail as possible, provided this can be done with safety and propriety. But when the East Indiamen come to anchor the cruisers are also to anchor near them, and compel all boats and vessels coming from them to bring-to in order to be examined. They are "then to proceed to rummage such boats and vessels. And if any goods are found therein they are to be seized, together with the boats in which they are found." The importance of this very plain instruction is explained by the further statement that "some of the commanders of the cruisers in the service of the Revenue endeavour to shun these ships, and thereby avoid attending them through their station."

On Christmas Eve of 1784 the Customs Commissioners sent word to all the ports saying that they suspected that there were a good many vessels and boats employed in smuggling which were thus liable to forfeiture. Therefore, within forty-eight hours from the receipt of this information sent by letter, a close and vigorous search was to be made by the most active and trusty officers at each port into every bay, river, creek, and inlet within the district of each port, as well as all along the coast, so as to discover and seize such illegal vessels and boats. And if there were any boats quartered within the neighbourhood of each port, timely notice of the day and hour of the intended search was to be sent by the Collector and Controller in confidence to the commanding officer only, that he might hold his soldiers in readiness. Yet, again the Board exhorted the Revenue officers "to exert yourselves to the utmost of your power ... and as it is very probable that the places where such boats and vessels are kept may be known to the officers who have long resided at your port, you are to acquaint such officers that if they value their characters or employments, or have any regard to the solemn oath they took at their admission, we expect they will, on this occasion, give the fullest and most ample information of all such places, and will cheerfully afford every other aid and assistance in their power, to the end that the said vessels and boats may be discovered and seized.