LIBRARY
OK THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.
RECEIVED BY EXCHANGE
Class
THE NAVY OF THE
AMERICAN REVOLUTION
ulltr Umurrsttg of
FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER
The Navy of the
American Revolution
Its Administration, its Policy and
its Achievements
A DISSERTATION
Submitted to the Faculty of the
Graduate School of Arts and Literature
In Candidacy for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Department of History
By
CHARLES OSCAR PAULLIN
CHICAGO
1906
-
A i v
COPYRIGHT, 1906
BY
THE BURROWS BROTHERS COMPANY
PREFACE
Several narrative accounts of the navy
of the American Revolution have been
written. These usually form the intro
ductory part of a history of the American
Navy since 1789. The earliest of these ac
counts is that of Thomas Clark, published
in 1814, and probably the best that of James
Fenimore Cooper, first printed in 1839. Lat
er narratives are rather more popular than
Cooper s. Many sources of information,
which were not accessible to the earlier
writers, and were not much used by the
later, were drawn upon in the writing of
this book. Moreover, the information that
is here presented is of a somewhat different
sort from that of previous writers; and the
method of treatment is new.
This book is written from the point of
view of the naval administrators; hitherto,
historians have written from the point of
view of the naval officers. Their narratives
treat almost exclusively of the doings at
sea, the movements of armed vessels, and
the details of sea fights. They have the
advantage of dealing primarily with pictur
esque, and sometimes dramatic, events.
Their accounts, however, lack unity, since
6 Preface
they consist of a series of detached incidents.
In the first place an attempt has been here
made to restore the naval administrative
machinery of the Revolution. The center
of this narrative is the origin, organization,
and work of naval committees, secretaries
of marine, navy boards, and naval agents.
Next, inasmuch as the men who served as
naval executives administered the laws re
lating to naval affairs, and indeed often pre
pared these laws before their adoption by
the legislative authorities, it was thought
best to give a fairly complete resume of the
naval legislation of the Revolution. Those
laws with which the naval administrators
were chiefly concerned have received most
attention. The legislation with reference
to prize courts and privateering has been
treated more briefly. As the privateers do
not, properly speaking, form a part of the
Revolutionary navy, no attempt to write
their history has been made. In order that
the subject may be seen in its true relations,
some statistics and other interesting facts
concerning this industry have, however,
been introduced. An account of the State
Navies is now given for the first time.
Since naval committees, navy boards, and
naval agents issued written orders to the
naval commanders prescribing the time
place, and manner of their cruises, it has
seemed logical and proper to consider the
naval policy of the administrators, and the
Preface 7
movements of the armed vessels. So de
tailed an account of naval movements, as
would be given by those writers who pro
ceed from the point of view of the doings of
the naval officers, would obviously not be
expected in this book. My plan has been to
describe the various classes of naval move
ments, to present the sum total of their re
sults, and to give briefly the details of a few
typical cruises and sea fights. The cruises
of the American vessels were much alike;
they were minor affairs, and many of them
scarcely merit individual treatment.
It is evident that one who proposes to
write the history of the navy of the American
Revolution from the point of view which I
have described, will not only avoid exces
sive detail in respect to individual naval
achievements, but will be particularly deter
mined not to allow their brilliancy or their
dramatic quality to fix the amount of detail
with which each shall be narrated. For
instance, several historians have been in
clined to dwell at some length upon the
brilliant and picturesque achievements of
John Paul Jones. Sometimes they have de
voted more than one-third of their narratives
of the Continental navy to. this hero, un
doubtedly the greatest naval officer of the
Revolution. As a result, the pictures
which they have presented are somew r hat
distorted, and many brave sea officers have
had scant justice done their gallant services.
8 Preface
An attempt is made in this book to present
a better balanced narrative, and to make a
j uster estimate of the work of the Revolu
tionary navy. The scope and method of
treatment adopted by the author has com
pelled a certain economy of phrase, precision
of statement, and sharpness of outline.
I am very grateful to the many persons
who have assisted me. Space does not per
mit me to thank each of them by name. I
am under special obligations to the librari
ans and officials of the Library of Congress,
the Library of the Department of the Navy,
the Bureau of Rolls and Library of the De
partment of State, the State Library of Mas
sachusetts, the Office of the Massachusetts
State Archives, the Boston Public Library,
the Boston Athenaeum, the Library of Har
vard University, the State Library of Rhode
Island, the Rhode Island Historical Society,
the State Library of Connecticut, the Con
necticut Historical Society, the Pennsyl
vania Historical Society, the State Library
of Virginia, the Virginia Historical Society,
the Office of the Secretary of State of South
Carolina, the Charleston (South Carolina)
Public Library, and the Library of the Uni
versity of Chicago. Far more than to any
one else, I am indebted to Professor John
Franklin Jameson, Director of the Depart
ment of Historical Research in the Carnegie
Institution of Washington. I have had the
advantage of Professor Jameson s extensive
Preface 9
knowledge of bibliography., his fruitful sug
gestions as to treatment, and his painstak
ing care in reading and criticising my manu
script. Parts of the narrative, somewhat
popularized, have appeared in the Proceed
ings of the United States Naval Institute
and the Sewanee Review.
C. 0. P.
Washington, D. C.
March 1, 1906.
CONTENTS
THE CONTINENTAL NAVY
CHAPTER I. The Naval Committee.
The need in 1775 for an army and for a
navy 31
Agitation for a navy outside of Con
gress 32
Agitation for a navy in Congress 34
The first naval legislation 35
Appointment of the Naval Committee 38
First work of the Naval Committee. ... 38
Reconstitution of the Naval Committee 38
John Adams s description of the Naval
Committee 39
The organization and decline of the Na
val Committee 40
Growth in Congress of naval sentiment 41
Naval legislation under the Naval Com
mittee 42
The procuring of a fleet 51
The appointment of officers 52
The first naval expedition 55
Resume of the work of the Naval Com
mittee . 60
12 Contents
CHAPTER II. The Fleets of Washington and
Arnold.
Fitting out of the " Hannah " 61
Fitting out of Washington s "Boston
fleet 7 62
Washington s opinion of his command
ers 64
Services rendered by Washington s
"Boston fleet" 65
Broughton and Selman s raid on Prince
Edward island 66
The disposition of Washington s prizes 67
The delay in bringing them to trial .... 68
History of the fleet after the evacuation
of Boston 69
Washington s " New York fleet " 70
Beginning of the fleet on lakes Cham-
plain and George 71
Its increase in the summer of 1776 72
The work of Benedict Arnold 73
The British fleet on the Lakes 76
The battle of Lake Champlain, October
11-13, 1776 77
Results of the naval campaign on the
Lakes 77
CHAPTER III. The Organization of the Ma
rine Committee.
The maritime interests of New England 79
Naval enterprise in Rhode Island 80
The naval situation in Congress, 1775-76 81
The Rhode Island instructions . , 81
Contents 13
The debate in Congress thereon 82
Postponement of action on instructions . 83
Favorable action by Congress, Decem
ber 11, 1775 85
Decision of Congress to build thirteen
frigates 85
Appointment of the Marine Committee 86
The Marine Committee absorbs the Na
val Committee 87
The organization and pay of the Ma
rine Committee 87
Its chairmen 88
Other valuable members 90
Naval agents for building the Continent
al frigates 90
Prize agents 93
Continental agents 95
Aid rendered the Marine Committee. . . 95
Navy Board at Philadelphia 96
Navy Board at Boston 97
Designations of the boards 99
The organization of the boards 100
The personnel of the boards 101
Salaries 102
Enumeration of the principal agents of
the Marine Committee 103
Minor agents 103
CHAPTER IV. The Work of the Navy Boards
and the Marine Committee.
Lack of system in the Naval Depart
ment of the Revolution 10 4
Examples 105
14 Contents
Work and duties of the navy boards. . 107
Men and materials needed in building a
ship 110
Provisions needed in fitting out a ship 112
Division of labor among the naval com
missioners 112
The heavy work of the Boston Board. . 113
Two-fold duties of the Marine Com
mittee 115
Administrative duties of the Marine
Committee 116
Naval uniform 117
Communications of the Marine Com
mittee 118
Reports of the Marine Committee 120
Naval legislation under the Marine Com
mittee 121
Naval increases 121
Naval appointments and promotions. . 123
Relative rank 125
Captures and the sharing of prizes 126
Privateers 127
Naval pay 128
Naval pensions 129
Courts-martial and courts of enquiry. . 131
Important naval trials 133
The case of Commodore Esek Hopkins 134
Provision for the fleet of Count D Est-
aing 139
The Marine Committee as a consular
bureau.. 139
CHAPTER V. The Conditions of the Conti
nental Naval Service.
The recent revolution in navies and nav
al conditions 141
Constancy of the principles of naval
strategy 143
Maritime conditions in America in 1775,
and in 1900 144
Difficulties in procuring seamen during
the Revolution 144
The privateers of the Revolution 147
State navies 152
The naval defence of America 153
Naval stations of the Americans 154
Naval stations of the British 155
Comparison of the British and Ameri
can navies 156
Weakness of the American navies 159
Diffusion of authority in naval admin
istration ". 160
CHAPTER VI. Movements of the Continen
tal Fleet under the Marine Committee.
Work of the fleet of a non-military
character 161
Classification of military operations . . . 162
Primary naval operations 163
Enumeration of secondary operations. 164
Defence of American commerce 164
Cooperation with the army 166
The striking of the enemy s lines of
communication.. 167
16 Contents
Commerce-destroying 169
The threatening and attacking of the
enemy s coasts 173
A naval plan of Robert Morris 174
The Marine Committee and its plans. . 176
Success and failure of the navy 177
The navy of the Revolution and of the
Spanish- American war 179
CHAPTER VII. The Board of Admiralty.
Defects of the Marine Committee 181
Criticism of the administration of Cong
ress 182
A new system of Executives 184
Criticism of the Naval Department by
Washington and Jay 184
Establishment of a Board of Admiralty,
October, 1779 187
Powers and duties of the Board of Ad
miralty 188
Salaries 189
Selection of commissioners of Admiralty 190
Francis Lewis and William Ellery 193
Congress and the Board of Admiralty . 194
Work of the Board of Admiralty 195
Decrease in naval machinery 195
Reports of the Board of Admiralty 196
Naval legislation under the Board of
Admiralty 197
The granting of naval commissions by
the states 201
The American navy and British models 202
Court of appeals for prize cases 203
Contents 17
The fleet under the Board of Admiralty 203
Embarrassments of the Board of Admi
ralty 204
Success and failure of the fleet 205
Discontinuance of the Board of Admi
ralty 208
Defects of the Board of Admiralty. ... 209
CHAPTER VIII. The Secretary of Marine
and the Agent of Marine.
The two factions during the Revolution 210
Supremacy of the "dispersive school". 211
The "concentrative school" in 1780. ... 212
Agitation for administrative reform.. . . 213
The success of the "concentrative
school" 214
Establishment of the office of Secretary
of Marine, February, 1781 216
Duties of the Secretary of Marine 216
Appointment of McDougall as Secre
tary of Marine 217
Failure to obtain a Secretary of Ma
rine 218
Robert Morris and the naval business. 218
Reorganization of the Naval Depart
ment 220
The Agent of Marine 223
Robert Morris as Agent of Marine 226
The organization of the Naval Depart
ment under Morris 227
Reports of the Agent of Marine 228
Naval legislation under the Agent of
Marine.. . 228
i8 Contents
The court-martialing of three seamen. . 230
Morris and the control of the fleet. . . . 234
The strength of the navy 235
Success and failure of the fleet 235
The cruise of the "Alliance," 1782-1783 236
The capture of the "Trumbull" by the
"Iris" 238
Attempts of Morris to increase the navy 239
Morris s views after the treaty of peace 244
Congress goes out of the naval business 245
Settling of the naval accounts 245
Disposing of the naval vessels 247
Retirement of the Agent of Marine. . . . 250
The end of the naval business 250
CHAPTER IX. Naval Duties of American
Representatives in Foreign Countries.
Mutual interests of the United States
and France 252
Duties of the Naval Office at Paris. ... 252
Personnel of the Naval Office 254
Communication with the Naval Office.. 255
Agents of the Naval Office 256
Appointment and recommendation of
officers 257
Privateers 260
The purchase and construction of ves
sels 261
The fitting out of vessels 265
The trial of prize cases 266
American prisoners 267
Breaches of neutrality 273
Contents 19
Miscellaneous duties 274
The Naval Office a channel of naval in
telligence 276
Naval plans of the Naval Office 276
Plan of the Committee of Foreign Af
fairs 278
CHAPTER X. Naval Duties of American
Representatives in Foreign Countries.
Continued.
Work of the Naval Office in 1777 281
Attempts to obtain the freedom of
French ports 282
The first prizes of the "Reprisal". ... 283
Difficulties between the English and the
French governments 284
The American Commissioners and the
French government 285
The cruise of the "Reprisal," February,
1777 286
The cruise of Conyngham in the "Sur
prise" 287
The cruise of the "Reprisal," "Lexing
ton," and "Dolphin" 287
Strained relations between the Commis
sioners and the French Court 289
The cruise of Conyngham in the "Re
venge" 290
Departure of the "Reprisal" and the
"Lexington" 291
Naval movements in 1778 292
The cruise of Captain Jones in the
"Ranger" 293
20 Contents
The Naval Office at Paris, 1779-1780 . . 294
John Paul Jones and Peter Landais . . 294
Plan for an expedition against England 295
The cruise of Captain Jones in the " Bon
Homme Richard" 295
Dispute between Jones and Landais... . 298
Their departure for America 300
The trials of Franklin 300
Work of the Naval Office, 1781-1783. 301
Thomas Barclay, consul and commis
sioner 302
John Paul Jones, agent for settling ac
counts 303
Naval stations in the West Indies 305
Duties and work of the commercial
agent at Martinique 305
Naval affairs on the Mississippi 307
Oliver Pollock and Galvez 307
Pollock and privateers 308
Pollock and the "Rebecca" 308
The " West Florida".. 310
THE STATE NAVIES
CHAPTER XL The Navy of Massachusetts.
The state craft 315
Naval administration in the states. ... 316
The problems of naval warfare 317
Military situation in Massachusetts,
1775 318
Action of the Provincial Congress 318
Contents 21
Massachusetts seaports ask for naval
aid 319
Act establishing privateering and prize
courts, November 1, 1775 320
Subsequent naval activities of the Gen
eral court, 1775 323
The fitting out of a fleet, 1776 324
Naval legislation, 1776 325
Remodelling of the law of November 1,
1775 327
Orders to naval officers a sample. . . . 328
Establishment of a Board of War, Oc
tober, 1776 329
Duties of the Board of War 330
A new naval establishment 333
Naval rules and regulations 334
Naval increases, 1777-1779 335
Launching of the "Protector" 336
Naval administration, 1779-1783 337
Naval increases, 1780-1783 338
Massachusetts privateers 339
The cruises of the state fleet 341
Cooperation of state vessels and priva
teers 344
The engagements of the state vessels
a sample 345
The Penobscot expedition 347
Losses of the state fleet 352
The end of the navy 353
CHAPTER XII. The Navy of Connecticut.
The Revolutionary government of Con
necticut. . . 354
22 Contents
Fitting out of the "Minerva" and the
"Spy" 355
Failure and discharge of the "Miner
va" 357
The "Defence" and the "Oliver Crom
well" 358
The building of three row-galleys, .... 360
Naval duties of the Governor and the
Council of Safety 360
Naval agents 361
New London and Nathaniel Shaw, jr. . 362
Bushnell s submarine boat 363
Privateers and prize courts 364
Naval pensions 366
Naval rules and regulations 366
A new naval establishment, 1779 366
Cruises of the navy 367
Losses of the navy 369
Warfare of whale-boats on Long Island
Sound 370
CHAPTER XIII. The Navy of Pennsyl
vania.
Objects of naval enterprise in Pennsyl
vania 373
The fleet of galleys 373
Rules and regulations 375
The "Montgomery" 375
Strength of the navy, August, 1776.. . 376
Naval uniforms and flag 377
Organs of naval administration 377
Commodores of the navy 378
Naval pay and the sharing of prizes. . 380
The Pennsylvania Navy Board 381
Work of the Navy Board 382
The navy in 1777 383
Services rendered by the fleet 383
The campaign on the Delaware, 1777-
1778 384
Trials for desertion 386
The Navy Board, 1777-1778 387
The fleet, April- July, 1778 388
Sale of the fleet and dismissal of the
Navy Board 388
The " General Greene/ 1779 390
Naval legislation 391
Privateers 392
Commissioners for the defence of the
Delaware 393
The "Hyder Ally" and " Washington" 394
The end of the navy 395
CHAPTER XIV. The Navy of Virginia.
Lord Dunmore s movements in Virgin
ia, 1775 396
Authorization of a navy, December,
1775 396
Work of the Committee of Safety 397
The " Potomac River fleet" 398
The Virginia Navy Board 398
Duties of the Navy Board 399
The location of shipyards 400
Naval manufactories and magazines. . . 401
James Maxwell, naval agent 401
Naval officers 401
Naval increases, 1776 402
24 Contents
Courts of Admiralty 403
Privateers 405
The vessels of the Virginia navy 405
Condition and services of the navy,
1775-1779 407
Losses of the navy, 1775-1779 408
The Board of War and the Naval Com
missioner 408
The Commissioner of the Navy 409
Military situation in the South in 1780 410
Naval legislation, 1780 411
The raid of Arnold and Phillips, 1781. 413
The navy at Yorktown ; 415
Dismissal of the officers, seamen, and
Commissioner 415
Virginia s defence of Chesapeake Bay,
1782-1783 415
The end of the navy 416
CHAPTER XV. The Navy of South Caro
lina.
First naval enterprises of South Caro
lina 418
Events of September, 1775 419
The "Defence" 420
Work of the Provincial Congress, No
vember, 1775 420
Work of the Committee of Safety, De
cember, 1775 421
The mission of Cochran 421
Naval legislation, February-March, 1776 422
The Constitution of 1776 423
Naval legislation, April, 1776 423
South Carolina Navy Board 424
Work and organization of the Navy
Board 424
Naval legislation, 1777-1778 427
Naval increases, 1776-1779 428
Privateers 429
Services rendered by the South Caro
lina navy, 1776-1779 429
The " Randolph" and the State fleet. . . 430
The campaign against Charleston, 1779-
1780 431
The navy in 1781 and 1783 434
Commodore Gillon and the " South Car
olina" 435
Gillon in Europe 436
The "South Carolina" in European
waters 436
The expedition against the Bahamas. . 438
The " South Carolina" at Philadelphia. 439
Capture of the " South Carolina" 439
Settlement of the Luxembourg claims. . 439
CHAPTER XVI. The Minor Navies of the
Southern States.
Organs of naval administration in
Maryland 441
Work of the Maryland Provincial Con
vention, 1776 441
Work of the Maryland Committee of
Safety, 1776 441
Maryland vessels 442
Recruiting of the navy 443
Naval officers. . . 443
26 Contents
Court of Admiralty 444
Maryland privateers 444
Sale of naval vessels, 1779 444
Naval conditions, 1779-1783 445
Acts for the defence of the Chesapeake 445
Transporting of the Continental army. 446
British depredations, 1782-1783 446
Commissioners for the defence of the
Bay 447
Services rendered by the Maryland
navy 448
The Battle of the Barges 449
End of the Maryland navy 451
The navy of North Carolina, December,
1775-May, 1776 451
The "Washington," "Pennsylvania
Farmer," and "King Tammany".. . . 452
The defence of Ocracoke Inlet 454
Services of the "Caswell" 456
North Carolina admiralty courts and
privateers 459
Georgia s first naval enterprise 459
Naval preparations 460
Georgia s galleys 460
Georgia s prize court 462
CHAPTER XVII. The Minor Navies of the
Northern States.
British depredations in Rhode Island,
1775 463
Naval operations 463
The "Katy" and " Washington" 464
Contents 27
The "Washington" and " Spitfire * gal
leys 465
Organs of naval administration 466
Prize court and privateers 467
An attempted naval increase, 1777 468
Cooperation of Rhode Island with Con
gress, 1778-1779 468
The "Pigot" and the "Argo" 469
The "Rover" -. 470
Naval preparations in New York 471
New York s naval establishment 472
Washington and the New York vessels 473
Services of the New York fleet 474
Additional facts about naval affairs in
New York 475
New Hampshire and the Penobscot ex
pedition 476
New Hampshire privateers and prize
court 476
Naval suggestions of New Jersey 477
APPENDICES
A bibliography 481
A list of commissioned officers in the
Continental Navy 506
A list of commissioned officers in the
Continental Marine Corps 512
A list of armed vessels , . 516
PART I
THE CONTINENTAL NAVY
CHAPTER I
THE NAVAL COMMITTEE
The history of the Continental navy cov
ers a period of ten years, extending from
1775 to 1785. During this time the Conti
nental Congress made many experiments in
naval legislation and devised several organs
of naval administration. The first of these
organs, with whose origin and work this
chapter is concerned, was the Naval Com
mittee. It lasted for only a few months. Its
lineal successors, each of which will be duly
considered, were the Marine Committee, the
Board of Admiralty, and the Agent of Ma
rine. These four executive organs, for the
most part, administered the Continental
navy. Certain odds and ends of the naval
business, however, fell to the commander-
in-chief of the army and his officers, and to
the American representatives in foreign
countries. The second chapter will treat of
the fleets of the army, and the closing chap
ters of the narrative of the Continental navy
will consider the naval services of our rep
resentatives in foreign lands.
In maritime countries the military service
is generally ambidextrous. Whether the
32 Navy of the American Revolution
army or navy is first brought into play at
the opening of a war depends upon various
circumstances. The presence <of a British
army at Boston, already on colonial soil,
when the American Resolution broke out
early in 1775, naturally led to the immediate
organization of an army by the colonists.
The need of a navy was at this time not quite
so insistent. Moreover, the building, or
even the purchase, of an armed fleet required
more time than did the raising of an army,
which was rendered comparatively easy by
the previous training of the colonists in the
local militia. Nevertheless, since both
countries engaged in the war were maritime,
the creating of a navy could not long be
delayed.
The reader recollects that by the middle
of 1775 the battles of Lexington, Concord,
and Bunker Hill had been fought, a Conti
nental army had been organized, and Wash
ington had been made commander-in-chief.
Outside of Congress the agitation in behalf
of a Continental navy had begun. That the
first suggestions and advances for a navy
should come from New England, where the
concrete problems of the defence of her ports
and coasts were being faced, was to be ex
pected. One of the first men to make such
suggestions was Josiah Quincy of Massa
chusetts. On July 11, 1775, he wrote to
John Adams in Philadelphia that the best
method of securing the coastwise naviga-
Navy of the American Revolution 33
tion of the colonies was by row-galleys. He
then continued: "As the whole Continent
is so firmly united, why not a Number of
Vessels of War be fitted out and judiciously
stationed, so as to intercept and prevent
any supplies going to our Enemies ; and con
sequently, unless they can make an Impres
sion inland, they must leave the Country or
starve." 1 The first formal movement in
behalf of a Continental navy came from
Rhode Island, which state was during the
summer of 1775 suffering serious annoyances
from the British ships. On August 26 her
legislature instructed the Rhode Island dele
gates to the Continental Congress to use
their influence at the ensuing session of
Congress to obtain a fleet for the protection
of the colonies. 2 On September 2, 1775,
Washington, in order to prevent reinforce
ments from reaching the enemy at Boston,
instructed Nicholson Broughton to proceed
in the schooner " Hannah" on a cruise
against the British transports. 3
1. Manuscript Letters of John Adams,
lodged with the Massachusetts Historical So
ciety by Mr. Charles Francis Adams, who kind
ly permitted the writer to see them.
2. See Chapter III, The Organization of
the Marine Committee.
3. See Chapter 1 1 , The Fleets of Washington
and Arnold. After a thorough investigation
and study of the sources of the early history
of the Continental navy, I am compelled to
reject many of the statements and conclusions
found in Chapter II, Volume I, of Augustus
34 Navy of the American Revolution
That the question of providing a Conti
nental navy would come up during the fall
session of Congress was certain. The argu
ments in its behalf, which were made almost
unanimously later in the session, must have
been on the lips of several of the members
when they assembled in Philadelphia in
September: an army had been organized,
why not a navy? The situation of the com
batants, separated by the great Atlantic
highway; and their character, one a great
naval and commercial power, and the other
with maritime interests by no means incon
siderable, would necessarily make the im
pending struggle in no small part a naval
one. America had seacoasts and seaports
to be defended, a coastwise navigation to
be secured, and above all commercial and
diplomatic communications with foreign
powers to be kept open. These communi
cations were a jugular vein, whose severing
would mean death to the United Colonies.
The urgent and specific calls for armed
vessels, which were being made, must be
met at once. Had not America conven
iently at hand materials for ships, and
abundant men who had the " habit of the
sea"?
In the early months of the session there
certainly would arise opposition to the new
military project. The inertia and conserv-
C. Buell s book, Paul Jones, Founder of the
American Navy.
Navy of the American Revolution 35
atism of some of the members would set
them against so great an innovation. To
others the fitting out of a fleet, at a time
when the length, seriousness, and meaning
of the war with the motherland were but
half unveiled, would seem an unwise and
hasty action.
The question of procuring a fleet of armed
vessels was first brought to the attention
of Congress on October 3, 1775, when the
Rhode Island members presented their in
structions, an account of which w r ill be given
in a succeeding chapter. 1 It is sufficient for
present purposes to say that until Decem
ber the Rhode Island instructions had lit
tle other result beyond crystallizing and clar
ifying opinion on naval affairs by means of
the debates which they caused in Congress.
On October 5 sundry letters from London
were laid before the Congress and read.
They conveyed the intelligence of "the sail
ing of two north country built brigs, of no
force, from England, on the llth of August
last, loaded with arms, powder, and other
stores, for Quebec, without convoy." Con
gress at once saw the importance of captur
ing these two vessels, in order both to de
prive the British of these stores and to ob
tain them for the Continental army around
Boston, which sorely needed all the muni
tions of war it could get. A motion was
1. See Chapter III, The Organization of
the Marine Committee.
36 A^ai y of the American Revolution
therefore made that a committee of three
be appointed to prepare a plan for inter
cepting the two brigs, and that it " proceed
on this business immediately." 1 John Ad
ams in his autobiography says that the oppo
sition to this motion was "very loud and
vehement," and included some of his own
colleagues, and also especially Edward Rut-
ledge of South Carolina. It seems to have
been recognized that the carrying of the
motion would be the initial step in the es
tablishment of a Continental navy. Such
an undertaking its opponents declared, with
a greater display of rhetoric than judgment,
was the "most wild, visionary, mad project
that ever had been imagined. It was an
infant taking a mad bull by his horns; and
what was more profound and remote, it
was said it would ruin the character and cor
rupt the morals of all our seamen. It would
make them selfish, piratical, mercenary,
bent wholly upon plunder, etc., etc." The
friends of the motion, in colors equally glow
ing, set forth "the great advantages of dis
tressing the enemy, supplying ourselves, and
beginning a system of maritime and naval
operations." On the taking of the vote the
motion passed in the affirmative; and ac-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 5, 1775. Waite, H. E., Origin of Ameri
can Navy, 1-5, containing letters of John
Adams, Elbridge Gerry, and John Langdon,
written in 1813.
Navy of the American Revolution 37
cording to John Adams s recollection, he,
John Langdon of New Hampshire, and
Silas Deane of Connecticut, "three members
who had expressed much zeal in favor of
the motion, " composed the committee. 1
A little later on the same day this com
mittee reported; and thereupon Congress
decided to write a letter to Washington di
recting him to obtain from the Council of
Massachusetts two of that state s cruisers,
and to despatch them on the errand of inter
cepting the two supply ships. It also di
rected that letters be written to the gov
ernors of Connecticut and Rhode Island ask
ing for the loan of some of their armed
vessels, which were to be sent on the same
mission. "The committee appointed to
prepare a plan for intercepting the two ves
sels bound to Canada " made another report
on the 6th, which was ordered to lie on the
table "for the perusal of the members." 2
This report was acted upon on October 13,
when Congress decided to fit out two armed
vessels, one of ten and the other of four
teen guns, to cruise three months to the
1. Works of John Adams, III, 7, 8. I have
accepted the account of this debate as found
in John Adams s autobiography, although it
is possible that writing many years after its
occurrence Adams may have confused it with
the debate of October 7 on the Rhode Island
resolutions. Works of John Adams, I, 187.
2. Journals of Continental Congress Octo
ber 6, 1775.
38 A T avy of the American Revolution
eastward for the purpose of intercepting the
enemy s transports laden with warlike stores
and other supplies. A committee consist
ing of Silas Deane, John Langdon, and
Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina was
appointed to estimate the expense which
would be incurred in fitting out the two
vessels. 1
In four days this new committee reported
an estimate, which was unsatisfactory and
was recommitted. 2 When it again reported
on October 30, two more vessels, one to
mount not more than twenty and the other
not more than thirty-six guns, were ordered
to be prepared for sea, and "to be employed
in such manner, for the protection and de
fence of the United Colonies, as the Congress
shall direct." It should be noted that the
two vessels for which provision was now
made were to engage in the defence of the
colonies, and not merely in the interception
of transports, an indication of an advance
in the naval policy of Congress. Four ad
ditional members were now added to the
committee, Stephen Hopkins of Rhode Is
land, Joseph Hewes of North Carolina, R. H.
Lee of Virginia, and John Adams of Massa
chusetts. 3 This reconstituted committee
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 13, 1775. The armament of the second ves
sel was not determined until October 30, 1775.
2. Ibid., October 17, 1775.
3. Ibid., October 30, 1775. John Adams,
in his Notes on Debates for October 30, 1775,
Navy of the American Revolution 39
composed of seven members was sometimes
called "the committee for fitting out armed
vessels/ occasionally the "Marine Com
mittee/ but most frequently the "Naval
Committee." It secured for its use a room
in a public house in Philadelphia, and in
order that there should be no conflict be
tween its meetings and those of Congress,
it fixed its hours from six in the evening
until the close of its business. Its sessions
were sometimes pleasantly continued, even
until midnight, by conversational diver
sions, marked by a rich flow of soul, history,
poetry, wine, and Jamaica rum.
John Adams, who always wrote pungent-
ly, has left us a lively picture of the Naval
Committee. His description makes it clear
that the deliberations of this committee were
not always marked by that exalted serious
ness and impassive dignity, which we too
habitually ascribe to the Revolutionary
Fathers. "The pleasantest part of my la
bors for the four years I spent in Congress
from 1774 to 1778," he said, "was in this
Naval Committee. Mr. Lee, Mr. Gadsden,
were sensible men, and very cheerful, but
Governor Hopkins of Rhode Island, above
reports George Ross of Pennsylvania as say
ing: "We can t get seamen to man four ves
sels. We could not get seamen to man our
boats, our galleys." Adams also tells us that
three of the Virginia members, Wythe, Nel
son, and Lee, were "for fitting out four ships."
Works of John Adams, II, 484.
40 A avy of the American Revolution
seventy years of age, kept us all alive. Upon
business, his experience and judgment were
very useful. But when the business of the
evening was over, he kept us in conversa
tion till eleven, and sometimes twelve o clock.
His custom was to drink nothing all day,
nor till eight o clock in the evening, and
then his beverage was Jamaica spirit and
water. It gave him wit, humor, anecdotes,
science, and learning. He had read Greek,
Roman, and British history, and was familiar
with English poetry, particularly Pope,
Thomson, and Milton, and the flow of his
soul made all of his reading our own, and
seemed to bring to recollection in all of us,
all we had ever read. I could neither eat
nor drink in these days. The other gentle
men were very temperate. Hopkins never
drank to excess, but all he drank was im
mediately not only converted into wit,
sense, knowledge, and good humor, but in
spired us with similar qualities." 1
The active life of the Naval Committee
lasted from October, 1775, until January,
1776, during which time it laid the founda
tions of the navy. Its chairman in January,
1776, was Stephen Hopkins; whether he
was the first to fill this position is not known.
His knowledge of the business of shipping
made him particularly useful to the Com
mittee. 2 The accounts of the Naval Com-
~T Works of John Adams, III, 9, 12.
2. Appleton s Cyclopedia of American Bi
ography, III, 259.
Navy of the American Revolution 41
mittee were kept by Joseph Hewes, who
was settling them with the Board of Treas
ury in September, 1776. 1 Early in Decem
ber, 1775, John Adams returned home, and
by January only four members of the Com
mittee were left to transact its business.
In October Congress ordered the fitting out
of four vessels, and appointed the Naval Com
mittee, but did nothing more. By the first
of November the sentiment of Congress was
setting strongly towards organizing a navy.
In its debates on the State of Trade during
the latter half of October the necessity of
having a navy in order both to defend the
colonial commerce and to carry on the war
was generally recognized. 2 The members
from the South were as a rule now lining
up with those of the North in behalf of a
naval armament. Events had happened
and were daily happening in New England
which were convincing the doubtful mem
bers of Congress. As a military necessity
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep
tember 19, 1776.
2. Works of John Adams, II, 469-83. In
one of these debates, according to Adams,
George Wythe of Virginia said: "Why should
not America have a navy? No maritime
?ower near the seacoast can be safe without it.
t is no chimera. The Romans suddenly built
one in their Carthaginian war. Why may not
we lay a foundation for it ? We abound with
firs, iron ore, tar, pitch, turpentine; we have all
the materials for the construction of a navy."
Works of John Adams, II, 479.
42 Navy of the American Revolution
for conducting the siege of Boston, and with
no intention whatever to create a navy, as
such, Washington had obtained seven small
cruisers, and either had sent or was sending
them to sea in pursuit of the enemy s trans
ports. The logic of events had forced him,
on his own responsibility, to create a little
fleet of his own. 1
With the passage of each day, the gap
between the mother-country and her revolt
ing subjects widened, and the feeling be
came stronger and more general that an
irrepressible war, which must be fought to
a just conclusion, had begun. W^hat in
October seemed chimerical, might in No
vember appear practicable.
Beginning with November the naval legis
lation of Congress moved rapidly. The duty
of preparing much of it naturally fell to
the Naval Committee. Its work in large
part may be found in the Journals of the
Continental Congress for November and
December, 1775, and January, 1776. A
brief summary of the most important Con
gressional resolutions for this period will be
here presented.
On November 2, 1775, Congress voted
$100,000 for the work of the Naval Com
mittee, and empowered it "to agree with
such officers and seamen as are proper to
man and command the four vessels already
1. See Chapter II,;The Fleets of Washington
and Arnold.
Xary of the American Revolution 43
ordered to be prepared for sea. Congress
also fixed the "encouragement" of the offi
cers and seamen at "one-half of all ships of
war made prize of by them, and one-third
of all transport vessels." 1
On November 10 the first legislation relat
ing to the Marine Corps of the United States
was passed. Two battalions, which were to
be called "the first and second battalions of
American Marines/ were to be raised, con
sisting of one colonel, two lieutenant-colo
nels, two majors, and "other officers as usual
in other regiments." There is some doubt
whether Congress fully understood the
duties of marines, for it provided that "no
persons be appointed to office, or inlisted
into said Battalions, but such as are good
seamen, or so acquainted with maritime
affairs as to be able to serve to advantage
by sea when required." 2 Such a require
ment seems to overlook the fact that the
duties of marines are military in character,
rather than naval.
The Naval Committee made what prob
ably was its most important report on No-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, No
vember 2, 1775.
2. Ibid., November 10. Congress first or
dered the marines to be raised from the Con
tinental army, but on the objecting of Wash
ington to such weakening of his forces, they
were directed to be raised independent of the
army. Journals, November 10, 30, 1775;
Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 225, 274.
44 A oz j of the American Revolution
vember 23, when it laid before Congress "a
draught of rules for the government of the
American navy, and articles to be signed by
the officers and men employed in that serv
ice." On the 25th and 28th of November,
these were debated by paragraphs and
after slight amendment were adopted. 1 The
rules, eight or ten pages in length, are brev
ity itself as compared with the present rules
and regulations of the United States navy,
which make a book of some six hundred
pages. More than one-half of the navy s
first rules are concerned with the feeding,
care, rights, duties, and punishments of the
ordinary sailor; while the present rules of the
American navy in large part apply to officers.
A few of the provisions of these old rules
are worthy of notice. The commanders of
ships of the thirteen united colonies were
"to take care that divine service be per
formed twice a day on board, and a sermon
preached on Sundays, unless bad weather
or other extraordinary accidents prevent."
Sailors were to be punished for swearing by
the wearing of a wooden collar, "or some
other shameful badge of distinction." Sail
ors were to be put in irons for drunkenness ;
while officers guilty of the same offense for
feited two days pay. The extreme punish
ment which an officer might inflict on a sea
man was "twelve lashes upon his bare back,
1. Journals of Continental Congress, No
vember 23, 25, 28, 1775.
Navy of the American Revolution 45
with a cat of nine tails." In case a sailor
deserved greater punishment, he must be
tried by a court-martial, which should con
sist of "at least three captains and three
first lieutenants, with three captains and
three first lieutenants of marines, if there
shall be so many of the marines then pres
ent, and the eldest captain shall preside."
A penal code was established. A court-mar
tial might inflict death for desertion, mutiny,
or murder.
Rations for the sailors were fixed by these
old rules for each day of the week. Satur
day s bill of fare, which consisted of "1 Ib.
bread, 1 Ib. pork, half pint peas, and four
ounces cheese," may be taken as a sample
one. Each seaman was given a half-pint of
rum a day, with a "discretionary allowance
on extra duty, and in time of engagement."
The following provision, for keeping the eat
ables sweet and palatable, is noted: "The
captain is frequently to order the proper
officers to inspect the condition of the pro
visions, and if the bread proves damp, to
have it aired upon the quarter deck or poop,
and also examine the flesh cask, and if any
of the pickle be leaked out, to have new
made and put in, and the cask made tight
and secure."
The following naval offices were estab
lished; the first two only w r ere commis
sioned: captain, lieutenant, master, mas
ter s mate, boatswain, boatswain s first mate,
46 A T az y of the American Revolution
boatswain s second mate, gunner, gunner s
mate, surgeon, surgeon s mate, carpenter,
carpenter s mate, cooper, captain s clerk,
steward, and chaplain. Five marine offices
were established; the highest \vas that of
captain. A pay-table was provided, accord
ing to which the monthly wage ranged
form $32 for captains, to $6.67 for able sea
men and marines. According to the form of
a contract of enlistment which accompanied
the rules, a bounty of $400 was to be deduct
ed from the proceeds of prizes and to be
paid to the commander, in all cases where
he lost a limb in the engagement, or was in
capacitated from earning a livelihood; if
the commander was killed, an equal sum
was to be paid to his widow. Minor officers
under the same circumstances received
proportionately smaller sums. The man
who first discovered a vessel that was after
wards captured was rewarded with a double
share of prize money; he who first boarded
a prize was entitled to a treble share.
Ten shares of every prize were set aside "to
be given to such inferior officers, seamen and
marines, as shall be adjudged best to deserve
them by the superior officers."
These rules, which were in force through
out the Revolution, and which were re-
adopted for the government of the new navy
under the Constitution, 1 were drawn up by
1. Thomas Clark, Naval History of United
States, II, 108.
Navy of the American Revolution 47
John Adams, and "examined, discussed,
and corrected" by the Naval Committee.
They are an abridgment and adaptation of
parts of the British naval statutes and regu
lations in force in 1775. That part of
Adams s rules which constitutes the penal
code of the navy, he obtained from the Nav
al Discipline Act passed by the British Par
liament in 1749. * In adapting the British
code, however, he made it less stringent.
The British also found it advisable in 1779
to lessen the severity of their code. The
rest of Adams s rules are, with verbal
changes and omissions, chiefly taken from
the King s Regulations and Admiralty In
structions of 1772. An extract from the
King s regulations followed by the corre
sponding one from Adams s rules will illus
trate the closeness of the parallelism: "No
Commander shall inflict any punishment
upon a Seaman, beyond Twelve Lashes upon
his bare Back with a Cat of Nine Tails, ac
cording to the ancient Practice of the Sea." 2
"No commander shall inflict any "punish
ment upon a seaman beyond twelve lashes
upon his bare back, with a cat of nine tails."
1. Pickering s Statutes, 22, George II,
chapter 33; title of act, "An act for amending,
explaining, and reducing into one Act of Par
liament, the laws relating to the government
of his Majesty s ships, vessels, and forces by
sea."
2. King s Regulations and Admiralty In
structions of 1772.
48 A az v of the American Revolution
An additional example of the influence of
the British upon the American navy is found
in the fact that the naval offices as given
above were already established in the navy
of the Stuarts, indeed, many of them in the
navy of Elizabeth. The Americans were
still British at the time of the Revolution,
and they intuitively went home, so to speak,
for the naval models with which they were
familiar.
On November 25, 1775, Congress enacted
some very important naval legislation, which
in John Adams s opinion was "the true ori
gin and foundation of the American navy,"
and in producing which he "had at least as
great a share as any man liv
ing." 1 The occasion of this legislation was
certain recommendations of Washington.
On October 5 he requested the "determina
tion of Congress, as to the property and dis
posal of such vessels and cargoes, as are de
signed for the supply of the enemy, and may
fall into our hands." On November 8 he
pointed out the necessity of establishing
proper admiralty courts. On November 11
~T Works of John Adams, III, 11. Certain
words of John Adams in a letter dated, Phila
delphia, April 28, 1776, have an interest in this
connection : V I have vanity enough to take to
myself a share in the merit of the American
navy. It was always a measure that my heart
was much engaged in, and I pursued it for a
long time against the wind and tide, but at
last obtained it." Force, American Archives,
4th, V, 1111.
Navy of the American Revolution 49
he recommended to Congress the establish
ment of an admiralty court for the trial of
prize cases arising from Continental cap
tures. 1 A report of a committee of seven
members, which had been appointed on the
17th to take Washington s request of No
vember 8 into consideration, was, on the
23rd, laid on the table "for the perusal of the
members/ 7 and was debated and agreed to
by paragraphs on the 24th and 25th. 2 Con
gress now took the decisive step of author
izing the capture of all British vessels em
ployed against the United Colonies, either as
armed vessels of war, transports, or supply
ships. Provision for privateering was made
in part. It was recommended to the legis
latures of the several colonies to establish
courts for the trial of prize cases. In all
cases appeals to Congress were to be allowed,
when made in accordance with certain pre
scribed rules. Prosecutions in prize cases
must commence in the court of that colony
in which the capture was made, but if the
capture took place on the open sea the cap
tor had the privilege of selecting the most
convenient court. Congress fixed the shares
of the proceeds of prizes. In the case of
1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 165,
203-04, 213-14; Washington to President of
Congress, October 5, November 8, 11, 1775.
See Chapter II, page 67.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, No
vember 17, 23, 24, and 25. The Journals for
November 25 contain the resolutions.
50 Xary of the American Revolution
privateers the whole of the proceeds of
captures went to the captors. In the case
of vessels fitted out by a colony, or by Con
gress, two- thirds were to go in the first in
stance to the colony, and in the second, to
Congress; and one- third was to go to the cap
tors : provided that, if the prize should be a
vessel of war, the captor s share should be
increased to one-half, and the govern
ment s share correspondingly decreased.
On December 2, 1775, Congress authorized
the Naval Committee to employ two addi
tional vessels, and also to "prepare a proper
commission for the captains or commanders
of the ships of war in the service of the
United Colonies." 1 On the report of the
committee on recaptures, Congress on De
cember 5 fixed the compensation of recap-
tors, which varied from one-eighth to the
whole of the value of the vessel and cargo,
depending on the time which elapsed be
tween the capture and recapture. 2 On De
cember 9 the following new naval offices
were established: midshipman, armorer,
sailmaker, yeoman, quarter-master, quarter-
gunner, cook, and coxswain. 3 On Decem
ber 13 the wages of able-bodied seamen
were raised to $8 a month; and on the 22nd
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 2, 1775.
2. Ibid., December 5, 1775. This legisla
tion refers to American vessels captured by
the British and recaptured by the Americans.
3. Ibid., December 9, 1775.
Nai v of the American Revolution 51
the salary of the commandcr-in-chief of
the navy was fixed at $125 a month. 1
In accordance with the direction of Con
gress, the Naval Committee, on January 6,
1776, reported on the division of the cap
tor s share of prizes, among officers, seamen,
and marines; whereupon, Congress divided
the captor s share into twenty parts, and al
lotted them equitably between the officers
and men. The commander-in-chief re
ceived one-twentieth, and the captains of
the fleet making the capture, two- twenti
eths. After the officers had been provided
for, the remaining eight and one-half parts
were allotted to the seamen, "share and
share alike." 2
Meanwhile, the Naval Committee had
been busy purchasing, fitting for sea, and
officering a fleet. About the first of Novem
ber John Adams was writing from Philadel
phia to James Warren in Massachusetts,
inquiring whether naval vessels might be
purchased or built in Massachusetts, and
whether suitable officers could be procured
there; and also at the same time to Samuel
Chase in Baltimore, in regard to the pur
chase of certain vessels in that city. 3 On
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 13 and 22, 1775.
2. Ibid., January 6, 1776.
3. Manuscript letters of John Adams, Mas
sachusetts Historical Society ; Warren to Ad
ams, November 14, 1775; Chase to Adams,
November 16 and 25, 1775.
52 Navy of the American Revolution
November 17 the Committee ordered Silas
Dearie to go to New York and to purchase
a 20-gun ship and a 10-gun Bermudan-built
sloop. 1 Under the authorizations of Con
gress of October 13 and October 30, the Na
val Committee purchased four vessels, the
"Alfred,"" "Columbus," "Cabot," and "An
drew Doria;" named, respectively, for the
founder of the English navy, the discoverer
of America, the first English explorer of
America, and the great Genoese Admiral. 2
The first vessel to be bought was the "Al
fred," a ship of two hundred tons burden.
The "Alfred" was originally the "Black
Prince," and belonged to John Nixon, the
well-known Philadelphia merchant of Rev
olutionary times. 3
On November 5 the Naval Committee ap
pointed Esek Hopkins, of Rhode Island,
commander-in-chief of the fleet. 4 The Com
mittee may have created this office as anal
ogous to Washington s position in the army.
It is more probable that the office was bor
rowed from the British navy, in which the
1. Collections of New York Historical So
ciety, Deane Papers, I, 91-92.
2. Works of John Adams, III, 12.
3. M. I. J. Griffin, Commodore John Barry,
19; Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, II, 668. In
December, 1774, the "Black Prince" belonged
to Thomas Willing, Robert Morris, Thomas
Morris, John Wharton, and John Nixon. Pa.
Magazine of Historv and Biography, October,
1904, 495.
4. Edward Field s Esek Hopkins, 78-9.
Navy of the American Revolution 53
commander-in-chief was the chief admiral
of a port or station, who held command over
all other admirals within his jurisdiction. 1
The first and only commander-in-chief of
the American navy was at the time of his ap
pointment fifty-seven years of age. He was
a member of an influential Rhode Island
family, and a brother of Stephen Hopkins,
of the Naval Committee. About 1745 Esek
Hopkins was a sea captain and merchant ad
venturer. In the French and Indian War
he had commanded a privateer. 2 At the
breaking out of the Revolution he received
the appointment of captain and then of
brigadier-general in the Rhode Island forces.
Deliberate in action and irascible in temper,
Hopkins \vas at the same time industrious,
steadfast, and veracious. The following
description was written by Henry Knox to
his wife, probably in April, 1776: "I have
been on board Admiral Hopkins ship, and
in company with his gallant son, who was
wounded in the engagement with the Glas
gow. The admiral is an antiquated figure.
He brought to my mind Van Tromp, the
famous Dutch admiral. Though antiqua
ted in figure, he is shrewd and sensible.
I, whom you think not a little enthusiastic,
should have taken him for an angel, only
1. British Marine Encyclopedia, in Hogg s
Naval Magazine for 1801.
2. Edward Field, State of Rhode Island
and Providence Plantations, II, 422.
54 A fli v of the American Revolution
he swore now and then. 1 The choice of
Hopkins as head of the navy was, at the
time, as promising as could have been made.
On December 7, 1775, a commission was
given to John Paul Jones, an energetic and
capable young man, twenty-eight years old,
whose brilliant career was still unforeseen. 2
On December 22 the Naval Committee laid
before Congress a "list of the officers by
them appointed/ 3 It included, besides
Hopkins and Jones, the names of four cap
tains, four first-lieutenants, five second-lieu
tenants, and three third-lieutenants. The
little roll of captains was headed by Dudley
Saltonstall, who owed his appointment to
his brother-in-law, Silas Deane, a member
of the Committee; and was ended by John
Burroughs Hopkins, a son of the comman-
der-in-chief . Immediately above J. B. Hop
kins in rank was Nicholas Biddle, a young
Philadelphian, twenty-five years old, and
very promising material for a naval officer.
He had entered the British navy in 1770,
and had served as midshipman on board the
same vessel with Lord Nelson. In the sum
mer of 1775 he was appointed commander
of the "Franklin" galley of the Pennsyl
vania navy. The fourth captain \vas Abra-
1. Edward Field s Esek Hopkins, 134,
quotes from Drake s Life of Knox.
2. Sands, Life and Correspondence of John
Paul Jones, 32.
3. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 22, 1775.
A arv of the American Revolution 55
ham Whipple, the commodore of the Rhode
Island navy.
In these first appointments of the Com
mittee it takes no eagle eye to discern the
workings of nepotism and sectional influ
ences. Of the five largest naval plums,
New England plucked four. This may have
been, however, right enough, as the South
was credited with the commander-in-chief
of the army, and New England greatly ex
ceeded the Middle and Southern states in
the number of men who were experienced
in maritime affairs.
In December, 1775, the Naval Committee
was preparing a fleet for sea, which was to
make the first naval essay of the new govern
ment. The Pennsylvania Committee of
Safety was contributing arms, ammunition,
and sailors. Commodore Hopkins enlisted
for the service of his fleet morethan one hun
dred seamen in Rhode Island, whom Whip-
pie brought to Philadelphia in the "Katy."
On December 3, 1775, John Paul Jones
hoisted the Continental flag on board the
"Alfred," Hopkins s flagship, the first Conti
nental vessel to fly the colors of the new na
tion. 1 By the end of January, 1776, the
Committee had added four other small ves
sels to the navy, the sloops "Providence,"
and "Hornet," and the schooners, "Wasp,"
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, IV, 360;
letter to Earl of Dartmouth, dated Maryland,
Dec. 20, 1775.
56 A^az v of tlie American Revolution
and "Fly." 1 The "Providence" had been
the "Katy" of the Rhode Island navy. The
"Hornet" and the "Wasp" were obtained in
Baltimore.
On January 5, 1776, the Naval Committee
issued sailing orders to the commander-in-
chicf. He was ordered , "if Winds and
Weather possibly admit of it, to proceed di
rectly for Chesapeake Bay in Virginia."
Here he was to strike the enemy s fleet
under Lord Dunmore, unless it was found
to be greatly superior to his own. If he was
so fortunate as to execute this business suc
cessfully, he was to continue southward and
master the British forces off the coast of the
Carolinas, and from thence he was to sail
northward directly to Rhode Island and "at
tack, take, and destroy all the enemy s na
val force that you may find there." 2 This
program seems rather ambitious, when one
considers the motley assemblage of officers,
seamen, and cruisers, that composed this
fleet of made-over merchantmen.
The ice in the Delaware greatly delayed
the expedition. Early in February, 1776,
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 2, 1775, January 9 and 16, 1776. The
Naval Committee spent $134,333 on the eight
vessels which they fitted out. Journals of
Continental Congress, September 19, 1776.
2. Records and Papers of Continental
Congress, 78, III, 239-40, orders of Commo
dore Hopkins, signed by four members of the
Naval Committee.
Navy of the American Revolution 57
the fleet was assembling at Cape Henlopen.
It then consisted-of the flagship "Alfred,"
24, Captain Dudley Saltonstall; the ship
" Columbus," 20, Captain Abraham Whipple;
the brigs "Andrew Doria," 14, Captain Nich
olas Biddle, and "Cabot," 14, Captain J. B.
Hopkins; the sloop "Providence," 12; and
the schooner "Fly," 8. On February 15
the sloop "Hornet," 10, and the schooner
"Wasp," 8, joined the fleet from Balti
more. 1 On the 17th the fleet sailed outside
the Capes into the broad Atlantic. A new
nation in whose veins flowed the blood of a
long line of seafaring and sea-fighting an
cestors was about to put to the initial test
its skill in naval warfare, and under condi
tions far from auspicious. If the doughty
Admiral should get all his queer craft once
more into a safe harbor he would be doing
well.
Hopkins had apparently concluded that
his Armada might prove vincible on the
stormy coasts of Virginia. Indeed, the
enemy must have heard of his intended
coming, and awaited it. Not only discre
tion, but good military judgment advised
him to abandon for the present the visitation
to the Chesapeake. 2 Before sailing on Feb-
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 823.
2. Ford, Writings of Washington, III,
299-300, 319. Washington wrote on January
4, 1776, to Joseph Reed: "I fear your fleet
has been so long in fitting, and the destination
of it so well known, that the end will be de-
58 Xavy of the American Revolution
ruary 17 he had determined to make a de
scent on Nassau, New Providence, and ac
cordingly he gave orders to his captains
and commanders to keep in company, if
possible, but if not, to make for the island
of Abaco, one of the Bahamas, where the
fleet would next rendezvous. 1
On the 3rd and 4th of March Nassau was
taken after a slight resistance and without
bloodshed, by a landing party consisting of
two hundred marines under one of their
officers, Captain Samuel Nichols, and fifty
sailors under Lieutenant Weaver of the
" Cabot." Eighty-eight cannon, fifteen mor
tars, a large quantity of shot and shell be
sides other munitions of war were captured.
Since the governor of the island succeeded
the night before the landing was effected in
removing the gunpowder to a safe hiding
place, the expedition failed of its chief ob
ject. 2
On March 17, having loaded his vessels
and a borrowed sloop w r ith the warlike
stores, Hopkins set sail for Rhode Island,
feated, if the vessels escape." In July, 1776,
Dunmore s fleet consisted of more than forty
vessels, most of which, however, were prob
ably unarmed, being occupied by refugee
Tories. Maryland Archives, XII, 24-25.
1. Edward Field s Esek Hopkins, 101 ; a copy
of Hopkins s orders is given.
2. Papers of Esek Hopkins, Rhode Island
Historical Society, an invoice of captured ar
ticles.
Navy of the American Revolution 59
taking with him as prisoners of war several
important officials, including the Governor
and Lieutenant-Governor of New Provi
dence. On April 4 the squadron, having
reached the eastward end of Long Island,
captured the British schooner "Hawk," 6,
and the bomb brig "Bolton," 8. At 1
o clock on the morning of the 6th the
"Alfred," "Cabot," "Columbus," "Andrew.
Doria/ and " Providence " engaged His
""Majesty s ship "Glasgow," 20, Captain Ty-
ringham Howe. After a severe fight of
about three hours, the "Glasgow," was per
mitted to escape, leaving her tender with
the Americans. 1 The loss of the enemy was
four; that of the Americans, twenty-four,
of which number twenty-three were on
board the "Alfred" and "Cabot," the two
vessels which bore the brunt of the en
counter. 2 Each of these vessels had a lieu
tenant killed.
The American commanders in this en
gagement exhibited little skill in tactics.
A fleet permitted a single vessel of the ene
my to escape. Something can be said for
them by way of extenuating circumstances.
It should also be said that they showed no
lack of spirit. As was natural, Commodore
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 823,
Hopkins to President of Congress, April,
1776, giving an account of the expedition.
2. W. L. Clowes, Royal Navy, IV, 3, 4;
Connecticut Gazette, April 12, 1776.
Co Navy of the American Revolution
Hopkins was made the target for much ad
verse criticism. Nations, it is said, are sel
dom just under disgrace, imaginary or real.
The expedition to New Providence was
the sole naval enterprise made by the Con
tinental vessels, while they were under the
direction of the Naval Committee. Early
in 1776 this Committee, reduced in mem
bership, yielded its control of marine affairs
to a new committee with a fuller comple
ment of members. It scarcely needs to be
said that the Naval Committee s claim to
distinction rests not upon its military
achievements, but upon its work of a civil
character, whereby it laid the foundations
of the Revolutionary navy. It acquired
the first American fleet, selected its officers,
and fitted it for sea. It drafted the first
civil and penal code of the navy, and pre
pared not a little fundamental naval legis
lation.
CHAPTER II
THE FLEETS OF WASHINGTON AND
ARNOLD 1
The first armed vessels that sailed under
Continental pay and control were those
that composed the little fleet fitted out by
Washington in the ports of Massachusetts
in the fall of 1775. As these vessels were
manned by soldiers and were commanded
by army officers, and were designed to
weaken the army of the enemy by captur
ing his transports carrying supplies and
troops, Washington was able to derive his
authority for procuring and fitting out the
fleet from his commission as commander-in-
chief of the Continental army. The first
vessel employed in this service was the
schooner "Hannah/ 1 commanded by Nich
olson Broughton, a captain in the army.
According to his instructions, issued Sep
tember 2, 1775, and signed by Washington,
1. This chapter, which is presented here
for chronological reasons, is not closely related
to the main narrative, which will be resumed
at the beginning of Chapter III.
62 Nary of tlie American Revolution
Broughton was directed to proceed " im
mediately on a cruise against such
vessels as may be found on the high
seas, or elsewhere, bound inwards and
outwards, to or from Boston, in the
service of the Ministerial Army, and to take
and seize all such vessels, laden with soldiers,
arms, ammunition, or provisions, for or
from said Army, or which you shall have
good reason to suspect are in such service."
One-third of all captured cargoes were to
be given to officers and crews as an en
couragement. The proportions according
to which the captors share was to be di
vided were fixed. The captain was to re
ceive six times as much as a private. Prizes
were to be sent to the "safest and nearest
port to this camp." Prisoners were to be
treated with kindness and humanity.
Broughton was directed to be exceedingly
careful and frugal with his ammunition, and
not to waste it in salutes. 1
Not until a month after the fitting out of
the "Hannah" did Washington begin to
add to his naval force. On October 4 he
appointed Colonel John Glover and Stephen
Moylan agents to equip two vessels at
Salem, Marblehead, or Newburyport, and
they were directed to name suitable men
for prize agents in the leading ports of Mas-
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 633-
34, Instructions to Broughton.
A T ary of the American Revolution 63
sachusetts. 1 When Washington received
the letter of Congress of October 5 directing
him to obtain two vessels from Massachu
setts and to send them to the St. Lawrence
river to intercept two British transports
bound from London for Quebec, he ordered
on this service, since Massachusetts at this
time had no armed vessels, the schooners
"Lynch," Captain Nicholson Broughton,
and " Franklin," Captain John Selman,
which had been or were being fitted out by
Glover and Moylan. 2 In October and No
vember four other small vessels, the schoon
ers "Lee," "Harrison," and "Warren,"
and the brigantine "Washington" were
fitted out and sent cruising against the
enemy s transports. About the first of
January, 1776, the schooner "Hancock"
was added. Washington had the entire
management of his fleet. Stephen Moylan,
who was attached to his staff, conducted
most of the correspondence with the cap
tains and naval agents while Washington
was at Cambridge. 3 Agents for fitting out
the fleet and receiving its prizes were es
tablished in Plymouth, Boston, Lynn,
Salem, Marblehead, Beverly, Newburyport,
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 946.
2. See Chapter I, The Naval Committee, page
37; Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 174-5.
3. Moylan had been for some months a
member of Washington s official household
before he was appointed aide-de-camp in
March, 1776.
64 A ai v of the American Revolution
and Portsmouth, X. H. In January, 1776,
Washington appointed John Manly commo
dore of the fleet. The other commanders
thereby became subject to Manly s orders.
With the exception of Manly, Washington
had a poor opinion of the abilities of his
commanders. On January 28 lie wrote to
Manly: "I wish you could inspire the cap
tains of the other armed schooners under
your command with some of your activity
and industry." 1 In November, 1775, he
had written: "Our rascally privateersmen
go on at the old rate, mutinying if they can
not do as they please. Those at Plymouth,
Beverly, and Portsmouth have done noth
ing worth mentioning in the prize way, and
no account as yet received from those far
ther eastward," referring to the "Lynch"
and "Franklin," whose commanders he
feared "would not effect any good pur
pose/ 2 Early in December Washington
was still more emphatic: "The plague,
trouble, and vexation I have had with the
crews of all the armed vessels, are inex
pressible. I do believe there is not on
earth a more disorderly set. Every time
they come into port, we hear of nothing but
mutinous complaints. Manly s success has
lately, and but lately, quieted his people.
1. Ford, Writings of Washington ,-iiI, 382-
83.
2. Ibid., 231-32, Washington to Joseph
Reed, November 20, 1775.
Navy of the American Revolution 65
The crews of the Washington and Harrison
have actually deserted them; so that I
have been under the necessity of ordering
the agent to lay the latter up, and get hands
for the other on the best terms he could." 1
Notwithstanding the Commander-in-
chief s unfavorable judgment, it must be
said that his fleet, upon the whole, was
quite as successful as were other fleets of
equal size and force during the Revolution.
The vessels which composed it were small
and lightly armed. Manly s first vessel,
the "Lee," with which he rendered effec
tive service, carried fifty men and four
4-pounders. The brigantine " Washington "
was somewhat larger, mounting ten guns.
Altogether the fleet captured some thirty-
five prizes. 2 The first important capture,
that of the brigantine "Nancy," was an ex
ceedingly timely one, and was made by
Manly in the "Lee" on one of the last
days of November, 1775. Among other
stores the ."Nancy" had on board 2,000
muskets, 100,000 flints, 30,000 round shot,
more than 30 tons of musket shot, 11
mortar beds, and a brass mortar weighing
10,000 pounds. It would have taken the
1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 261-
62, Washington to President of Congress, De
cember 4, 1775.
2. This calculation is made chiefly from
accounts of the vessels found in Force s Ameri
can Archives and Ford s Writings of Wash
ington.
66 A r avy of the American Revolution
Americans eighteen months to have manu
factured a like quantity of ordnance. 1 In
June, 1776, the fleet, together with the
" Defence" of the Connecticut navy, captured
four British transports, which had on board
besides a quantity of supplies upwards of
three hundred and twenty Scottish troops. 2
Washington s fleet cruised chiefly off the
Massachusetts coast. Broughton and Sel-
man, whom Washington dispatched to the
river St. Lawrence to intercept the two
British transports, did not enter the river
at all. After making several unauthorized
captures, they turned their attention to the
island of St. Johns, now Prince Edward
island. Here they pillaged the defence
less inhabitants, and robbed the houses of
the Governor and Acting-Governor of plate,
carpets, curtains, mirrors, table linen, and
wearing apparel. They made prisoners of
the Acting-Governor and two other leading
men of the island, whose families were left
in great distress. Washington was highly
indignant at these unwarranted acts of his
captains, and at once on their arrival in
Massachusetts he released their three pris
oners. 3
1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 252
and note; Letters of John Adams, Massachu
setts Historical Society, William Tudor to
John Adams, December 3, 1775.
2. Boston Gazette, July 6, 1776.
3. Force, American Archives, 4th, IV, 451-
52, Memorial of Philip Callbeck and Thomas
Navy of the American Revolution 67
Moved by the need for a proper judicial
tribunal to try the prize cases arising from
captures made by his vessels, Washington
on November 11, 1775, wrote to Congress
on the subject. He enclosed in his letter
a copy of the Massachusetts law establish
ing admiralty courts, and explained that
this law did not apply to the captures made
by Continental vessels. " Should not a
court/ he asked, "be established by au
thority of Congress, to take cognizance of
prizes made by the Continental vessels?
Whatever the mode is, which they are
pleased to adopt, there is an absolute ne
cessity of its being speedily determined on,
for I can not spare time from military
affairs to give proper attention to these
matters." As early as October 5 Washing
ton had requested the "determination of
Congress, as to the property and disposal
of such vessels and cargoes, as are designed
for the supply of the enemy, and may fall
into our hands." On November 8 he called
the attention of Congress to the same sub
ject. On December 4 and December 14 he
again urged Congress to establish a Conti-
Wright; Ford, Writings of Washington, III,
175 and note, 261-62 and note. H. E. Waite,
Origin of American Navy, 26-28. Report on
Canadian Archives, 1895, Prince Edward
Island, 15-16. The number of vessels cap
tured by Broughton and Selman on this cruise
has been given by Elbridge Gerry as ten and
by Selman as seven. Both figures are prob
ably too high.
68 A r az T of the American Revolution
nental prize court. 1 Finally, on December
20 Congress resolved that the several ves
sels heretofore carried into Massachusetts
by the armed vessels in the service of the
United Colonies should be "proceeded
against by the rules of the law of nations,
and libelled in the courts of admiralty
erected in said colony." 2 The method of
procedure which Congress here established
was followed throughout the Revolution
in all prize cases arising from captures made
by Continental vessels. Congress permitted
the states to exercise original jurisdiction
in all Continental prize cases, and reserved
to itself appellate jurisdiction, so far as it
had power to do so.
It is recalled that Congress, on November
25, 1775, having under consideration the
report of a committee on Washington s letter
of November 8, determined the kinds of
British property which should be subject to
capture, fixed the shares of prizes, and estab
lished certain forms of procedure in the trial
of prize cases. 3 The lack of correspondence
1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 165,
203-04, 213-214, 251-58, 274.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 20, 1775.
3. See Chapter I, The Naval Committee,
page 48. It would seem that Congress, by its
resolutions of November 25, intended to give
colonial courts original jurisdiction in Conti
nental prize cases. Washington did not so
understand these resolutions. See his letter
Nai y of the American Revolution 69
between these resolutions and the Massa
chusetts law of November 1, establishing ad
miralty courts, caused long and serious de
lays in bringing the Continental prizes to
trial. Washington, on April 25, 1776, wrote
from New York: "I have not yet heard,
that there has been any trial of the prizes
carried into Massachusetts Bay. This pro
crastination is attended with very bad con
sequences. Some of the vessels I had fitted
out are now laid up, the crews being dissat
isfied that they cannot get their prize money.
I have tired the Congress on this subject,
but the importance of it makes me again
mention, that, if a summary way of proceed
ing is not resolved on, it will be impossible
to get our vessels manned." 1
On the evacuation of Boston by the Brit
ish in March, 1776, Washington soon re
moved his headquarters to New York., He
left his fleet in charge of General Artemas
Ward, who reported its movements to him.
In February, 1777, the Marine Committee
of Congress ordered the Continental agent
at Boston to pay off and discharge the fleet. 2
of December 14, 1775, to the President of Con
gress, and his letter of December 26, 1775, to
R. H. Lee.
1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 404;
IV, 44, 45.
2. Marine Committee Letter Book, Robert
Morris, Vice-President of the Marine Com
mittee, to John Bradford, Continental agent
at Boston, February 7, 1777. The "Lee,"
Captain Skimmer, was still in the Continental
70 Navy of the American Revolution
In March the Marine Committee appointed
three commissioners to settle the accounts
of Washington s prize agents. 1 These com
missioners had not completed their task in
April, 1778. 2
In April, 1776, immediately upon Wash
ington s arrival in New York, he began to
equip a fleet similar to the one at Boston.
He requested from the New York Committee
of Safety the loan of their state vessels,
which he wished to use in suppressing illicit
trade with the enemy. Some disagreement
arose as to the terms of the loan. Washing
ton insisted that if he manned the "General
Schuyler," he would expect to appoint her
officers. In the end, the "General Schuy-
ler" was turned over to Washington, and
the captain of the "General Putnam" was
directed to obey his orders. 3 Washington
now obtained from other sources the sloop
"General Mifflin." These vessels, which
cruised during the summer of 1776 chiefly in
the neighborhood of Long Island, and usu-
service in November, 1777, when the Navy
Board was ordered to discharge Skimmer, and
to take the "Lee" into the regular Conti
nental navy, if she was adapted for it. Marine
Committee Letter Book, Committee to Navy
Board at Boston, November 22, 1777.
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Commit
tee to the three Commissioners, March 21, 1777.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, April
9, 1778.
3. Journals of New York Committee of
Safety, April 24, May 10, 1776.
A arv of the American Revolution 71
ally with the Xew York state sloop "Mont
gomery," captured several British vessels. 1
In the summer of 1776 Washington was con
structing some "gondolas/ row-galleys, and
fire-ships, for the defence of the Hudson.
The galley "Lady Washington/ 7 which was
manned and completed by the summer of
1776, was still in service on the Hudson in
June, 1777. 2
In the significance of their results the ope
rations of no other naval armament of the
Americans during the Revolution compare
with those of Arnold s fleet on Lake Cham-
plain in the fall of 1776. On May 31, 1775,
the Continental Congress desired the New
York Provincial Congress "to take effectual
care that a sufficient number of batteaus be
immediately provided for the lakes." 3 Ma-
jor-General Schuyler commanded the Conti
nental forces in this region, including the
naval armaments upon the Lakes. These
last, in September, consisted of a sloop, a
schooner, two row-galleys, and ten "bat-
1. The movements of these vessels may be
followed in Force s American Archives, Ford s
Writings of Washington, and the Journals of
the New York Provincial Congress and Com
mittee of Safety.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, May
30, 1776; Force, American Archives, 5th, I,
1263; Journals of New York Provincial Con
gress, June 7, 1777.
3. Journals of Continental Congress, May
31, 1775.
72 A arv of the American Revolution
teaus." 1 About the first of August the New
York provincial Congress sent James Smith
to Schuyler to take command of the sloop
"Enterprise." 2 Smith either received or
gave to himself the title of "Commodore on
the Lakes." He did not long hold this title;
for in March, 1776, the Continental Congress
appointed Major William Douglass of New
York, "Commodore on the Lakes." a place
for which General Schuyler had recommen
ded Captain Jacobus Wynkoop, of the same
state. 3 In April Wynkoop was enlisting
seamen in New York City. 4 In May, since
Douglass did not enter upon his appoint
ment, Schuyler, acting under the orders of
Congress, put the armed vessels under the
command of Wynkoop. 5
About the first of July, 1776, the Ameri
can forces were driven out of Canada. They
retreated southward as far as the forts on
the Lakes. The holding of Lakes Cham-
plain and George, which were a strategic
part of the line of communication between
Canada and the Hudson, now became a mat-
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 738.
2. Ibid., 11, 14.
3. Journals of Continental Congress, March
26, 1776; Journals of New York Committee of
Safety, March 18, 1776.
4. Journals of New York Committee of
Safety, April 24, 1776.
5. Force, American Archives, 5th, I, 1186,
1277; Journals of New York Provincial Con
gress, March 16, 1776; Journals of Continental
Congress, May 2, 1776.
Navy of the American Revolution 73
ter of vital importance. Providing against
a possible failure in Canada, Congress, Wash
ington, and Schuylcr had, in May and early
June, been increasing the effectiveness of
the naval armament on the Lakes. On
June 17 Congress ordered Schuyler to build
"with all expedition, as many galleys and
armed vessels as, in the opinion of himself
and the general officer to be sent into Can
ada, shall be sufficient to majce us indis
putable masters of the lakes Champlain and
George." A master carpenter, acquainted
with the construction of the galleys used on
the Delaware, other carpenters, and models
of galleys, if required, were to be sent on
from Philadelphia. 1
Towards the end of June, Brigadier-Gen
eral Benedict Arnold, recognizing the su
preme importance of maintaining a naval
superiority on the Lakes, began to exert an
influence in naval affairs. Arnold was not
without marine experience; as a resident of
New Haven, engaged in the West India
trade, he had sometimes commanded his
own ships. On June 25, 1776, he wrote to
Washington: "It now appears to me of
the utmost importance that the Lakes be
immediately secured by a large number (at
least twenty or thirty) of gondolas, row-
galleys, and floating batteries I think
1. Journals of Continental Congress, May
22, May 25, June 17, 1776; Ford, Writings of
Washington, IV, 101.
74 Navy of the American Revolution
it absolutely necessary that three hundred
carpenters be immediately employed." 1 To
wards the end of July, General Gates ap
pointed Arnold to command the naval
forces on the Lakes. Wynkoop, who held
a similar command by virtue of an appoint
ment from Congress and Schuyler, refused
to yield to Arnold. He was thereupon
arrested by Gates and sent as a prisoner to
Schuyler. 2 ^
During July and August, 1776, Skenes-
borough, at the head of Lake Champlain,
was the scene of the greatest naval activity.
Requisitions were made upon Pennsyl
vania, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Isl
and, and Massachusetts for carpenters-.
Naval stores and munitions of war of all
sorts, sail-cloth, cordage, anchors, cannon,
and ammunition were sent to the Lakes
from the seaboard, especially from New York
and Connecticut. Seamen were hurried for
ward. On August 13 the Governor and
Council of Safety of Connecticut voted 180
to Captain Seth Warner of Saybrook to en
able him to raise a crew of forty seamen for
the naval service on the Lakes. These men
were "to receive a bounty of 6 for inlist-
ing; and for finding themselves blankets,
12s; guns, 6s; and cartouch-box and belt
and knapsack, 2s; and one month s wages
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, VI, 1 107-
08.
2. Ibid., 5th, I, 1186-87.
Navy of the American Revolution 75
being 48s advanced, according to procla
mation/ On August 16 the Governor and
Council of Safety authorized two other com
panies to be raised. 1 In September Gates
understood that two hundred seamen had
been enlisted in New York city. 2
On July 24, 1776, Arnold wrote from
Skenesborough to Gates: "I arrived here
last evening, and found three gondolas on
the stocks; two will be completed in five or
six days, the row galley in eight or ten days.
Three other gondolas will be set up immedi
ately, and may be completed in ten days.
A company of twenty-seven carpenters from
Middletown are cutting timber for a row-
galley, on the Spanish construction, to
mount six heavy pieces of cannon. One
hundred carpenters from Pennsylvania and
Massachusetts will be here this evening. I
shall employ them on another row-galley.
In two or three \veeks, I think we shall have
a formidable fleet. No canvass or cordage
is yet arrived, though much wanted." 3
Through strenuous exertions the American
fleet on the Lakes was greatly increased and
strengthened. By October it consisted of
one sloop, three schooners, eight "gondolas,"
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
500, 503. The rolls of these three Connecticut
companies, containing eighty-five names, will
be found in the Connecticut Historical Society
Collections, VIII, 235-37.
2. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 186.
3. Ibid., I, 563.
76 Navy of the American Revolution
and four galleys, mounting a total of 94 can
non, 2-pouriders to 18-pounders. With a
full complement, the fleet would have car
ried 856 men. It probably numbered about
700 officers and men, such as they were. 1
Arnold said that he had a "wretched motley
crew in the fleet; the marines the refuse of
every regiment, and the seamen few of
them ever wet with salt water." Many
of his seamen and marines were almost
naked. 2
During the first days of October the naval
superiority on the Lakes shifted to the Brit
ish. General Sir Guy Carleton, the British
commander, drawing upon superior naval
resources, had outbuilt Arnold. Early in
October Carleton s fleet consisted of one
ship, two schooners, one "radeau," one
large "gondola," twenty gunboats, and four
armed tenders. Some of these vessels and
the material for others he had brought from
the St. Lawrence up the Richelieu. The
ship "Enterprise," eighteen 12-pounders,
180 tons burden, whose construction had
been begun at Quebec, he thus transported
in pieces. She was set up at St. Johns, on
the Richelieu, where the British shipyard
was situated. This vessel in size and arma-
ment greatly exceeding any one craft of the
1. Force, American Archives, 5th, 11,1039.
One galley which was fitting at Ticonderoga is
net included in the above list. The exact
number of men in Arnold s fleet is uncertain.
2. Ibid., 481, 834.
Navy of the American Revolution 77
Americans. A fleet of transports and ships
of war in the St. Lawrence furnished Carle-
ton with seven hundred experienced officers
and seamen. 1
The two fleets engaged each other on Lake
Champlain on October 11, 12, and 13, 1776.
Ten of the American vessels were captured
or destroyed. General Waterbury, second
in command, and 110 prisoners, were cap
tured. In killed and wounded Arnold lost
about eighty men; and the British forty.
The British were left in command of the
Lake; the Americans retreated to Ticon-
deroga. 2
Although most decisively defeated in the
battle upon the Lake, Arnold had delayed
the advance of the British some two or three
months, while they were obtaining a naval
superiority. This delay had far-reaching
consequences. Carleton now found the sea
son too late to pursue his advantage, and to
make, or attempt to make, a juncture with
Howe to the southward. He therefore soon
returned to winter quarters at Montreal.
When Burgoyne, in 1777, repeated the at
tempt to penetrate to the Hudson, Howe s
removal of his army to the Chesapeake in
his movement against Philadelphia, de
prived Burgoyne s army of the support on
1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 1178-
79; Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 353-370, Chap
ter XXXI, written by Captain A. T. Mahan.
2. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 1079-
80; Almon s Remembrancer, 1777, 356.
78 A r az r v of the American Revolution
the Hudson, which it might have had in the
fall of 1776. It has been strikingly said,
by Captain Mahan, that Arnold s and Carle-
ton s naval campaign on Lake Champlain
was a "strife of pigmies for the prize of a
continent." Although the American flo
tilla was wiped out, "never had any force,
big or small, lived to better purpose, or died
more gloriously; for it had saved the Lake
for that year." 1
1. Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 363, 368. In
the campaign of Burgoyne, in July, 1777, the
British destroyed or captured a small Ameri
can flotilla at Skenesborough. Winsor, Nar
rative and Critical History, VI, 297.
CHAPTER III
THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MARINE
COMMITTEE
In the years immediately preceding the
Revolution the four New England colonies
were largely engaged in shipbuilding, fish
ing, whaling, and commerce. The forests of
Maine and New Hampshire afforded incom
parable oaks and white pines for ships. In
deed, not a few of these trees were sealed
for the use of the Royal Navy, and their high
quality authenticated, by the mark of the
"King s broad arrow." New England s
hardy dwellers on the seacoast had long en
gaged in fishing on the Newfoundland banks,
or in whaling in many seas, and had bred a
race of sailors. The Atlantic withheld few
secrets from the bold Yankee skippers.
They were equally at home in the coastwise
navigation, reaching from Nova Scotia to
Florida, in deep-sea voyages to the mother
land or the Continent, in skirting the Guinea
coast in quest of its dark-skinned trade, or
in slipping down the trade winds with can
vas set for the sunny sugar islands of the
8o Xai \ of the America)! Revolution
West Indies or the Spanish Main. In
no other section of the revolting colonies was
the first formal movement for the building
of a Continental navy so likely to be made
as in New England. Here were ships, sail
ors, and a knowledge of the sea.
Certainly not a whit behind the other
three New England states in nautical inter
ests was little sea-cleft Rhode Island. In
the establishing of state navies she had
moved first, and on June 15, 1775, had put
two vessels in commission. On the same
day her Commodore Whipple captured an
armed tender of the British frigate "Rose"-
the first authorized capture made by the
Americans at sea during the Revolution. 1
Already her coasts and her trade w r ere being
annoyed by the enemy. It was then in
keeping with her maritime character, with
her forwardness in naval enterprise, and
with her needs for defence, that her Assem
bly should have instructed her two delegates
to the Continental Congress, on August 26,
1775, "to use their whole influence, at the
ensuing Congress, for building at the Conti
nental expense, a Fleet of sufficient force for
the protection of these Colonies, and for em
ploying them in such manner and places as
will most effectually annoy our enemies,
and contribute to the common defence of
these Colonies." The Assembly was per-
1. See Chapter XVII, The Minor Navies of
the Northern States.
A arv of the American Revolution 81
suaded that an American fleet "would great
ly and essentially conduce to the preser
vation of the lives, liberty, and property of
the good people of these Colonies." 1
The naval situation in Congress during
the fall of 1775 and the winter of 1775-76
should be clearly understood. The debates
and legislation of Congress concerning naval
affairs are attached, as it were, to two
threads. One thread, beginning with the
appointment of a committee, on October 5,
1775, to prepare a plan for intercepting two
British transports, has already been unrav
eled. The other, which had its origin in the
introduction in Congress of the Rhode Island
instructions, will now be followed.
The delegates of Rhode Island to the Con
gress in the fall of 1775 were two sterling
patriots, Samuel Ward and Stephen Hop
kins. Each had been governor of Rhode Is
land, and each had grown old in the public
service. Once bitter political rivals, they
were now yoked together in the common
cause of their state and country. On Oc
tober 3 ; 1775, one of the Rhode Island dele
gates, presumably Samuel Ward, laid before
Congress the instructions of his state in be
half of a Continental fleet. On this day the
consideration of the instructions went over
until the 6th, and on the 6th until the 7th. 2
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 231 ;
Sparks, American Biography, 2nd, IX, 314-15.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo-
82 Naz v of the American Revolution
When the Rhode Island instructions came
up on October 7, a debate ensued, a synop
sis of which has been left us by John Adams. 1
The discussion was participated in by Rob
ert Treat Paine, Samuel Adams, and John
Adams of Massachusetts, John Rutledge
and Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina,
Samuel Chase of Maryland, Stephen Hop
kins of Rhode Island, Dr. John J. Zubly of
Georgia, Eliphalet Dyer and Silas Deane of
Connecticut, and Peyton Randolph of Vir
ginia. When the debate took place, the
consideration of the Rhode Island instruc
tions had been postponed until the 16th,
and the motion before the Congress was to
appoint a committee "to consider the whole
subject."
The establishing of a navy naturally found
least favor among the members coming from
the agricultural South, and most support
from those of maritime New England.
Chase, of Maryland, declared, "It is the mad
dest idea in the world to think of building
an American fleet; its latitude is wonderful;
we should mortgage the whole continent."
He added, however: "We should provide,
for gaining intelligence, two swift sailing
vessels." Zubly, of Georgia, said: "If the
plans of some gentlemen are to take place,
an American fleet must be a part of it, ex-
ber 3, 1775; Force, American Archives 4th,
III, 1888-91; Works of John Adams, II, 462.
1. Works of John Adams, II, 463-4.
Navy of the American Revolution 83
travagant as it is." Gadsden, of South
Carolina, temperately favored the procur
ing of armed vessels, thinking that it was
"absolutely necessary that some plan of de
fence, by sea, should be adopted." He
was opposed to the "extensiveness of the
Rhode Island plan/ although he thought
that it should be considered. The friends of
the navy acted on the defensive. They prob
ably realized that their cause might well
bide its time. Its opponents, to use John
Adams s phrase, were "lightly skirmishing."
In the end the motion was lost, and consider
ation of the instructions was deferred until
the 16th.
On October 16, and again on November
16, the Rhode Island instructions were post
poned. 1 Samuel Ward had hopes for a fa
vorable action on the latter day. On No
vember 16 he wrote from Philadelphia to
his brother in Rhode Island: "Our instruc
tion for an American fleet has been long
upon the table. When it was first present
ed, it was looked upon as perfectly chimer
ical; but gentlemen now consider it in a very
different light. It is this day to be taken
into consideration, and I have great hopes
of carrying it. Dr. Franklin, Colonel Lee,
the two Adamses, and many others, will sup
port it. If it succeeds, I shall remember
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 16, November 16, 1775.
84 A ai v of the American Revolution
your ideas of our building two of the ships." 1
The several postponements of the Rhode
Island instructions make it clear that Con
gress was slow to reach the conclusion that
the "building of a fleet" was desirable or
feasible. It was one thing to fit out a few
small vessels for intercepting British trans
ports, and quite another to build a fleet
of frigates. It is not surprising that under
the circumstances Congress hesitated to
embark on the larger undertaking. The
difference in the presentation to Congress of
the two propositions, both of which involved
the procuring of a naval armament, is wor
thy of note, for it had its influence on leg
islation. The appointment of a committee
to prepare a plan for intercepting trans
ports, put the question in a softened, more
veiled, and less direct form. It pointed
the wedge of naval legislation by a tactful
presentation, and drove it home with an
exigency.
In Chapter I the increase of sentiment in
favor of a naval armament during the latter
part of October and during November has
been shown, and the important naval legis
lation of November has been presented.
It was now only a question of time until
Congress would heed the recommendations
of Rhode Island. On December 9, 1775,
the Rhode Island instructions once more
1. Gammell, Life of Samuel Ward, in
Sparks s American Biography, 2nd, IX, 316
Navy of the American Revolution 85
came up, and a day for their consideration
was fixed, Monday, December II. 1 On the
llth, " agreeable to the order of the day,
the Congress took into consideration the
instructions given to the delegates of Rhode
Island;" whereupon a committee of twelve
was appointed to devise ways and means
for furnishing these colonies with a naval
armament. 2 This committee performed its
work with commendable celerity, and
brought in, on December 13, one of the most
important reports in the history of the
naval affairs under the Revolution, for by
its acceptance Congress committed itself to
the establishment of a considerable naval
force. Congress determined to build thir
teen frigates, five of 32, five of 28, and
three of 24 guns, to be distributed, as re
gards the place of their construction, among
the states as follows : New Hampshire, one;
Massachusetts, two; Rhode Island, two;
Connecticut, one; New York, two; Pennsyl
vania, four; and Maryland, one. It was
estimated that these ships would cost on
the average $66,666.67 each, and that their
whole cost would amount to $866,666.67.
All the materials for fitting them for sea
could be procured in America except can
vas and gunpowder. 3
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 9, 1775.
2. Ibid., December .1, 1775.
3. Ibid., December 13, 1775.
86 A T az y of the American Revolution
On December 14 a committee consisting
of one member from each colony was chosen
by ballot to take charge of the building and
fitting out of these vessels. The members
chosen with their states were as follows:
Josiah Bartlett, New Hampshire; John Han
cock, Massachusetts; Stephen Hopkins,
Rhode Island; Silas Deane, Connecticut;
Francis Lewis, New York; Stephen Crane,
New Jersey; Robert Morris, Pennsylvania;
George Read, Delaware; Samuel Chase,
Maryland; R. H. Lee, Virginia; Joseph
Hewes, North Carolina; Christopher Gads-
den, South Carolina; John Houston, Geor
gia. 1 This committee was substantially the
same as that which reported 1 the naval in
crease on the 13th; the only changes were in
the members from Massachusetts and Mary
land, and in the addition of a member from
Georgia. The committee was a very able
one, comprising several of the foremost men
of the Revolution. Hancock, Morris, Hop
kins, and Hewes were especially interested
in naval and maritime affairs. The absence
of the name of John Adams is probably ac
counted for by his return home early in
December.
This new committee was soon designated
as the Marine Committee, by which name
it was referred to throughout the Revolu
tion. Larger, and, with its engrossing work
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 14, 1775.
Xct i v of tlic American Revolution 87
of building and fitting out the thirteen fri
gates, more active than the Naval Commit
tee, it soon overshadowed and finally ab
sorbed its colleague. This absorbtion was
facilitated no doubt by the fact that the
four members of the Naval Committee re
maining in January, 1776, also belonged
to the new committee. With the exception
of the rendering of its accounts, the duties
of the Naval Committee came to an end with
the sailing of Hopkins s fleet in February,
1776. 1 The Marine Committee now ac
quired a firm grasp of the naval business of
the colonies, and from this time until De
cember, 1779, it was the recognized and re
sponsible head of the Naval Department,
and as such, during the period that saw
the rise and partial decline of the Conti
nental navy, its history is of prime im
portance.
The Marine Committee like the Naval
Committee had at Philadelphia an office of
its own, and held its sessions in the evening.
Its officers consisted of a chairman or presi
dent, a vice-president, and a secretary. 2
Its clerical force comprised one or more
clerks. On June 6, 1777, Congress resolved
that five of its members which number
thereafter constituted a quorum should
1. Journals of Continental Congress. Janu
ary 25, September 19. 1776. See Ford s new
edition of the Journals.
2, The Secretary of the Marine Committee
was John Brown.
88 Nai \ of the American Revolution
form a "board" for the transaction of busi
ness. 1 Each of the thirteen states had one
member on the Committee. Rarely did
more than one-half of the Committee s mem
bers attend its sessions. Its personnel was
continually changing. This was necessita
ted in part by a similar change in the mem
bership of Congress; as the old members
retired, the new ones filled their places.
The members of the Marine Committee re
ceived no pay for their nayal services as
such. Each state of course paid its mem
ber of the Committee for his services as a
delegate to the Continental Congress. The
wages of the secretary of the Committee
and of its clerical force varied. On June 16,
1778, the Committee was permitted to raise
the wages of its clerks to $100 a month. 2
The secretary was paid at the rate of $8.000
a year after November 2, 1778. 3 During
1778 and 1779 Congress was raising the
salaries of its executive employees because
of the depreciation of the currency.
The most responsible duties of the Com
mittee naturally fell to the four or five
members oldest in its service. From this
class it drew its chairmen. Three out of
the five men who are known to have filled
this office were on the first list of the Com-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, June
, 1777.
6
2. Ibid., June 16, 1778.
3. Ibid., January 27, 1780.
Xtri y of t/ic American Revolution 89
mit tee s members. During possibly all of
1776, and for a part of 1777, courtly John
Hancock presided over the Marine Com
mittee, while at the same time he dignified
the chair of the President of Congress. In
December, 1777, Henry Laurens of South
Carolina had succeeded to both of Han
cock s positions. 1 In 1778 and 1779 the
mantles of the first leaders in naval admin
istration, whether they exactly fitted or
not, were worn by Richard Henry Lee, "one
of the fine fellows from Virginia"; Samuel
Adams of Massachusetts ; and William Whip-
pie of New Hampshire. Lee was chairman
in the summer of 1778. Probably before
December of that year, certainly by that
time, Adams had succeeded him. 2 Adams
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 27, 1777.
2. Lee, however, signed a letter as chair
man in March, 1779. Relative to Samuel
Adams s work in the Marine Committee, these
words of his biographer possess interest:
"Upon his arrival in Congress [May 21, 1778],
he was added to the Marine Committee, of
which important Board he was made chairman,
and continued to direct its duties, for the next
two years. In this arduous position, judged
from the great number of reports and the mul
tiplicity of business submitted to it, Adams
might fairly have claimed exemption from all
other employments." Wells, Life and Public
Services of Samuel Adams, III, 13. Mr. Wells
exaggerates the length of the naval services of
Adams, who left Philadelphia about June 20,
1779; whereupon William Whipple succeeded
him as chairman of the Marine Committee.
90 A rti v of the American Revolution
in turn yielded in June, 1779, to Whipple,
who continued to fill the office until the
Committee was superseded by a Board of
Admiralty in December, 1779.
There were other members besides the
chairmen upon whose shoulders rested the
burden of the naval business. Morris,
Hewes, and Hopkins have been previously
mentioned as members who w T ere deeply
interested in naval affairs. Morris was for
a time vice-president of the Committee.
During the winter of 1776-77, while Congress
was at Baltimore, he remained in Philadel
phia, and, for a time, practically without
assistance from the Committee, adminis
tered the naval affairs of the colonies.
William Ellery of Rhode Island, who on
October 13, 1776, succeeded Hopkins, showed
zeal in the business of the navy. The work
of Francis Lewis of New York deserves
mention. No doubt there were other
members whose naval services were consid
erable. Unfortunately, time has been care
less with many of the records of the Marine
Committee.
In carrying out the resolutions of Con
gress of December 13, 1775, authorizing the
building of thirteen frigates, the Marine
Committee employed agents to superin
tend the work. These agents, who were
variously designated, were residents of the
colonies in which they were employed, and
their selection was usually determined by
A t.c v of tlie American Revolution 91
local advice and influence. The New Hamp
shire frigate, the "Raleigh," 32, was built
at Portsmouth under the direction of John
Langdon, formerly a member of the Naval
Committee, but now Continental agent at
Portsmouth. He employed three master-
builders, who completed the frigate within
less than sixty days after raising it. 1 The
Massachusetts frigates, the " Hancock," 32,
and the " Boston," 24, were built at Salis
bury and Newburyport, under the direction
of an agent. 2
The Rhode Island vessels, the " War
ren," 32, and the Providence," 28, were
constructed at Providence, under the super
intendence of a committee of twelve influ
ential men of that city, who were appointed
by Stephen Hopkins, the Rhode Island
member of the Marine Committee. Certain
complaints were lodged with the Marine
Committee against the committee at Provi
dence. One of these was made by Commo
dore Hopkins, who charged that the " Provi
dence" and the "Warren" had cost tw r ice
as much as their contract price, "owing to
some of the very committee that built the
ships taking the workmen and the stock
agreed for off to work and fit their priva
teers, and even threatening the workmen
1. New Hampshire Gazette, June 1, 1776.
2. Probably put upon the stocks at Salis
bury and completed at Newburyport.
UNIVERSITY
>^
92 A fl^ v of the American Revolution
if they did not work for them." 1 When in
the fall of 1776 the Marine Committee wrote
to the committee, blaming its members for
some of their proceedings, they relinquished
their authority over the two vessels to
Stephen Hopkins. 2
The "Trumbull" was built under the di
rection of agents at Chatham on the Con
necticut river. 3 Two other frigates were
begun in Connecticut in 1777, the "Confed
eracy," 36, on the Thames river between
Norwich and New London, and the " Bour
bon," 28, at Chatham on the Connecticut.
Each of these two frigates was constructed
under a superintendent responsible to Gov
ernor Jonathan Trumbull and the Connec
ticut Council of Safety. 4 Two Commission
ers at Poughkeepsie, New York, had charge
of the work on the "Montgomery," 28, and
" Congress," 24. The Marine Committee
kept fairly well in its own hands the direc
tion of the building at Philadelphia of the
Pennsylvania frigates, the " Randolph," 32,
the "Washington," 32, the "Effingham,"
~T Edward Field, State of Rhode Island
and Providence Plantations, II, 423.
2. Staples, Annals of Providence, 267-8;
Marine Committee Letter Book, Marine Com
mittee to Stephen Hopkins, and Marine Com
mittee to Committee for Building the Conti
nental Frigates at Providence, October 9,
1776.
3. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
526.
4. Records of State of Connecticut, I, 177.
93
28, and the "Delaware/ 24. The "Vir
ginia/ 28, was built at Baltimore, Mary
land, with the assistance of the Baltimore
Committee of Observation. 1 When under
the resolves of Congress of November 20,
1776, two frigates were begun at the Gos-
port navy-yard in Virginia, the work was
placed in -charge of two commissioners
and a master-builder. Richard Henry Lee,
the Virginia member of the. Marine Commit
tee, made the contract with the master-
builder. 2
The need of some one to receive and dis
pose of prizes soon led to the appointment
of "agents for prizes" in the leading sea
ports of the colonies. On April 23, 1776,
Congress, on the recommendation of the
Marine Committee, appointed prize agents
as follows: One at Boston; one at Provi
dence; one at New London, Connecticut;
one at New York; two at Philadelphia; one
at Baltimore; one at Williamsburg, Virginia;
and one each at Wilmington, Newbern, and
Edenton, North Carolina. 3 On June 25,
1776, Congress appointed an agent at Ports
mouth, New Hampshire. 4 In November,
1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 350
636, 989; III, 827.
2. Marine Committee Letter Book, Marine
Committee to David Stodder, master-builder,
April 11, 1778.
3. Journals of Continental Congress, April
23, 1776.
4. Ibid., June 25, 1776.
94 -Vary of the American Revolution
1776, the Marine Committee selected two
prize agents for South Carolina and one for
Georgia. 1 This list was not completed until
September 1, 1779, when Congress appointed
a prize agent for New Jersey. 2 These agents
had charge of all Continental prizes sent into
their respective states. By far the most im
portant agency was that of John Bradford
at Boston. It may be estimated that one-
half of all the prizes captured by the Conti
nental vessels in American waters were or
dered to Boston. The naval port second in
importance was Philadelphia.
The duties of the prize agents were to
libel all of the Continental prizes sent into
their jurisdiction, see that the prizes were
tried by the proper admiralty court; and
after they had been legally condemned, to
sell them, and make an equitable distribu-
1. Force, American Archives, 5th, III,
671, 739-40. The first prize agents to be ap
pointed, many of whom held their offices
throughout the greater part of the Revolu
tion, were as follows: John Langdon, Ports
mouth; John Bradford, Boston; Daniel Til-
linghast, Providence; Nathaniel Shaw, jr.,
New London; Jacobus Vanzant, New York;
John Nixon and John Maxwell Nesbit, Phila
delphia; William Lux, Baltimore; John Taze-
well, Williamsburg ; Robert Smith, Edenton;
Richard Ellis, Newbern ; Cornelius Harnet,
Wilmington ; Livinus Clarkson and John Dor-
sius, Charleston; John Wereat, Savannah; and
Okey Hoaglandt, New Jersey.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep
tember 1, 1779.
Naz y of the American Revolution 95
tion of the proceeds, in accordance with the
resolutions of Congress governing the shar
ing of prizes. The prize agents were direct
ed by the Marine Committee to render to it
a quarterly statement showing the prizes
received, sales effected, and distributions of
the proceeds made. 1
The same men who were prize agents were
also as a rule " Continental agents," in
which latter capacity they served the vari
ous administrative organs of Congress, in
cluding the Marine Committee. They as
sisted the Committee and commander-in-
chief of the fleet in purchasing, refitting,
provisioning, and manning the armed ves
sels. The naval services of some of these
men, both as prize agents and as Continental
agents, were so considerable as to render
their names worthy of mention. Most con
spicuous among the several naval agents
were John Bradford of Boston, John Nixon
and John Maxwell Nesbit of Philadelphia,
John Langdon of Portsmouth, New Hamp
shire, Nathaniel Shaw, jr., of New London,
and Daniel Tillinghast of Providence.
The governors and legislatures of the colo
nies and other local governmental authori
ties often aided the Committee in its work.
The work of Governor Trumbull and the
Connecticut Council of Safety in the build
ing of the Continental frigates in that state
1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 1113-14.
96 Navy of the American Revolution
has already been noted. In the latter part
of 1776 the New York Convention attempted
in behalf of the Marine Committee to secure
the two Continental frigates at Poughkeepsie
from the British when they occupied the
lower Hudson. Such illustrations could be
multiplied. In two services so closely con
nected as the navy and the army, the offi
cers and agents of one were naturally now
and then called upon to serve the other.
They borrowed from and lent to each other
cannon, ammunition, and military stores.
The Commissaries of one and the Navy
Boards of the other had mutual dealings.
The Commissary-General of Prisoners of
the Army had much to do with the care of
the marine prisoners.
Towards the close of 1776 the unsatisfac
tory state of the naval business, together
with its increase and its growing complex
ity, forced home upon the Committee the
necessity of providing some permanent force
to take charge of the-details of naval admin
istration. Accordingly, on November 6,
1776, Congress at the instance of the Marine
Committee resolved "that three persons,
well skilled in maritime affairs, be immedi
ately appointed to execute the business of
the navy, under the direction of the marine
committee/ 1 Later in the same month
John Nixon, John Wharton, and Francis.
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 28, November 6, 1776.
Xary of the American Revolution 97
Hopkinson were selected as suitable persons
for this work, all three living within or near
Philadelphia.
Nixon with his experience as a shipping
merchant was probably best fitted for his
task. Fancy may discern a poetic fitness in
his choice, since he had been the owner of
the "Alfred/ the first vessel of the Ameri
can navy. Nixon also had the distinction
of being the first man to read publicly the
Declaration of Independence. Wharton be
longed to the distinguished Philadelphia
family of that name. Of the three men,
Hopkinson probably had the widest culture.
At the outbreak of the Revolution he was
practicing law at Bordentown, New Jersey.
He was one of the Signers of the Declaration
of Independence. From 1779 to 1789 he
was judge of the Admiralty Court of Penn
sylvania. He is best known, however, not
for his substantial services, but as ^ie au
thor of the humorous ballad, the " Battle of
the Kegs."
On April 19, 1777, Congress on the motion
of John Adams decided to form a similar
board for the New England states, the mem
bers of which were to "reside at or in the
neighborhood of Boston, in the state of
Massachusetts Bay, with a power to adjourn
to any part of New England; w r ho shall have
the superintendence of all naval and marine
affairs of these United States within the
four eastern states, under the direction o*
98 A oz v of the American Revolution
the marine committee. 71 Adams secured
the filling of this board with some difficulty
owing to the indifference of Congress to its
establishment. Finally, nine men were nom
inated, and on May 6 three of these were cho
sen commissioners, James Warren of Ply
mouth, Massachusetts; William Vernon of
Providence, Rhode Island; and John Deshon
of New London, Connecticut. 2
Foremost of the three Commissioners was
Warren, an eminent patriot, who had been
President of the Massachusetts Provincial
Congress and also of the Massachusetts
Board of War. He was an intimate friend
of John and Samuel Adams, and, it is said,
much resembled the latter in character.
1. Journals of Continental Congress, April
19, 1777.
2. On May 6, 1777, John Adams wrote to
James Warren notifying him of his appoint
ment. , He added a few words explaining the
character of the position : You will have the
building and fitting of all ships, the appoint
ment of officers, the establishment of arsenals
and magazines, which will take up your whole
time; but it will be honorable to be so capitally
concerned in laying a foundation of a great
navy. The profit to you will be nothing; but
the honor and the virtue the greater. I almost
envy you this employment." Works of John
Adams, IX, 465. On May 9, the Rhode Island
member of the Marine Committee notified
William Vernon of his appointment. Publi
cations of the Rhode Island Historical Society,
VIII, 206. See also Massachusetts Historical
Society Collections, 7th, II, 45.
Navy of the American Revolution 99
Vernon, who served as President of the
Navy Board, was a most distinguished New
port merchant and one of the most self-sac
rificing of patriots. During the Revolution
he advanced large sums of money to the
government, which were only in part repaid.
Before the war his trade extended to all the
maritime nations of Europe and to the West
Indies and Africa. 1 Deshon was of Hugue
not descent. He was conspicuous in the
Revolutionary party of New London, and
was a captain in his state s military forces.
He rendered much assistance in fitting out
the Connecticut navy.
These two boards were variously desig
nated in the official documents of the time.
The one was most frequently called the
Navy Board of the Middle Department or
District, or the Navy Board at Philadelphia,
Bordentown, or Baltimore, according to its
location rjand the other, the Navy Board of
the Eastern Department or District, or the
Navy Board at Boston. The Navy Board
at Philadelphia was at first referred to as
the Continental Navy Board, or the Board
of Assistants. These two names indicate
that when the board at Philadelphia was
formed, the establishing of a second board
was not in contemplation. The Navy Board
at Philadelphia seems to have taken little
or no part in the naval affairs in New Eng-
1. New England Historical and Genealogi
cal Register, XXX, 316-18.
ioo .Y<77 v of the American Revolution
land. It was hardly settled in its work be
fore the Navy Board at Boston was created.
Attention should be called to the fact that
the offices of Navy Board and of Commis
sioner of the Navy had long been established
in the British navy. The British offices
served in some degree as models to Con
gress and the Marine Committee. 1
Each board had a secretary, treasurer,
and paymaster; but one person sometimes
served in two, or even the three, capacities.
Each board had one, and sometimes two
clerks. A clerkship was at times joined
with one of the other offices. The boards as
a rule selected their own employees. Any
1. When the Navy Board at Philadelphia
was being established and its commissioners
appointed, William Ellery wrote to William
Vernon as follows: "I should be glad to know
what is the Office of Commissioners of the
Navy, and that you would point it out par
ticularly; unless you can refer me to some
Author who particularly describes. The Con
duct of the Affairs of a Navy as well as those
of an Army, We are yet to learn. We are
still unacquainted with the systematical man
agement of them, although We have made
considerable Progress in the latter. It is the
Duty of every Friend to his Country to throw
his Knowledge into the common Stock. I
know you are well skilled in Commerce and I
believe you are acquainted with the System of
the British Navy, and I am sure of your Dispo
sition to do every Service to the Cause of Lib
erty in your Power. 5 Publications of Rhode
Island Historical Society, VIII, 201, Papers of
William Vernon and the Navy Board.
Navy of the American Revolution 101
two members of the Navy Board at Boston
were empowered by Congress on October
23, 1777, to form a quorum. 1
With the exception of the resignation of
Deshon in May, 1781, the Navy Board at
Boston did not change in personnel. Its
headquarters remained continually at Bos
ton. On the other hand, the membership
of the Navy Board at Philadelphia made
several changes. On May 9, 1778, Wil
liam Smith of Baltimore was elected in the
place of John Nixon, who had resigned. 2
On August 19, Hopkinson and Smith
having resigned, Captain Nathaniel
Falconer and James Searle, both of
Pennsylvania, were appointed. 3 Falconer
declined the appointment; Searle accepted,
but resigned on September 26. 4 Meanwhile,
Wharton had resigned, and the three com-
missionerships were vacant. On November
4, 1778, the vacancies were filled by the re-
appointment of Wharton, and the selection
of James Read of Delaware, the clerk and
paymaster of the Board, and William Win
der, 5 a captain in the military forces of Mary
land and a judge of the court of appeals of
Somerset county in that state. When in
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 23, 1777.
2. Ibid., May 9, 1778.
3. Ibid., August 19, 1778.
4. Ibid., September 28, 1778.
5. Ibid., November 4, 1778.
IO2 Xavy of the American Revolution
December, 1776, Philadelphia seemed to be
in danger from the enemy, Congress and the
Board retreated to Baltimore, where they
spent the winter of 1776-1777. The fortunes
of war compelled the Board in the fall of
1777 to retreat to Bordentown, New Jersey;
and after the American fleet in the Dela
ware was destroyed, the Marine Committee
early in 1778 ordered it to Baltimore, 1
where it was situated for a few months. In
the summer of 1778 it returned permanently
to Philadelphia.
The salary of a commissioner of the navy
was first fixed at $1,500 a year. On October
31, 1778, "in consideration of the extensive
business of their departments," this salary
was raised to $3,000, and on November 12,
1779, on the depreciation of the currency,
to $12,000. It was reduced on September
25, 1780, to $1,500, and was now paid quar
terly in specie or its equivalent. The sal
aries of the employees of the Navy Boards
underwent like variations. Beginning with
$500, they advanced in some instances as
high as $2,000 a year. On August 4, 1778,
the clerk of the Navy Board at Boston was
made a special allowance of $500, "in consid-
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Marine
Committee to Navy Board of Middle Depart
ment, January 22, 1778. The Philadelphia
Board was ordered on January 22 to remove
to Baltimore, but it appears that it did not go
until April.
A flT v of the American Revolution 103
eration of the great and constant business/
in which he had been engaged. 1
To recapitulate, the chief agents of the
Marine Committee were these: the Navy
Boards, the prize agents, the Continental
agents, and the agents for building vessels.
After the creation of the Navy Boards, the
latter three classes served in part as their
sub-agents; but by no means entirely so,
for the Marine Committee gave many orders
over the heads of the Boards.
The Marine Committee and its principal
agents employed many minor agents. One
illustration, taken from the work of the
Navy Boards as purveyors of the navy, will
suffice to show the subordinate character of
the services which these minor agents ren
dered. It is recorded that the Navy Board
at Boston had in its employ in New Hamp
shire "a contractor of beef for the navy,"
who in turn had in his employ a- single
drover, that by September, 1779, had pur
chased more than one thousand head of
cattle for the use of the Navy Board at
Boston. 2
1. For salaries of the Commissioners of the
Navy and their employees, see Journals of Con
tinental Congress, November 7, 1776; April 19,
1777; October 23, 1777; October 10, 1778;
October 31, 1778; November 12, 1779; Janu
ary 28, 1780; and September 25, 1780.
2. Miscellaneous Manuscripts, Division of
Manuscripts, Library of Congress.
CHAPTER IV
THE WORK OF THE NAVY BOARDS AND
THE MARINE COMMITTEE
There was a painful lack of system about
the business methods of the Naval Depart
ment of the Revolution. Then, official rou
tine was not settled as at present. Usage
had had no opportunity to establish fixed
and orderly forms of procedure; and amid
the distractions of war, when some real or
supposed emergency was continually invit
ing one authority or another to disregard
regularity and order, usage could obtain
but scant permission to begin its work.
Wars are famous for breaking through, not
for forming a crust of official precedent.
The administrative machinery of armies and
navies tends to adapt itself to the condi
tions of peace now the normal state of na
tions. During long periods of partial stag
nation this machinery becomes complicated;
its tension is weakened; and many of its
axles grow rusty from disuse. When war
breaks out, the conditions of administra
tion are greatly changed. A thousand ex
tra calls for work to be done at once are
Nazy of the American Revolution 105
loud and inexorable. Expedition must be
had at all hazards and costs. Rapid action
of the administrative machinery must be
obtained, its tension screwed down, extra
cog wheels discarded, and efficient machin
ists substituted for the dotards of peace.
It is obvious that with this sort of difficulty
those who managed the naval affairs during
the Revolution did not have to contend, for
the organ of naval administration was then
created from its foundation. Their difficul
ties sprang not from the age, but from the
newness of this organ. It lacked a nice cor
relation of parts, the smooth action that
comes from long service, and the system
that immemorial routine establishes.
The absence of system in the Naval De
partment w r as most conspicuous in the ap
pointment of naval officers, from the cap
tain to the coxswain. This work was shared
by Congress, the Marine Committee, the
Navy Boards, the Continental agents, the
Commander-in-chief of the navy, the com
manders of vessels, recruiting agents, the
Commissioners at Paris, and the commer
cial agents residing in foreign countries.
Appointments were sometimes actually de
termined by the governors of states, " con
spicuous citizens/ 7 and local governmental
bodies. A good illustration of the way in
which convenience was sometimes consulted
is found in the resolution of Congress of
June 14, 1777, which designated William
io6 Xai y of the American Revolution
Whipplo, the New Hampshire member of
the Marine Committee, John Langdon, Con
tinental agent at Portsmouth, and John
Paul Jones, the commander of the ship
Ranger/ 7 to select the commissioned and
warrant officers of the "Ranger," then at
Portsmouth. 1 In a new navy without esprit
de corps, to permit a commander to have a
voice in choosing his own officers often made
for proper subordination.
It was a source of annoyance and confu
sion to the Navy Boards to find through ac
cidental sources of information, as they
sometimes did, that the Marine Committee
had given orders to naval agents to transact
business, the immediate control of which
was vested in the Boards. Naval agents
sometimes discovered that they were serving
in a single task two or three naval masters.
Irregularities were chargeable not alone to
the Naval Department. The governor of a
state was known on his own authority, to
the vexation of the rightful executive, to
take part in the direction of the cruises of
Continental vessels. Naval commanders
were now and then guilty of breaches of
their orders. Congress had its share in the
confusing of business. On one occasion,
making a display of its ignorance, it sus
pended Captain John Roach from a com
mand to which he had not been appointed;
1. Journals of Continental Congress, June
14, 1777.
Xary of the American Revolution 107
Roach in fact was not an officer in the Con
tinental navy. 1 It sometimes made imprac
ticable details of the armed vessels. It
also exercised its privilege of referring to
special committees bits of business that
logically belonged to the Marine Committee.
These irregularities, notwithstanding their
number, were after all exceptions. The very
nature of business forces it to follow some
system, however imperfectly. Where there
is a number of agents there must be a
division of labor. Without such arrange
ments chaos would exist. It is therefore
possible to set forth with some detail the
respective duties of the Marine Committee,
the Navy Boards, and the various naval
agents. The work and duties of the naval
agents have already been treated with suffi
cient particularity. The work of the Navy
Boards and the Marine Committee will be
considered in this chapter.
The duties of the Navy Boards were of a
varied character. Each Board superin
tended the building, manning, fitting, pro
visioning, and repairing of the armed ves
sels in its district. It kept a register of the
vessels which it built, showing the name,
dimensions, burden, number of guns, tackle,
apparel, and furniture of each vessel. Each
1. Journals of Continental Congress, June
14, 1777. Marine Committee Letter Book,
Committee to Navy Board at Boston, March
6. 1778.
io8 Navy of the American Revolution
Board had records of all the officers, sailors,
and marines in its district, and required the
commanders to make returns of these items
upon the termination of their cruises. It
was the duty of the Boards to notify the
Marine Committee of the arrivals and de
partures of the Continental vessels. They
were required to settle the naval accounts
and "to keep fair Books of all expenditures
of Publick Moneys." The records of their
transactions were to be open to the inspec
tion of Congress and the Marine Committee.
They rendered to the Committee annually,
or oftener when required, an account of
their disbursements. The Boards paid the
salaries of officers and seamen, and audited
the accounts of the prize agents. 1
In the appointment of officers the Navy
Board at Boston was given a freer rein than
was its colleague at Philadelphia. The
share of the Navy Boards in selecting officers
and in enlisting seamen was about as fol
lows. The Boards superintended the ap
pointing of petty officers and the enlisting
of seamen, both of which duties were
chiefly performed by the commanders of
vessels and by recruiting agents. The
Boards generally selected the warrant offi
cers, very frequently on the recommenda
tion of the commanders. If the one appoint-
1. Publications of Rhode Island Historical
Society, VIII, 208, Instructions of Marine Com
mittee to the Eastern Navy Board, July 10, 1777
Navy of the American Revolution 109
ment to the office of Commander-in-chief be
disregarded, there existed but two classes of
commissioned officers in the Revolutionary
navy, captains and lieutenants. The
Boards often chose the lieutenants; and
they generally recommended the captains
to the Marine Committee. The Commit
tee furnished the Boards with blank war
rants and commissions, signed by the Presi
dent of Congress. When one of these forms
was properly rilled out by a navy board for
an officer, the validity of his title to his
position and rank could not be questioned.
The Boards were empowered under cer
tain circumstances, and in accordance with
the rules and regulations of the navy and
the resolutions of Congress, to order the
holding of courts of enquiry and courts-mar
tial. They could administer oaths to the
judges and officials of these courts. A
Board might suspend an officer of the navy
who treated it with " indecency and disre
spect/ 1 On October 23, 1777, the Navy
Board at Boston was given power to sus
pend a naval officer, " until the pleasure of
Congress shall be known/ 2 Not always
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De-.
cember 30, 1777. The occasion of this grant
of power by Congress was a letter complaining
of "disrespect and ill treatment" which a
member of the Navy Board of the Middle De
partment had received at the hands of John
Barry, commander of the frigate "Effingham."
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 23, 1777.
no A ai y of the American Revolution
did the kindliest relations exist between
the Navy Boards and the commanders of
the vessels. Officers who but yesterday
tramped the decks of their ow r n merchant
men, giving commands but not receiving
them, chafed under the subordination that
their position in the navy exacted.
The Navy Boards made public the reso
lutions of Congress on naval affairs, copies
of which they lodged with the prize agents,
the commanders of vessels, and all inter
ested persons. They distributed among
the naval captains the rules and regulations
of the navy, the sea-books, and the naval
signals. The Boards acted in an advisory
capacity to the Marine Committee, which
frequently called upon them for informa
tion or opinions; when a revision of the
rules and regulations of the navy was under
consideration their assistance in the work
was requested. Sometimes they volun
teered important suggestions looking to the
betterment of the navy. They communi
cated frequently with the Committee, giv
ing in detail the state of the naval business
in their respective districts.
In the hiring, purchase, and building of
vessels the Boards had to do with craft of
all sorts, freight-boats, fire-ships, galleys,
packets, brigs, schooners, sloops, ships, fri
gates, and men-of-war. Measured by the
standards of the time, the building of one
of the larger vessels was a work of some
Xarv of tlic American Revolution in
magnitude. A notion of the men and ma
terials requisite for such an undertaking
may be gained from an estimate, made
early in 1780, of the sundries needed to
complete the 74-gun ship " America/ the
largest of the Continental vessels constructed
during the Revolution. The construction
of this ship had been begun at Portsmouth,
New Hampshire, in 1777. It was computed
that one hundred and fifty workmen for an
average period of eight months would be
required. Fifty carpenters, twenty ordi
nary laborers, twenty caulkers, ten riggers,
ten sailors, two master-builders, and an
uncertain number of blacksmiths, sail-
makers, coopers, plumbers, painters, gla
ziers, carvers, boat-builders, ship-copperers,
tinners, cabinet-makers, and tanners were
demanded. Materials and provisions were
needed as follows: Seven hundred tons of
timbers, one hundred casks of naval stores,
forty tons of iron, one thousand water-casks,
masts and spars of all sorts, sheets of lead,
train oil, and oakum; provisions for most
of the above workmen, and lastly, an indis
pensable lubricant for all naval services at
this time, "rum, one half pint per day, in
cluding extra hands, say for 150 hands, 8
months, 12 hhds, 1310 gallons." 1 In build
ing the armed vessels, the Boards were
greatly hampered by the difficulty of ob-
1. Records and papers of Continental Con
gress, 37, p. 217.
H2 Xai y of the American Revolution
taining artisans, owing to their being called
out for military service, or to their engaging
in privateering. In providing armament
and equipment, they were embarrassed by
the inexperience of the colonists in casting
cannon, and by the obstacles which they
encountered in importing canvas, cables,
arms, and ammunition.
For the future use of the fleet the Navy
Boards collected in due season provisions
and naval stores. In their work as pur
veyors for the navy a knowledge of the
baking of bread and the curing of meats
might not prove amiss. The kinds and
quantities of provisions which they bought
may be judged from an estimate of the sup
plies that were requisite to equip for -sea
and for a single cruise the 36-gun frigate
" Confederacy." The names and quantities
of the articles needed were as follows:
bread, 35,700 Ibs.; beef, 15,300 Ibs.; pork,
15,300 Ibs.; flour, 5,100 Ibs.; potatoes, 10,-
000 Ibs.; peas, 80 bus.; mutton, 2,500 Ibs.;
butter, 637 Ibs.; rice, 2,550 Ibs.; vinegar,
160 gals.; and rum, 2,791 gals. 1 The
Boards supplies of naval stores consisted
chiefly of canvas, sails, cordage, cables, tar,
turpentine, and ship chandlery.
The commissioners of each district made
some division of their work among them
selves. For instance, the special task of
1. Records and papers of Continental Con
gress, 37, p. 273.
Navy of the American Revolution 113
Wharton of the Philadelphia Board was the
superintending of the accounting and the
naval finances of the Middle District. Dur
ing 1778 Deshon of the Boston Board
spent much time in Connecticut attending
to the naval business in that state. This
had to do chiefly with freeing the "Trum-
bull" frigate from a sandbar upon which
she had grounded. During the same year
Vernon was for a time at Providence en
deavoring to get to sea the Continental
vessels which the British had blockaded in
that port. For a part of the year Warren
alone attended to the business of the
Board at its headquarters at Boston. On
August 4, 1778, Congress appropriated $365
to each of the commissioners of the Navy
Board at Boston to pay their traveling ex
penses during the past year, since in the
right discharge of their office they were
obliged " frequently to visit the different
parts of their extensive district." 1
In the extent of its powers and in the
amount of its business the Boston Board
exceeded the one at Philadelphia. 2 This
was largely owing to the centering of naval
affairs in New England after the occupa-
tion of Philadelphia in September, 1777;
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Au
gust 4, 1778.
2. In the transmission of foreign mail the
Navy Board at Boston acted as the agent of
the Committee of Foreign Affairs. It both
purchased and hired packet boats.
H4 Navy of the American Revolution
and to the capture or destruction in that
year of a large part of the fleet to the
southward of New England. After 1776 all
the new vessels added in America to the
navy, with the exception of two or three,
were either purchased or built in New Eng
land. The long distance of the Marine
Committee from Boston, with the conse
quent difficulties and delays in communi
cation, made it necessary for the Com
mittee to grant to the Boston Board larger
powers than to the Philadelphia Board.
The most important work of a Naval
Office is the directing of the movements of
the fleet, or in other words, the determining
of the cruises of the armed vessels. This
power the Marine Committee jealously
guarded, and was loathe to yield any part
of it. The Committee was forced at times,
however, to give to the Boston Board a
considerable discretion. In July, 1777, it
ordered the Board to send out the cruisers
as fast as they could be got ready, " direct
ing the Commanders to such Latitudes as
you shall think there will be the greatest
chance of success in intercepting the enemy s
Transports and Merchant Ships"; and in
November, 1778, to send the vessels out,
"either collectively, or singly, as you shall
judge proper, using your discretion as to
the time for which their Cruises shall con
tinue, and your best judgment in directing
the commanders to such places and on such
Navy of the American Revolution 115
stations as you shall think will be for the
general benefit of the United States, and
to annoy and distress the Enemy." 1 Such
general orders were always subject to the
particular plans and directions of the Com
mittee, which were by no means few. The
Committee itself determined the service of
all vessels that refitted at Philadelphia. As
a consequence the duties of the Navy Board
of the Middle Department had to do chiefly
with the minor details of administration.
Turning now from the work of the Navy
Boards to that of the Marine Committee,
one finds the significant fact to be the two
fold relation that the Committee bore to
the Continental Congress. By reason of
the union in Congress of both legislative
and executive functions, the Committee
was at one and the same time an adminis
trative organ of Congress charged with exe
cuting the business of its Naval Depart
ment, and its legislative committee on naval
affairs. Naturally, there were at points no
lines of demarkation between these two
functions; and it is therefore not always
easy, or even possible, to determine in which
capacity the Committee is acting. The
CommitteVs administrative duties, par ex
cellence, were the enforcing and the carrying
out by means of its agents of the various
1. Marine Committee Letter Book Com
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, July 11,
1777; November 16, 1778.
u6 Navy of the American Revolution
resolutions of Congress upon naval affairs.
Already much light has been thrown upon
this phase of the Committee s work in the
treatment of the Navy Boards and the
naval agents.
It was the duty of the Marine Committee
to see that the resolutions on naval affairs
were brought to the attention of the proper
persons, officers, agents, and authorities.
As the head of the Naval Department, it
issued its commands and orders to the Navy
Boards, the naval agents, and the command
ers of vessels. This w r as done both verbally
and by letters. The Navy Board of the
Middle Department, the naval agents at
Philadelphia, and often the naval officers
in that port, conferred with the Committee
and received orders by word of mouth. In
the prosecution of its work outside of Phil
adelphia the Committee conducted a large
correspondence, chiefly with the Navy
Board at Boston, the naval agents at Ports
mouth, Boston, New London, and Balti
more, and the leading captains of the navy.
It addressed letters to the governors of
most of the states and to many of the
local governmental authorities; to the Com
mander-in-chief of the navy, Washington,
General Heath, General Schuyler, the Com
missary-General of Prisoners, Commissary-
General of Purchases of the army, the mer
chants of Baltimore, Count D Estaing, the
Commissioners in Paris, and most of the cap-
Navy of the American Revolution 117
tains of the navy. This list of correspon
dents well represents the range of the busi
ness of the Committee.
Through its recommendations to Con
gress the Marine Committee virtually se
lected almost all the captains of the navy
and of the marine corps, many lieutenants
of both services, as a rule the commission
ers of the navy, the prize agents, and the
advocates for the trying of maritime causes.
Appointments to these offices were rarely
made by Congress contrary to the recom
mendations of the Committee, or on its own
initiative independent of the Committee.
A few captains and lieutenants of the navy
were appointed by representatives of the
United States residing abroad.
As is well known, all executive offices are
called upon to establish certain forms, rules,
and regulations for the guidance and gov
ernment of their agents. Of this character
was the fixing by the Marine Committee of
the naval signals, the forms for sea-books,
and the proper uniforms for the naval offi
cers. The Committee s regulations on uni
forms were dated September 5, 1776. For
captains they prescribed a blue coat "with
red lappels, slash cuff, stand-up collar, flat
yellow buttons, blue britches, red waistcoat
with narrow lace." The uniform of the offi
cers of the marines was equally resplendent
in colors. It included a green coat, with
white cuffs, a silver epaulet on the shoulder,
n8 Navy of the American Revolution
white waistcoat and breeches edged with
green, and black gaiters and garters. Green
was the distinctive color of the marines.
The privates were to display this badge in
the form of green shirts, "if they can be pro
cured." 1 Not enough information is acces
sible to the writer to determine what influ
ence the regulations prescribing the uniform
of British officers had on those adopted by
the Marine Committee. Both required in
the uniform of captains, blue coats, stand-
ing-up collars, and flat buttons; neither re
quired epaulets, the wearing of which, as is
well known, originated in France. 2 It is
probable that the prescribed uniform was
little worn by the Continental naval officers.
Grim necessity forced each officer to ran
sack whatever wardrobe Providence offered,
and it is somewhat inaccurate to call their
miscellaneous garbs "uniforms."
As the Naval Office at Philadelphia de
veloped, letters, memorials, and petitions
poured in upon it in increasing numbers.
Many of these communications were ad
dressed to the President of Congress, were
read in Congress, and were formally referred
to the Marine Committee to be acted or
reported upon. It was only infrequently
that Congress offered any suggestions as to
1. Sherburne, Life of John Paul Jones, ed.
1851, 30. Copies of the regulations on uni
forms will be found in John Paul Jones manu
scripts, Library of Congress.
2. Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 347-50 ; IV, 182.
Nazy of the American Revolution 119
their proper disposition. These complaints
and requests were of a varied character,
and came from many sources; not a few
originated with that obsequious crowd,
with axes to grind, that always attends upon
official bodies. The wide range of these
communications may be judged from the
following subjects selected at random:
New Hampshire and Massachusetts re
quest that the frigates building in those
states be ordered to defend the New Eng
land coast. 1 Governor Livingston of New
Jersey asks for a naval office for a relative,
Musco Livingston. 2 Gerard, the minister
of France to the United States, wishes to
know "the opinion of Congress respecting
his offering a premium to the owners of pri
vateers that shall intercept masts and spars
belonging to the enemy, coming from Hali
fax to New York and Rhode Island." 3
John Macpherson asserts that the position
of commander-in-chief in the navy was prom
ised to him by Messrs. Randolph, Hop
kins, and Rutledge, to whom he communi
cated an important secret. 4 An affront has
been offered several French captains in Bos
ton by the commander of the Continental
frigate " Warren." 5 Twelve lieutenants
1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 315.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep
tember, 17, 1779.
3. Ibid., December 7, 1778.
4. Ibid., July 11, 1776.
5. Ibid., June 16, 1778.
I2O Navy of the American Revolution
who had been dismissed from the navy for
combining in order to extort an increase of
pay, ask to be reinstated. 1 The ambassa
dor of Naples at the Court of France, whose
king has opened his ports to the American
vessels, wishes "to know the colours of the
flag, and form of the sea-papers of the United
States." 2 Captain Biddle writes concern
ing the cruel treatment inflicted by Lord
Howe upon Lieutenant Josiah of the Conti
nental navy. 3 Captain Skimmer has been
killed in an action with the "Montague,"
and has left eleven children, nine of whom
are unable to earn a livelihood. His widow
asks for a pension. 4
The Marine Committee made frequent re
ports to Congress, both in response to pre
vious orders therefrom, and of its own ac
cord in the course of its business. Occa
sionally parts of its reports were recommit
ted by Congress to a limited number of the
Committee s members, doubtless for the
1. Journals of Continental Congress, July
23, 24, 1777.
2. Ibid., February 24, 1779.
3. Ibid., August 7, 1776.
4. Ibid., September 14, 23, 1778. The
Marine Committee reported and Congress
agreed that "the eastern navy board be direct
ed to supply 400 dollars annually, in quarterly
payments, for the support of Captain Skimmer s
widow and nine youngest children, and that
this provision be continued three years. " This
is the first instance of the granting by the
United States of a pension to the family of a
naval officer upon his death.
Navy of the American Revolution 121
purpose of obtaining prompt and expert
action. The Committee sometimes as
signed special business to sub-committees,
or to single members. The subjects which
the Committee considered, discussed, and
reported upon ran the whole gamut of na
val activities and interests. The substance
of many of its reports may be found in the
Journals of the Continental Congress for the
years 1776, 1777, 1778, and 1779. During
this period the Marine Committee prepared
and reported the larger part of the naval
legislation of Congress. It is true that spe
cial committees contributed something to
this work, but these were composed in part
of members of the Marine Committee. Con
gress, as a body, originated little, although
occasionally it was moved to the passage of
resolutions on naval affairs by some real or
supposed emergency, the importunities of
the self-seeking, or the whims of individual
members. It of course amended the re
ports of its committees.
The principal legislation of Congress re
lating to the navy which was passed during
the incumbency of the Marine Committee
will now be noted. No attempt will be
made to separate those provisions that were
the special work of the Marine Committee
from the whole legislative output.
During 1776 and 1777 Congress author
ized important naval increases. It directed
the Marine Committee in March and April,
122 Navy of the American Revolution
1776, to purchase "the armed vessel now in
the river Delaware" and the ship "Molly/
to fit out two armed cutters, and to build
two galleys "capable of carrying two 36 or
42 pounders." 1 On November 20, 1776,
Congress resolved to build immediately,
one ship, 74, in New Hampshire; two ships,
74 and 36, in Massachusetts; one ship, 74,
a brig, 18, and a packet boat, in Pennsyl
vania; two frigates, 36 each, in Virginia;
and two frigates, 36 each, in Maryland. 2
Later, the size and armament of some of
these vessels were reduced by the Marine
Committee, and some of them were
never completed. Only three of these
ten vessels were armed, manned, and
sent to sea as a part of the forces
of the Continental navy. They were
the "Alliance," 36, the "General Gates/
18, both built in Massachusetts, and the
"Saratoga," 16, built in Pennsylvania.
The 74-gun ship "America," constructed at
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, was not
launched until shortly before the Revolu
tion ended. On January 23, 1777, Congress
ordered the construction of two frigates, 36
and 28, in Connecticut. These two* ships
were named respectively the "Confederacy"
and "Bourbon." On March 15, 1777, the
Marine Committee was ordered to purchase
1. Journals of Continental Congress, March
13, March 28, April 3, April 14, 1776.
2. Ibid., November 20, 1776.
Xai \ of the American Revolution 123
three ships. 1 Congress gave directions
for other naval increases, but they were not
fully carried out. In July, 1777, owing to
the "extravagant prices now demanded
for all kinds of materials used in ship-build
ing, and the enormous wages required by
tradesmen and labourers," Congress em
powered the Committee to stop the building
of such of the Continental vessels as they
should judge proper. 2
During 1776 many important appoint
ments and promotions in the navy and the
marine corps were made by the Marine Com
mittee, and confirmed by Congress. Sam
uel Nichols was placed at the head of the
marines, with the rank of major. Twenty
captains of the navy were appointed. Four
of these had been appointed lieutenants on
December 22, 1775, and were promoted,
but the remaining sixteen were new ap
pointees. John Manly was taken from
Washington s fleet. Nicholas Biddle, Thom
as Read, Charles Alexander, and James Josi-
ah had seen service in the Pennsylvania
navy; and James Nicholson in the Maryland
navy. During this year there was a great
scramble to obtain offices on board the thir
teen frigates, and amid the rivalries of poli
tics, it is not surprising that some candi
dates were successful that, unfortunately
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Janu
ary 23, March 15, 1777.
2 Ibid., July 25, 1777.
124 Navy of the American Revolution
for the navy, had tasted little salt water. 1
In military services questions of promo
tion and rank are perennial sources of
heartburning and jealousy. The advancing
of an officer on any other principle than
that of seniority in service rarely fails to
arouse feelings of injustice and suspicions
of partiality, which are only too often war
ranted. The discontent and insubordi
nation that Mich a promotion incites must
always be weighed against its beneficial re
sults. When, on October 10, 1,776, Con
gress, in determining the rank of twenty-
four captains and two lieutenants, disregard
ed the dates of their commissions and appoint
ments, it was unable to defend its act on the
usual, and under some circumstances, tenable
ground of the conspicuous services, marked
talents, and signal professional skill of those
favored. Once more Southern influences pre
vailed, and James Nicholson, of Maryland,
commander of the frigate "Virginia," was
made the senior captain of the navy. This
distinguishing of Nicholson, who was ap
pointed captain on June 6, 1776, worked
1. Journals of Continental Congress, June
25, October 10, 1776; Scribner s Magazine,
XXIV, 29, Mahan, John Paul Jones in the
Revolution, quotes a member of Congress writ
ing to Jones probably in the fall of 1776 : You
would be surprised to hear what a vast num
ber of applications are continually making for
officers of the new frigates, especially for the
command. "
Navy of the American Revolution 125
a hardship to the officers, and especially to
the four captains, appointed on December
22, 1775. John Paul Jones, who stood fifth
in rank in the list of December 22, and now
found himself eighteenth, smarted under
the injustice which was done him. 1 It is
noteworthy that from March, 1777, when
Esek Hopkins was suspended from his po
sition of commander-in-chief of the fleet,
until the end of the Revolution, the head of
the Continental army and the ranking offi
cer of the navy came from adjoining
Southern states. 2
On November 15, 1776, Congress fixed
1. Jones made a copy of the list of cap
tains of the navy arranged in accordance with
their respective ranks, upon which copy he
commented: "Whereby No. 18 is superseded
by 13 [men] altho their superior
Merits and Abilities are at best Presumptive,
and not one of them was in the service the
7th day of December, 1775, when No. 18 was
appointed Senior Lieut of the Navy." Jones
Manuscripts, Library of Congress.
2. Nicholson, while at times displaying con
spicuous bravery, was less fortunate in his
naval service than Hopkins. Two frigates un
der his command were at different times cap
tured by the enemy. On May 1, 1777, Con
gress suspended him from his command, "until
he shall have made such satisfaction as shall
be accepted by the executive powers of the
state of Maryland, for the disrespectful and
contemptuous letter written by him to the
governor of that state/ Journals of Continen-
nental Congress, May 1, 1777..
126 Navy of the American Revolution
the relative rank of army and naval officers
as follows: 1
Admiral, with General.
Vice-Admiral, with Lieutenant-General.
Rear- Admiral, with Major-General.
Commodore, with Brigadier-General.
Captain of a ship of 40 guns and up
wards, with Colonel.
Captain of a ship of 20 to 40 guns, with
Lieutenant-Colonel.
Captain of a ship of 10 to 20 guns, with
Major.
Lieutenant of the navy, with Captain.
In this legislation on rank once more the
influence of British models is apparent.
The Committee was evidently building for
the future, for the four higher ranks were
not established at this time, nor during the
Revolution. The present relative rank of
army and naval officers is based on the
above table.
On March 23, 1776, Congress passed most
important resolutions supplementary to
those of November 25, 1775, concerning cap
tures and the shares of prizes. The resolu
tions of November 25 legalized the capture
of the enemy s vessels of war and trans
ports. The new resolutions permitted for
the first time the capture of all ships and
cargoes, "belonging to any inhabitant, or
inhabitants of Great Britain, taken on the
1. Journals of Continental Congress, No
vember 15, 1776.
Nary of the American Revolution 127
high seas, or between high and low water
mark," by American privateers, vessels of
the Continental navy, or ships fitted out by
any of the colonies. In brief, the new
resolutions legalized reprisals on British
commerce. In the case of Continental ves
sels, one-third of the prize went to the offi
cers and crew; in the case of privateers, the
whole of the prize fell to the owners and cap
tors. Each colony was permitted to fix the
shares of the proceeds of merchantmen cap
tured by its own ships of war. 1 On Octo
ber 30, 1776, the share of prizes taken by
vessels of the Continental navy was in
creased to one-half of merchantmen, trans
ports, and store ships; and to the whole of
ships of war and privateers. 2
On April 2, 1776, Congress agreed to a
form of commission for privateers. On
the next day it resolved to send blank com
missions, signed by the President of Con
gress, to the legislatures, provincial con
gresses, and committees of safety of the
United Colonies. These were to be filled
out and delivered to privateersmen. Blank
bonds, which were to be executed by the
owners or masters of privateers, were also
sent. These bonds, which prescribed a pen
alty of five or ten thousand dollars, accord
ing to the size of the ship, were intended to
1. Journals of Continental Congress, March
23, 1776.
2. Ibid., October 30, 1776.
128 Navy of the American Revolution
discourage or prevent misconduct and un
warrantable acts on the part of officers and
crews. Congress also drafted a form of in
structions to the commanders of priva
teers. 1
Congress on November 15, 1776, estab
lished a new pay-table. Officers were now
divided into three classes, those serving on
board of vessels of 20 guns and upwards,
vessels of 10 to 20 guns, and vessels below
10 guns. The vessels of the first two
classes were commanded by captains, and
of the third class by lieutenants. The pay
of the higher officers, which the new table
generally raised, varied for each of the
three classes, the commanding officers of
which received, respectively, $60, $48, and
$30 a month. Seamen were now paid a
monthly wage of $8. The pay of officers
below the captain ranged from $30 to $8.34
a month. A bounty of $20 for every cannon
and $8 for every seaman captured on board
a British ship of war was now voted. 2 On
July 25, 1777, the "subsistence" of officers
while in foreign or domestic ports was
fixed. 3 On January 19, 1778, Congress re
solved that officers not in actual service
should be allowed pay, but not rations.
While prisoners of war, their allowance
1. Journals of Continental Congress, April
2, April 3, 1776.
2. Ibid., November 15, 1776.
3. Ibid., July 25, 1777.
Navy of the American Revolution 129
for rations was to be diminished by the
value of the supplies which they received
from the enemy. 1 Pursers for vessels of
16 guns and upwards were authorized on
November 14, 1778. 2
Additional interest attaches to the initial
legislation on pensions of the American gov
ernment because of the unprecedented liber
ality which now marks its treatment of its
veterans. The first legislation on naval
pensions dates from the adoption by Con
gress on November 28, 1775, of a form of
naval contract according to which certain
bounties were granted officers, seamen, and
marines disabled from earning a livelihood. 3
These bounties were derived from the
proceeds of prizes captured by the aid of
the beneficiaries. A more typical pension
law was passed on August 26, 1776. 4 It
had, however, a vital defect in that it was
left to the enforcement of the individual
states. According to its provisions every
naval officer, seaman, or marine, "belonging
to the United States of America, who shall
lose a limb in any engagement in which no
prize shall be taken, or be therein otherwise
so disabled as to be rendered incapable of
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Janu
ary 19, March 20, 1778.
2. Ibid., November 14, 1778.
3. See Chapter I, page 46.
4. Journals of Continental Congress, August
26, 1776. This law applied to both the army
and the navy.
130 Nai y of the American Revolution
getting a livelihood, shall receive during
his life, or the continuance of such disability,
one half of his monthly pay." When a
prize was captured at the time the disabil
ity was contracted, the disabled person s
share of prize money was considered as a part
of his half-pay. If the disabled person was
rendered incapable of serving in the navy,
although not totally disabled from earning
a livelihood, he received a monthly sum,
judged to be adequate by the legislature of
the state in which he resided. Each state
was to determine which of its citizens were
entitled to a pension under this law, to pay
such persons their half-pay or allowance, and
to make a quarterly report of its work to the
secretary of Congress. The distinguishing
characteristic of the law lay in its depend
ence on the states for its enforcement. As
might be expected, it was very imperfectly
carried out.
On September 25, 1778, Congress extend
ed the advantages of the law to all persons
whose disabilities were acquired previous
to August 26, 1776. 1 It is to be carefully
noted that this was a pension for disabil
ities and not for service a fundamental
classification in pension law. An agita
tion for a service pension for life for the of
ficers of the army was made in and out of
Congress for a long time, until in 1780 it
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep
tember 25, 1778.
Navy of the American Revolution 131
was at last successful. 1 Such emoluments
were not at this time granted to naval offi
cers ; it was probably argued that their shar
ing in captured prizes offset the pensions of
the army officers. Then, too, the army had
ways of gaining the attention of Congress
that the weak and insignificant navy did
not possess.
Few more important duties fall to naval
offices than the enforcing of discipline in the
navy by means of naval courts. Adams s
rules of November 28, 1775, made provision
for holding courts-martial, but not courts of
enquiry, which are a sort of grand jury or
inquest. They also provided that courts-
martial should consist of at least six naval
officers, with six officers of marines, if so
many of the latter were convenient to the
court. 2 The Committee and Navy Boards
at times found it impossible to assemble so
many officers. No definite procedure in
investigating the loss of vessels was
prescribed by Adams s rules. Additional
legislation was therefore demanded. On
May 6, 1778, Congress adopted new reg
ulations on naval courts, which were to be
operative for one year. 3 They provided
that, when a vessel of war was lost by cap-
1. Harvard Historical Studies, X, L. C.
Hatch, Administration of American Revolu
tionary Army, Chapter V, Pay and Half-pay.
2. See Chapter I, page 45.
3. Journals of Continental Congress, May
6, 1778.
132 Navy of the American Revolution
ture or otherwise, a court of enquiry should
be held, consisting of that navy board
which shall, by the marine committee of
Congress, be directed to proceed therein,
or any three persons that such navy board
may appoint/ If the court of enquiry
found that the loss of the vessel was caused
by the negligence or malconduct of any com
missioned officer, the Navy Board might
suspend such officer pending his trial by a
court-martial, which, in the event that six
naval officers could not be assembled, was
to consist of five men appointed by the
Navy Board. The permitting of civilians
to sit upon naval courts is the salient fea
ture of these new resolutions, and is an
anomaly in naval judicature. They also
provided that in cases where one or more
vessels out of a fleet were lost by capture or
otherwise, the commanders of the escaping
vessels were to be tried by a similar proced
ure. If a court-martial found that the loss
of a vessel was caused by the cowardice or
treachery of the commanding officer, it was
directed to inflict the death penalty. On
August 19, 1778, the procedure established
on May 6 was extended to "all offences and
misdemeanors in the marine department." 1
The proceedings of courts-martial were for
warded to the Marine Committee, which
laid them, together with its recommenda-
1 Journals of Continental Congress, Au
gust 19, 1778.
Navy of the American Revolution 133
lions thereupon, before Congress for final
action.
During the incumbency of the Marine
Committee a number of interesting and im
portant naval trials were held. Captain
Thomas Thompson in 1778 and Captain
Dudley Saltonstall in 1779 were broken by
<?ourts-martial. Other captains who lost
their vessels were tried, but escaped so se
vere a punishment. The cases growing
out of Commodore Hopkins s expedition to
New Providence, his engagement with the
"Glasgow," and the immediately succeed
ing events of his fleet in the spring of 1776
deserve more extended notice. During the
summer of 1776 the Marine Committee or
dered Commodore Hopkins and Captains
Dudley Saltonstall and Abraham Whipple
to leave the fleet, which was then stationed
in Rhode Island, and to come to Philadel
phia for trial. After calling before it the
inferior officers of the "Alfred" and "Co
lumbus," and hearing their complaints
against the two captains, the Committee
reported to Congress on July 11 that the
charge against Captain Saltonstall was not
well founded, and that the charge against
Captain Whipple "amounts to nothing more
than a rough, indelicate mode of behaviour
to his marine officers." Cjongress ordered
the two captains to repair to their com
mands, and recommended Captain Whipple
134 Navy^of the American Revolution
"to cultivate harmony with his officers." 1
Commodore Hopkins was not to get off so
easily. His whole conduct since he left
Philadelphia early in January, 1776, was in
vestigated. The principal charge against
him was the disobeying of the instructions
of the Naval Committee of January 5, 1776,
to attack the forces of the enemy in the re
gion of Virginia and the Carolinas. Hop
kins based his defence on the statement
that the enemy in that region had become
too strong to attack by the time his fleet
had sailed on February 17, and also on a cer
tain clause in his instructions granting him
discretionary powers. 2 After the Marine
Committee had investigated the case, and
reported upon it, Congress, on August 12,
took into consideration the "instructions
given to Commodore Hopkins, his examina
tion and answers to the Marine Committee,
and the report of the Marine Committee
thereupon; also, the farther defence by him
made, and the testimony of the witnesses."
On the 15th, Congress came to the resolu
tion: "That the said commodore Hopkins,
during his cruise to the southward, did not
1. Journals of Continental Congress, July
11, 1776.
2. Edward Field s Esek Hopkins, 154-56,
quotes words of Hopkins in his own defence.
Washington feared the plan of the Naval Com
mittee would fail as the enemy must know it,
so long had the fleet been fitting for sea. Ford,
Writings of Washington, III, 319.
Navy of the American Revolution 135
pay due regard to the tenor of his instruc
tions and, that his reasons
for not going from Providence immediately
to the Carolinas, are by no means satisfac
tory." The next day Congress resolved,
"that the said conduct of commodore Hop
kins deserves the censure of this house, and
this -house does accordingly censure him." 1
This action seems more severe than the
facts justify. John Adams, who defended
Hopkins, had with difficulty prevented Con
gress from cashiering the Commodore. Ac
cording to Adams s view, Hopkins was
"pursued and persecuted by that anti-New-
England spirit which haunted Congress in
many other of their proceedings, as well as
in this case." 2 The action of Congress may
be interpreted differently. Hopkins had
not met the expectations of Congress or the
Marine Committee. As the head of the
fleet, blame naturally fell upon him, whether
he deserved it or not. He had his short
comings as a naval officer, and failure mag
nified them. By placing the blame upon
him, the skirts of Congress, of the Marine
Committee, and of the other naval officers
were cleared, and the hopes of a few self-in
terested men were brightened.
Commodore Hopkins s failure to carry
out the plans of the Marine Committee dur-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Au
gust 12, 15, and 16, 1776.
2. Quoted in Field s Esek Hopkins, 158.
136 Navy of the American Revolution
ing the fall of 1776, together with the par
tial inaction of the fleet under his command,
increased his disfavor with Congress and the
Marine Committee. His praiseworthy en
deavors to man and prepare his fleet for sea
won for him the enmity of the owners of pri
vateers at Providence, for his success would
mean the taking of men and materials sorely
needed by the privateersmen. Hopkins s
intemperate language, lack of tact, and na
val misfortunes bred a spirit of discontent,
and gave an excuse for insubordination
among his inferior officers. Encouraged
by the discontented privateersmen of Prov
idence, ten of the inferior officers of the
"Warren," the Commodore s flagship, signed
a petition and certain letters containing
complaints and charges against Hopkins,
and sent their documents to the Marine
Committee. They were taken to Philadel
phia by the chief "conspirator," Captain
John Grannis of the marines. These docu
ments asserted that Hopkins had called
the members of the Marine Committee and
of Congress " ignorant fellows lawyers,
clerks persons who don t know how to gov
ern men;" that he was "remarkably addict
ed to profane swearing;" that he had "treat
ed prisoners in a most inhuman and barbar
ous manner;" that he was a "hindrance to
the proper manning of the fleet;" and that
"his conversation is at times so wild and or
ders so unsteady that I have sometimes
Navy of the American Revolution 137
thought he was not in his right mind." Be
sides these accusations, there were a few
others of even less substantial character. 1
On March 25, 1777, the Marine Commit
tee laid before Congress the complaints and
charges against Commodore Hopkins, and
on the next day Congress took them into
consideration; whereupon it resolved that
"Esek Hopkins be immediately, and he is
hereby, suspended from his command in the
American navy." 2 Hopkins remained sus
pended until January 2, 1778. The Jour
nals of Congress for this date contain the
following entry: "Congress having no far
ther occasion for the service of Esek Hop
kins, esq. who, on the 22nd of December,
1775, was appointed commander in chief of
the fleet fitted out by the naval committee,
Resolved, That the said Esek Hopkins, esq.
be dismissed from the service of the United
States." 3
Hopkins s suspension and removal did not
in any way improve the navy. Indeed, it
was far less fortunate in 1777, than it had
been in 1776. That its chief officer
should have been suspended without
a hearing, on flimsy charges, offered by a
small number of inferior officers whose leader
1. Edward Field s Esek Hopkins, Chapter
VI, Conspiracy and Dismissal, contains many
original documents.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, March
25, March 26, 1777.
3. Ibid., January 2, 1778.
138 Navy of the American Revolution
was guilty of insubordination, convicts Con
gress of acting with undue haste and of do
ing a possible injustice, and arouses the sus
picion that it was not actuated wholly by a
calm and unbiased judgment. The word
ing of Hopkins s dismissal seems needlessly
curt, and harsh. Since Hopkins had lost
the confidence of Congress, the Marine
Committee, and many of his countrymen,
his removal from the office of commander-
in-chief to that of a captain might have
been justified.
On January 13, 1778, Hopkins brought a
suit for libel against the ten officers con
cerned in the "conspiracy," fixing his dam
ages at 10,000. On July 30 Congress
passed a resolution for defraying the rea
sonable expenses of the ten officers in de
fending their suit. 1 The case was tried be
fore a jury in the Inferior Court of Common
Pleas of Rhode Island. The decision was
unfavorable to Hopkins, as the jury brought
in a verdict for "the defendants and their
costs." The victory of the opposition to
the Commodore was complete. He had not,
however, lost the confidence of his fellow
townsmen. He served in the General As
sembly of his state, representing North
Providence from 1777 until 1786, and he
was from 1777 until the end of the Revolu
tion a member of the Rhode Island Council
1. Journals of Continental Congress, July
30, 1778.
Xavy of the American Revolution 139
of War. 1 No one who knew Hopkins inti
mately ever doubted his courage, his patriot
ism, or his honesty of purpose.
The arrival off the Delaware Capes, on
July 8, 1778, of twelve sail of the line and
four frigates under the command of Count
D Estaing, Vice-Admiral of France, threw
additional work upon the Naval Depart
ment. No sooner did the Marine Commit
tee learn of the presence of the French, than
it exerted itself to supply the table of its
naval guests with eatables and drinkables.
Casks of fresh water, several hundred barrels
of bread and flour, and a small supply of
fresh provisions, were at once sent to the
Count, and the Committee ordered a com
missary to collect for the use of the French
fleet fifty bullocks, seven hundred sheep, a
number of poultry, and a quantity of vege
tables. After the ill-starred expedition
against Rhode Island in August, 1778, when
the French fleet put into Boston for repairs,
its provisioning again became a care to the
Naval Department. The Marine Commit
tee ordered three thousand barrels of flour
to be sent on from Albany for the use of
the French. 2
The distinction of having performed the
first work of a consular bureau in the United
1. Edward Field s Esek Hopkins, 237-38.
2. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com
mittee to Count D Estaing, July 12, July 17
1778.
140 Navy of the American Revolution
States belongs to the Marine Committee,
since it had charge of the publication and
record of the first consular appointments to
this country. In accordance with the first
commercial treaty between the United
States and France, Gerard, the French
minister, soon after his arrival in America
in July, 1778, appointed John Holker, con
sul for the port of Philadelphia, and in Sep
tember named a vice-consul for the same
place. The latter appointment Congress re
ferred to the Marine Committee "in order
that the same may be made public. " A
similar disposition was made of the appoint
ments of consuls for Maryland, South Caro
lina, and Boston, and of the vice-consuls for
Alexandria (Virginia), and Virginia. In the
case of the vice-consul for Virginia, Congress
ordered the Marine Committee to "cause
the commission of Mr. d Annemours to be
recorded in the book by them kept for that
purpose, and his appointment made known
to all concerned." The Committee was in
strumental in obtaining the settling of the
powers and duties of consuls as regards the
United States and France. On August 2,
1779, the control of consular affairs was re
moved from the Marine Committee and vest
ed in the Secretary of Congress. 1
1. Journals of Continental Congress, July
23, September 24, October 27, November 4,
1778; January 21, June 7, 22, 23, July 30,
August 2, 1779.
CHAPTER V
THE CONDITIONS OF THE CONTINENTAL
NAVAL SERVICE
The nineteenth century worked its mar
vels on sea as well as on land. The progress
of invention, the discovery of new sources
of wealth and power in nature and in man,
and the development of powerful states,
have revolutionized transportation and com
munication by sea, maritime pursuits, and
naval science. Commerce has found fleeter
wings ; and it no longer waits on the caprice
of Aeolus. Countless steamships with enor
mous tonnage and high rates of speed have
in large measure supplanted the small, snail-
like sailing craft of our fathers. The haz
ards of sea-going trade have been greatly
reduced. Invention has pacified Neptune s
fierce temper. The breed of pirates and
corsairs has been exterminated by the long
muscular arm of the modern state. The pri
vations of ocean-travel which were distress
ing accompaniments of the colonial per
iod in America, were succeeded about the
middle of the last century by the comforts
of the first steamships, and these within the
142 Navy of the American Revolution
memory of young men have yielded to the
luxuries of the floating palaces of the sea.
Complementary to these transformations
in commerce, navigation, and travel by sea,
have come improved methods of their de
fence. Modern naval science in all of its as
pects has been developed. Glancing for a
moment in retrospect at the long line of na
val progress, one sees it pass from the an
cient row-galleys, to the sailing ship of the
early Modern Age, and from thence to the
steamships of to-day. The motive power
has changed from human muscle to wind,
and from wind to steam. Placed beside the
iron-clad battleships, the light, wooden
frigates of the Revolution look almost as
antiquated as tfye Greek galley with its fig
ured prow. Smart, trim, beautiful vessels
were the Revolutionary craft, but how small,
simple, and crude they now appear. In
deed, a new type of poet, one who loves raw
force first, and the picturesque afterwards,
has risen to sing the glories of new navies
and new seas.
Other naval changes have been made, as
significant as those in style of vessel and mo
tive power. Ships of war now wear heavy
coats-of-mail. The "great guns" and the
"long guns" of the Revolution are neither
great nor long beside modern cannon. A
new type of sea officer has been trained to
meet the new conditions of naval service.
It would puzzle a modern officer to take a
A (7T v of the American Revolution 143
schooner from Boston to Plymouth, for his
seamanship is now fitted to steamships.
By over-study of modern armament, tor
pedo boats, and the latest naval manoeuvres,
his "weather eye" has lost something of its
skill for reading in the skies the coming of
storms or sunshine. Trim and immaculate
in their uniforms, the American naval offi
cers of to-day, who have entered the naval
profession by the way of their technical
studies at Annapolis, little resemble their
hardy prototypes in the Continental navy,
to whom clung the barnacles of their ap
prenticeship aboard merchantmen.
Notwithstanding this revolution in naval
science, a consideration of the conditions of
the Continental naval service and of the
naval policy of the Marine Committee has to
day a practical value for naval experts.
Certain fundamental principles in naval
science do not change. Captain Mahan, in
his " Influence of Sea Power upon History,"
has pointed out that, while naval tactics
vary with the improvements in the motive
power and armament of fleets, the basic prin
ciples of naval strategy do not. They are as
enduring as the order of nature. For ex
ample, one cannot conceive that there will
come a time when an inversion will be made
of the strategic principle, that an enemy
should be struck at his weak point. Cap
tain Mahan even finds it worth while, for the
benefit of his fellow-experts, to set forth with
144 Nazy of the American Revolution
some detail the naval strategy of the Car
thaginian wars.
When America, in these first years of the
twentieth century, makes an invoice of her
resources, she counts first her great prairies
of the Mississippi basin, her rich mines of
the Alleghanies and Rockies, and her wealth
of manufactories and their products. In
1775 her assets w r ere of a different sort.
America then was a mere strip of seacoast,
cut into a series of peninsulas by the lower
courses of a number of navigable rivers.
Her interests and her wealth then w r ere much
more largely maritime than now. Atten
tion has already been directed to the wide
pursuit of commerce, shipbuilding, fishing,
and whaling in New England. It remains
to be said that in the Middle and Southern
colonies commerce and shipbuilding were
important industries. During the Revolu
tion Virginia put more naval ships afloat
than any other colony. In the colonial
period communication between the towns
of the colonies was best by water. The in
habitants of America, during this period,
were amphibious. They have lost this
quality, for their character is now fixed by
the "West," and not by the Atlantic sea
board. In 1775 America had, relatively,
many more seamen than in 1898.
In the light of these facts it seems some
what singular that the Revolutionary navy
was forced to spend most of its days in port,
Navy of the American Revolution 145
vainly trying to enlist seamen for its de
pleted crews. To be sure the lack of suffi
cient armament, naval stores, and provis
ions was felt, but it was the lack of sailors
that constituted the chief obstacle to the
success of the Continental navy. Those
vessels that finally weighed anchor were
wanting as a rule in this prime naval requi
site. The same causes that prevented seamen
from enlisting lowered the quality of those
that did enlist, and kept them from enter
ing for longer than a single cruise. A
ship s complement of sailors was often ill-
assorted. Seamen were improvised from
landsmen; captured British seamen were
coaxed into service; and for one cause or
another many nationalities at times shipped
side by side. These conditions made for
insubordination, and even mutiny. On one
occasion seventy or eighty British sailors,
who were enlisted on board the Continental
frigate "Alliance," bound for France, plan
ned to mutiny and carry the frigate into an
English port. In order to obtain seamen
many measures were resorted to by Con
gress, the states, the Marine Committee,
Navy Boards, and commanders of vessels.
Premiums for importing seamen were given
to foreigners; 1 wages were advanced to
recruits; 2 attempts were made to place em-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, April
2. Ibid., March 29, 1777.
146 Navy of the American Revolution
bargoes upon privateers; 1 bounties were
paid to seamen enlisting for a year; 2 induce
ments were offered to those captured from
the enemy to get them to enter the Ameri
can service; 3 some seamen were impressed;
glowing advertisements were inserted in
the public prints; 4 and broadsides, which
1. Rhode Island Colonial Records, VIII,
53.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, July
11, 1780.
3. Ibid., August 5, 1776.
4. In Jtily, 1778, when a joint American
and French attack on Newport was planned,
the Navy Board at Boston inserted a notice
in the Providence Gazette, requiring sailors
who were enlisted to repair to their vessels,
and calling for recruits. This call was in the
following language: "All seamen now in
America, who regard the Liberty of Mankind,
or the Honor of the United States of America,
as well as their own advantage, are now ear
nestly entreated to enter immediately on
board some of the Continental Vessels, in
order to afford all possible Aid and Assistance
to His Most Christian Majesty s Fleet, under
the Command of the Count de Estaing, the
Vice- Admiral of France, now in the American
Seas, for the Purpose of assisting these Ameri
can States in vanquishing a haughty and
cruel Enemy, too long triumphant on these
Seas. Now is the Time to secure to your
selves Safety in your future Voyages, and to
avoid the cruelties which all those experience
who have the Misfortune to be captured by
the Britons; and now is the time to make your
Fortunes." Providence Gazette, July 25,
1778. See also advertisement in Connecticut
Gazette, March 7, 1777.
Navy of the American Revolution 147
cleverly recited the many advantages of the
Continental service, were displayed in sun
dry taverns. 1
All these efforts were defeated by the se
ductive allurements of privateering. The
Revolutionary Congress was poor and paid
poor wages. After its seamen had enlisted,
they were toled away by mercenary priva-
teersmen. These same privateersmen were
accused of taking the naval stores and the
artisans of Congress in order to fit out their
own ships. The owners and commanders
of privateers, as they received the whole
of their captures, could afford to treat their
crews liberally. It was generally asserted
that they paid higher wages than did Con
gress or the states. Privateering was more
popular, more elastic, and more irregular
than the other naval services. When no
one was looking, parts of cargoes could more
readily be appropriated for private use
without waiting the tedious process of
the admiralty courts. Privateersmen could
devote all their time and energy to com
merce-destroying, unfettered by the miscel-
1. A facsimile of a most interesting and
rare broadside will be found in C. K. Bolton s
Private Soldier under W as nrngton, page 46.
This broadside was designed to attract re
cruits to the ship "Ranger," Captain John
Paul Jones, fitting out in the summer of 1777
at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to sail for
France.
148 Navy of the American Revolution
laneous duties which often fell to naval
ships.
The backbone of the privateering interest
was in New England. Silas Deane said in
1785 that four out of every five of the pri
vateers of the Revolution came from the
states north and east of the Delaware river.
This probably overstates the proportion in
favor of the northern states. 1 Pennsylvania
and Maryland did considerable business, but
farther to the southward the industry was
less flourishing. The Virginia privateers did
little. Massachusetts sent out one-third of
all the privateers. From 1777 until 1783,
inclusive, the Massachusetts Council issued
998 commissions. In 1779, 184 prizes cap
tured by privateers were libelled in the
three admiralty courts of this state. The
average burden of these captured vessels
was one hundred tons. Rhode Island s
best year was probably in 1776, when thirty-
eight vessels were libelled at Providence.
A list of 202 privateers has been made out
for Connecticut. In 1779 twenty-nine ves
sels taken from the British by privateers
were libelled in the Pennsylvania court of
admiralty. During the last six years of the
war Maryland issued about 250 commissions.
Boston was the chief center for fitting out
privateers and for selling their prizes, al-
1. Collections of New York Historical So
ciety, Deane Papers, V, 466.
Nai v of the American Revolution 149
though towns like Salem and Marblehead
did a thriving business. 1
Not a few of the failures and misfortunes
of the Continental navy are to be laid at
the doors of the Yankee privateersmen,
whose love for Mammon exceeded that for
their country. 2 A more patriotic course
was to have been expected of certain sub
stantial merchants who embarked in the
business of commerce-destroying. But on
the other hand, one might easily be too
severe on many bold, simple, seafaring folk.
The war, which deprived them of their
gainful pursuits at sea, now pointed the
way, as a recompense, to a new and attrac
tive calling. Wives and babies were still
to be fed, and plans for sweethearts to be
realized. The new trade was as alluring as
a lottery. Had not a neighbor drawn a
competence sufficient for almost a lifetime
1. For additional information and appro
priate references concerning privateers, see
Part II, State Navies.
2. There is much evidence on this point.
See especially Publications of Rhode Island
Historical Society, VIII, 256, William Ver-
non, Commissioner of Navy Board at Boston,
to John Adams, December 17, 1778; Force,
American Archives, 5th, II, 1105, John Paul
Jones to Robert Morris, October 17, 1776;
Ibid., 599, Mrs. John Adams to John Adams,
September 29, 1776; Ibid., 337 and 622; Ibid.,
5th, III, 1513, Benjamin Rush to R. H. Lee,
December 21, 1776; and C. K. Bolton, Private
Soldier under Washington, 45, 46.
150 A^flrv of the American Revolution
by a successful haul of the enemy s rich
West Indiamen? It was true that another
neighbor, who but recently sailed proudly
for sea with women-folk waving a last
good-bye, now languished in a prison-ship
off New York, or was starving in the old
Mill prison at Plymouth, England. "But
then a man must take his chances," each
privateersman argued, "and it may be I,
who by a fortunate cruise shall bring home
enough Jamaica rum to fairly float my
schooner, arid every pint of it is as good as
gold coin."
Due credit must always be given to the
hardy and venturesome privateersmen for
supplying the army and navy with the
sinews of war, which they captured. To be
sure, if Congress or the states wished their
captured property, it was to be had by pay
ing a good round price for it in the open
market. Even here the government s agents
sometimes suspected collusions between the
buyers and the agents of the captors to run
up prices to the disadvantage of the govern
ment. 1 The privateersmen were engaged
1. In the case of Continental prizes the
Navy Board at Boston discovered collusions
which were detrimental to the government.
Ordered to buy the Continental prize "Thorn,"
it writes to the Marine Committee that the
agents and captains interested in the prize
refuse to let it have the "Thorn" at a price
to be fixed by three disinterested appraisers;
and that "taking our chance, in the purchase
by auction, amongst such circles of men in com-
Navy of the American Revolution 151
not in patriotic, but business ventures.
Could one-half of this irregular service have
been enlisted in the Continental and state
navies, the other half could not have been
better employed than in its work of distress
ing the enemy s commerce, transports, and
small letters of marque. Zealous eulogists
of the privateers have overrun the cup of
their merit. They have not always pointed
out that the number of American priva
teers, merchantmen, fishermen, and whale
men captured by British privateers and
small naval craft was comparable to the
number of similar British vessels taken by
the American privateers. The prison ships
and naval prisons of the enemy at New
York, in Canada, the British West Indies,
and England were at times crowded with
Americans captured at sea. 1 A few of these
men England enlisted in her navy; and with
others she manned a whaling-fleet for the
coast of Brazil composed of seventeen ves
sels. It is, however, worthy of note that
binations is a miserable one. In the same letter
the Board writes also concerning the "Thorn"
that "bets run high that she will sell for
two hundred thousand pounds." Records
and Papers of Continental Congress, 37, pp.
145, 147.
1. See Chapter IX, page 267; also Gomer
Williams, Liverpool Privateers, Chapter IV,
Privateers of the American War of Independ
ence. From August, 1778, to April, 1779, Liver
pool fitted out one hundred and twenty pri
vateers.
152 A avy of the American Revolution
the supplies captured from the British were
often almost indispensable to the colonists;
while similar captures made by the British
had to the captors little value.
Another factor in the naval situation
of the Americans was the existence of
state navies in Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, Connecticut, New York, Penn
sylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Caro
lina, and South Carolina. The fleet of
Massachusetts, comprising sixteen armed
vessels, was the most active and effect
ive of the state fleets. The Virginia navy
numbering about fifty vessels, was poorly
equipped and rendered little service. These
fleets were made up of all sorts of naval
craft; sailing vessels variously rigged,
fire-ships, floating batteries, barges, row-
galleys with and without sails, half-galleys,
and boats of all sizes. Most of this craft
was designed for the defence of coasts,
rivers, and towns. This was especially true
of the galleys, which were shallow vessels,
some seventy or eighty feet in length, carry
ing two or three cannon, sometimes as large
as 36 s or 42 s. Only some sixty of these
vessels of the state navies were well adapted
for deep-sea navigation. 1
To a limited extent both privateers and
state vessels were placed at the service of
the Marine Committee. There were cruises,
expeditions, and defences of towns, in which
1. See Part II, State Navies.
Navy of the American Revolution 153
two, or the three, services participated. In
such cases the senior Continental captain
was regularly the ranking officer, or the com
modore of the fleet, as it was then expressed.
To the extent that state vessels and priva
teers might be concerted with the Continen
tal vessels, it would seem at first blush
that they undoubtedly were elements of
naval strength to the Marine Committee.
This was by no means true. These con
certed expeditions proved disappointing,
and when too late the Committee became
wary of them. Proper subordination, upon
which naval success so much depends, could
not be obtained in these mixed fleets. The
commander of a state vessel or the master
of a privateer, for aught either could see,
subtended as large an angle in maritime
affairs, as an officer of Congress, which
body was to them nebulous, uncertain, and
irresolute.
If the location and physical form of colo
nial America with reference to the sea
tended to develop a maritime people, they
also made most difficult the problems of
naval defence. As has been pointed out,
the territory of the revolting colonies com
prised a narrow band of seacoast divided
into a number of peninsulas. All the large
towns were seaports. Had the peninsulas
been islands, their defence against the great
sea-power of England would have been an
impossibility. The connections by land on
154 -Vary of the American Revolution
the west side of the thirteen colonies gave
Washington a most valuable line of commun
ications from Canada to Florida. Had the
revolting territory lain compactly, approach
ing a square in shape, with a narrow front
age on the sea, its naval defence would have
been a simple problem.
Having decided late in 1775 to make a
naval defence, Congress early in 1776 took
into consideration the establishing of one
or more bases for naval operations. 1 There
were needed one or more strongly fortified
ports where the Continental fleet and its
prizes would be comparatively secure from
attack, and where the armed vessels could
equip, man, and refit. The ports best
adapted for naval stations were Boston,
New York, Philadelphia, some point on or
near the James river in Virginia, and Charles
ton, South Carolina. Lesser towns had
their advocates and their hopes. In Feb
ruary, 1776, Gurdon Saltonstall of Connec
ticut wrote to Silas Deane that New London
would be "the Asylum of Cont. Navey,"
for "one they must have of necessity." 2
The Southern ports were not available for
several reasons, but chiefly on account of
their distance from the center of maritime
interests in New England. New York was
1. Journals of Continental Congress, March
23, 1776.
2. Papers of Silas Deane in the Library of
the Connecticut Historical Society.
Xavy of the American Revolution 155
occupied by the British. Philadelphia had
many points in its favor, not the least of
which was the location there of Congress
and the Marine Committee. Its occupation
for a time by the enemy in 1777 and 1778,
and the close watch which his armed vessels
maintained at the mouth of Delaware Bay,
greatly impaired its usefulness as a harbor
of refuge for the Continental vessels. Bos
ton was by far the most available port.
After its abandonment by the British in
March, 1776, and the shifting of the theater
of the war first to the Middle and later to
the Southern states, it was left compara
tively free from British interference. It
was the naval emporium of the Revolution,
where naval stores, armament and equip
ment for vessels of war, seamen, and ships
could be procured, if they were to be had
at all.
The British had naval bases in America
that left. little to be desired. When they
seized New York in September, 1776, they
obtained not only a military point of the
highest strategic value, but also a secure
naval station for fitting out and refitting
their privateers and naval ships. From
New York, centrally situated with reference
to the revolting colonies, their vessels pro
ceeded along the Atlantic coast both north
ward and southward on the outlook for
American merchantmen, privateers, and
naval craft. Their favorite patrolling
of the American Revolution
grounds were off the entrances of Delaware,
Chesapeake, and Narragansett bays. Brit
ish vessels were also to be found off
Boston Bay, Ocracoke Inlet, Cape Fear,
Charleston, and Savannah. The British
occupation of Newport from 1776 to 1779,
and of Savannah from 1778, and Charles
ton from 1780, to the end of the war,
afforded other convenient stations for
British operations against the shipping of
the colonies. St. Augustine was a port of
much importance in the movements of the
enemy s smaller ships. The naval stations
at Halifax, Jamaica, and the Bermudas,
while not so convenient as those enumerated,
were sources of naval strength to the Brit
ish. Halifax was a base for the naval oper
ations against New England. It scarcely
needs to be said that the ports mentioned
were in a way secondary bases of opera
tions, and that England s center for ships,
seamen, and supplies of all sorts was the
British Isles.
From this account of the respective naval
stations in America of the two combatants,
one proceeds naturally to a comparison of
their fleets. The rude naval craft of the
Americans, two-thirds of which were made-
over merchantmen, was outclassed by the
vessels of the Royal Navy at every point.
Disregarding the fleets of Washington and
Arnold, there were during the Revolution
fifty-six armed vessels in the American
A flc y of the American Revolution 157
navy, mounting on the average about twen
ty guns. The vessels in the British navy
when the Revolution opened in 1775 num
bered 270, and when it closed, 468. 1 Of this
latter number, 174 were ships of the line,
each mounting between sixty and one hun
dred guns. The naval force of the Ameri
cans when it was at its maximum in the
fall of 1776 consisted of 27 ships, mounting
on the average twenty guns. 2 At the same
time the British had on the American sta
tion, besides a number of small craft, 71
ships, which mounted on the average twenty-
eight guns. 3 Of these, two were 64 s; one, a
60; seven, 50 s; and three, 44 s. The British
vessels, being so much larger than the Amer
ican, were naturally armed with much heav
ier guns. Very few 18-pounders were to
be found in the Continental navy. The fri
gates were usually mounted with 12 s, 9 s,
and 6 s; and many of the smaller craft with
6 s and 4 ; s. The guns on the larger British
ships mounted 18 s, 24 s, 32 s, and 42 ; s.
An exhibition of figures showing the dif
ference in size between one of the largest of
1. Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 328.
2. Few of these vessels were ready for sea
for lack of crews. The British also suffered
greatly during the Revolution owing to the
scarcity of seamen. This the First Lord of
the Admiralty attributed to the loss of 18,000
American sailors, who had contributed to the
manning of the British fleets in former wars.
Annual Register, 1778, 201.
3. Boston Gazette, November 4, 1776.
158 Navy of the American Revolution
the frigates built by the Marine Committee
in 1776 and a typical 100-gun ship of the
line of the Royal Navy is interesting not
only by way of comparison, but also as
giving a notion of the size of Revolutionary
naval craft. The figures in feet for the
American 32-gun frigate, " Hancock," and
for the British 100-gun ship, "Victo
ry/ respectively, were as follows : Length
of gun deck, 137 and 186; length of keel,
116 and 151; width of beam, 34 and 52;
depth, 12 and 22. The tonnage of the
"Hancock s" companion frigate, the "Bos
ton," was 515 tons; of the "Alfred," the
first ship fitted out by Congress, 200 tons. 1
Continental naval craft, such as the
" Cabot," "Wasp," and " Fly," were smaller
still than the "Alfred."
The number of seamen and marines in the
Continental navy is believed not to have
exceeded at any time three thousand men.
The exact number of commissioned officers
in the Continental navy and marine corps
may not as yet have been ascertained.
Owing to the diffusion of the power of ap
pointment, the Naval Department of the
Revolution seems to have prepared no per
fect list of its officers. The best list of
commissioned officers, and one that in all
probability needs few corrections was com-
1. A battleship building in 1903 at the
New York navy yard has a displacement of
16,000 tons.
Navy of the American Revolution 159
piled in 1794 in the Auditor s Office, De
partment of the Treasury. 1 This gives the
names of 1 commander-in-chief, 45 captains,
and 132 lieutenants, or 178 commissioned
officers in all, in the navy proper; and 1
major, 31 captains, and 91 lieutenants, or
123 commissioned officers, in the marine
corps. With the exception of the years
1776 and 1777, when the total number of
officers in actual service was about one-half
of the above figures, the number of officers
at sea or attached to vessels in ports was
much less than one-half. In 1902 the Amer
ican navy consisted of 899 commissioned
officers of the line, arranged in eight grades.
In 1775 the British navy contained 18,000
seamen and marines, and when the war
closed in 1783 this number had risen to
110,000. The total " extra" and " ordi
nary" expenses of the Royal Navy from
1775 to 1783, as voted by Parliament,
amounted to 8,386,000. 2
Both Continental and state naval services
suffered from the lack of esprit de corps,
naval traditions, and a proper subordina
tion and concert of action between officers
and crews. Bravery is often a poor sub
stitute for organization and naval experi
ence and skill. Navies can be grown, but
not created. The quality of the Continen-
1. Manuscript list, in Division of Manu-.
scripts, Library of Congress.
2. Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 327.
160 Xavy of the American Revolution
tal naval officers, diluted it is true by the
presence of a few "political skippers/ was
upon the whole as high as the circum
stances of their choice and the naval ex
perience of the country admitted. Many
of them were drawn from the merchant ser
vice, and a few had had some months 7 ex
perience in state navies. Six captains ap
pointed by Washington entered the service
of the Marine Committee.
The vessels of the Continental navy were
procured and managed under several Con
tinental auspices. The Marine Committee,
with its predecessor and its successors in naval
administration was the chief naval admin
istrative organ of the Revolutionary gov
ernment. We have already seen, however,
that Washington fitted out one fleet in New
England and another in New York; and
that Arnold fought with still another fleet,
one of the most important naval engage
ments of the Revolution. In a succeeding
chapter we shall find that the American rep
resentatives in France, who were respon
sible to the Foreign Office of Congress, and
the Continental agent at New Orleans, who
worked chiefly under the Committee of
Commerce, fitted out fleets, and were vested
with important naval duties. At one and
the same time three committees of Congress,
the Marine Committee, the Committee of
Foreign Affairs, and the Committee of Com
merce, were fitting out armed vessels.
CHAPTER VI
MOVEMENTS OF THE CONTINENTAL
FLEET UNDER THE MARINE
COMMITTEE
Many duties fell to the Marine Committee
and its fleet which were not of a purely
military character. The Committee was
obliged to employ some of its vessels in
keeping open the commercial and diplo
matic communications of the United States
with Europe and the West Indies; upon
this intercourse with foreign countries
largely depended the successful issue of the
war. The Committee detailed vessels to
carry abroad ambassadors, and foreign
agents; letters and dispatches; tobacco, fish,
flour, indigo, and such other colonial pro
ducts as exchanged well for naval stores,
clothing, and the munitions of war. Among
the distinguished men who took passage on
board the Continental vessels were John
Adams, Lafayette, and Gerard, the first
French minister to the United States. In
this work it cooperated with other com
mittees of Congress, and most especially
1 62 A T fl7 v of the American Revolution
with the Committee of Secret Correspon
dence, or its successor, the Committee of
Foreign Affairs; and with the Secret Com
mittee, or, as it was later called, the Com
mittee of Commerce. Owing to the close
connection of the w r ork of the Marine Com
mittee and the Committee of Commerce in
exporting colonial products and in importing
supplies, their accounts became inextric
ably confused. While running errands for
the various administrative organs of Con
gress, the Marine Committee often at the
same time ran errands of its own. A com
mander who had been selected to carry
abroad a minister or foreign agent, might
be ordered to pick up any prizes which fell
in his way, or to cruise for a brief period in
European waters while waiting for letters
and packets from Paris addressed to Con
gress; or if on the other hand, it was a
voyage in which dispatch was of the highest
importance, he would be specifically for
bidden to do these very things.
Turning now to the strictly military work
of the Committee, one finds that clearness
in presentation will be obtained by making
a classification of naval operations. These
will be divided into primary and secondary
operations. A primary operation will be
defined as one directed against the enemy s
naval vessels at sea. Any other naval opera
tion whatsoever will be called asecondary one.
Primary operations will be divided into ma-
Navy of the American Revolution 163
jor and minor operations. In major primary
operations fleets of considerable size and force
are matched against each other, as was the
case at the battles of Santiago, Trafalgar,
and Martinique. Minor primary operations
are engagements between some two or
three of the smaller vessels of the combat
ants. A good example of these is the fight
between the "Bon Homme Richard" and
the "Serapis." Secondary operations are
of several forms, chief of which is "com
merce-destroying." Continental vessels
during a single cruise sometimes engaged in
both primary and secondary operations.
In* the light of the comparison which has
been made showing the relative strength
of the Continental and British navies, the
reader does not need to be told that the
Marine Committee did not engage its fleet
in major primary operations. The very ex
istence of the Continental vessels depended
upon their success in keeping outside the
range of the larger guns of the Royal Navy.
The Marine Committee sometimes gave
specific orders to its captains to avoid the
British "two-deckers." In the minor pri
mary operations of the Revolution some
thirty or thirty-five engagements may be
counted. The honors here are upon the
whole evenly divided. The Americans cap
tured ten or twelve naval vessels of the
enemy. With the exceptions of the frigate
"Fox," 26. captured by Captain John Manly
164 A fli v of the American Revolution
between New England and Newfoundland;
and the sloop "Drake," 20, and the ships
"Countess of Scarborough/ 20, and " Sera-
pis," 44, captured by Captain John Paul
Jones in European waters, the prizes of the
Americans were minor naval craft, averag
ing ten or twelve 4 s and 6 s. The British
captured or destroyed about the same num
ber of vessels as they lost, but their prizes
on the average were larger and better armed
vessels than were those of the Americans.
Seven of them were frigates. On the other
hand the British had no victory as brilliant
as that of Jones off Flamborough Head.
The secondary operations of the Conti
nental navy were more important than its
primary operations. They mainly involved
the protection of American commerce, the
defence of certain Atlantic ports, the strik
ing of the lines of communication of the
British military forces, the attacking of the
enemy s commerce at sea, and the threaten
ing and assailing of her unprotected coasts
and ports both at home and in her outlying
dependencies. Each of these forms of
secondary operations will now be briefly
considered.
The Committee defended American com
merce by ordering its cruisers to "attack,
take, burn, or destroy" the enemy s priva
teers. One illustration of such orders will
suffice. In November, 1778, the Committee
wrote to the Navy Board at Boston that
Naz y of tlic American Revolution 165
"at present we consider it an Object of im
portance to destroy the infamous Goodrich
who has much infested our Coast, cruising
with a squadron of 4, 5, or 6 armed Vessels,
from 16 guns downwards, from Egg Har
bour to Cape Fear in North Carolina." 1 In
its orders the Committee as a rule included
the small naval ships of the enemy with the
privateers. Of the three naval captains
who lost their lives in the Continental serv
ice, two of them were killed in engagements
with privateers. On March 4, 1778, the
brigantine " Resistance/ Captain Samuel
Chew, while cruising in the West India seas
had a desperate and indecisive encounter
with a letter of marque of 20 guns. Chew
and his lieutenant, George Champlin, both
of New London, were killed; Chew was a
native of Virginia. 2 Late in the summer of
1778 the " General Gates/ 18, Captain John
Skimmer, captured the brigantine " Mon
tague " in an engagement in which Captain
Skimmer lost his life. 3
In addition to defending the American
commerce by cruising against the privateers
and small naval ships of the enemy, the
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, November
16, 1778.
2. F. M. Caulkins, History of New London,
539-40; Records and Papers of New London
Historical Society, Part IV, I, 9.
3. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep
tember 14, 1778.
i66 A (77 v of the American Revolution
Continental vessels often threw their pro
tecting arm directly around the trade of the
states. Vessels were often detailed to con
voy to sea American merchantmen and
packets. At times when the trade was
bound for France, the Continental vessels
accompanied it even as far as the Grand
Banks of Newfoundland, but as a rule their
services did not extend beyond a few leagues
from the American coast. Sometimes the
Continental vessels were ordered to cruise
off the Delaware Bay, or similar channel, to
guide and protect incoming shipping.
The Marine Committee cooperated with
the army in the defence and in the attack
of certain ports. In the campaigns around
Philadelphia in 1777 and 1778 the Continen
tal navy lost some ten vessels, including three
of the thirteen original frigates; and at the
siege of Charleston in 1780 it lost four ves
sels. The British occupation of New York
caused the destruction of the two frigates
built at Poughkeepsie. In 1779 a Conti
nental vessel aided a Spanish expedition in
capturing Mobile. Several times the Com
mittee placed part of its fleet under the con
trol of Washington and the Admiral of the
French naval forces, when they were plan
ning an attack upon some seaport held by
the enemy.
In 1779 Gerard, the French minister, de
vised a plan which contemplated a joint
expedition of the French and American
.Vary of the American Revolution 167
fleets against the British colonies to the
northward. Gerard s purpose was "to give
the King of France Halifax and Newfound
land." In May, 1779, he consulted with
Washington in his camp about the pro
posed expedition. By September Gerard s
plan, or a similar one, had so far matured
that the Marine Committee ordered the
Navy Board at Boston to prepare the Con
tinental vessels for a three months cruise
and to hold them ready to sail at a moment s
warning to join the French fleet, or to pro
ceed to such other place as Washington or
Count D Estaing might direct. The Board
was to provide a sufficient number of pilots
for Newfoundland, Halifax, Rhode Island,
and the Penobscot river. This expedition
was not abandoned until November, 1779. 1
The Committee struck at the enemy s
lines of communication between his army
and navy in America, and the British Isles,
Canada, the Bermudas, Florida, and the
West Indies. After the transfer of the war
to the Southern states in 1778 and 1779,
transports running between New York and
Savannah and Charleston were vulnerable
craft. The capture of British transports
laden with munitions of war, provisions, and
troops had the advantage of obtaining for
1. Bancroft, History of United States, V,
319; Marine Committee Letter Book, Commit
tee to Navy Board at Boston, September 28,
November 10, 1779.
168 Naz \ of the American Revolution
the Americans the very sinews of war, of
which the enemy were deprived. When
troops were captured, they could be ex
changed for an equal number of American
prisoners. The reader may recall that it
was for the purpose of intercepting British
transports that Congress fitted out the
first Continental vessels in October, 1775.
The most successful capture of the ene
my s transports was made in the spring of
1779. In order to protect the trade of the
Southern states, depredations upon which
were most frequent and destructive, the
Marine Committee in February of that year,
ordered the Navy Board at Boston to send
certain of the Continental vessels to sweep
the coast from Cape May to the bar of
South Carolina. This detail of the armed
vessels was made partly to satisfy the mer
chants of Baltimore, who had complained
to Congress that their interests were being
neglected. On March 13 a fleet consisting
of the "Warren," 32, Captain J. B. Hop
kins, as commodore, the "Queen of France,"
28, Captain Joseph Olney, and the "Rang
er/ 18, Captain Thomas Simpson, sailed
from Boston, for the coast of the Southern
states. On April 7 they captured the pri
vateer schooner, "Hibernia." This vessel
told them of the sailing of a fleet of trans
ports from New York, bound for Brigadier-
General Campbell s army in Georgia, and
laden with stores and supplies. The next
Navy of the American Revolution 169
day fifteen leagues off Cape Henry, Hop
kins fell in with the fleet; and meeting with
a trifling resistance, he made prizes of seven
out of its nine vessels. These prizes were
all sent to New England. On April 22, the
"Queen of France" arrived in Boston with
the ship "Maria," 16, carrying eighty-four
men, the schooner "Hibernia," 8, also car
rying eighty-four men, and the brigs "John,"
200 tons, "Batchelor," 120 tons, and " Prince
Frederick," 160 tons. Another prize, His
Majesty s ship "Jason," 16, with one hun
dred men, also reached Boston. The
"Ranger" put into Portsmouth with the
schooner "Chance" and a brig. The
Marine Committee wrote to Captain Hop
kins congratulating him and his fellow cap
tains on the fortunate outcome of their
cruise. 1
The most important objective of the
Marine Committee in its naval operations
was the capture of England s commerce in
transit at sea. The Committee planned to
intercept her sugar ships of the West Indies,
her Newfoundland fishing craft, her Hud
son bay fleet laden with skins and peltries,
her Guineamen with cargoes of ivory and
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com
mittee to Captain Olney, to Captain Harding,
and to Navy Board at Boston, February 10,
1779; Committee to Merchants of Baltimore,
February 23, 1779; Boston Gazette, April 26,
1779; Publications of Rhode Island Historical
Society, VIII, 259.
170 Navy of the American Revolution
slaves, and her Mississippi trade with its
lumber and furs. The Committee s agents
and the naval officers abroad hoped to en
snare the enemy s Baltic trade, the Irish
linen ships, the Brazil whaling fleet, and
homeward bound East Indiamen. The
sending of frigates to the Coromandel Coast
to intercept the enemy s China ships and
the trade of India was seriously considered.
On one occasion the Committee designed to
attack English vessels bound for Canada
with cargoes of "Indian goods." But gen
erally the blows were aimed at the fleets of
rich merchantmen returning to England,
for their many vessels were like honey-
laden bees flying homeward to their hives.
The British fishing fleet on the Grand
Banks of Newfoundland and the homeward
bound West Indiamen were found most
vulnerable. It is not practicable for a com
batant to prey upon commerce far from
his base of operations. The frequent man
ning of prizes depletes his crews and compels
him to make an early return home. The
chance of prizes being retaken is increased
with the distance they must travel to
reach safe ports. The operations of the
Continental vessels in European waters
were made possible by their use of French
ports as naval stations. In attacking Eng
land s commerce the Marine Committee
found most promise of substantial reward
by directing its vessels to cruise during the
Xiii v of t/ic American Revolution 171
summer or the early fall some leagues to the
eastward of the Bermudas in the track of
the homeward bound West Indiamen, laden
with rum, sugar, cotton, coffee, and other
Colonial products. These fleets sometimes
consisted of as many as 200 merchantmen
under the convoy of a few ships of war.
Skilful seamanship found it comparatively
easy to cut out a few sail. In three in
stances Continental vessels made captures
which netted them more than one million
dollars each.
Two of these fortunate cruises w r ere made
while the fleet was under the direction of
the Marine Committee. On May 4, 1779,
the Committee wrote to the Navy Board
at Boston that it desired that the " Con
federacy," " Warren," " Queen of France/
"Ranger," " Jason," "Hibernia," and two
of the lately built packets as tenders, and
the "Deane," which it should send from
Philadelphia, should be joined together and
sail in company to the southward and at
tack the sea force of the enemy on the coast
of Georgia. After routing the enemy there,
the fleet was to throw itself in the way of
the West India ships, bound to England.
A fortnight later the Committee wrote that
it had reason to lay aside the expedition
to Georgia, and that it was their intention
to place the collected naval force in such
manner as to accomplish the double pur
pose of intercepting the enemy s transports,
coming to and going from New York, and
of attacking her homeward bound West
India ships.
In accordance with the latter plan of the
Committee, sometime during the summer a
fleet was sent to sea from Boston, consist
ing of the "Providence", 28, Captain Abra
ham Whipple, commodore of the fleet, the
"Queen of France," 28, Captain John P.
Rathburn, and the "Ranger," 18, Captain
Thomas Simpson. In August the American
vessels fell in with the Jamaica fleet, bound
for London, and convoyed by a 32-gun
frigate and three other armed vessels. The
Americans succeeded in cutting out from
the fleet ten large merchantmen, heavily
laden with rum and sugar. Of the ten ves
sels, seven arrived at Boston and one at
Cape Ann. The names of these eight ships,
whose average burden was 285 tons, were
as follows: " Holderness," " Dawes,"
"George," "Friendship," "Blenheim," "The
tis," "Fort William," and " Neptune." This
was one of the richest captures which the
Continental fleet made during the Revolu
tion. The ships with their cargoes sold for
more than one million dollars. 1 Early in
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, May 4, May
20, 1779; Continental Journal and Weekly
Advertiser, August 26, 1779; Boston Gazette,
September 20, 1779. "Last Saturday noon
this town was alarmed by the Appearance of
Seven Topsail Vessels in the Offing, which,
Xai y of the American Revolution 173
the year the ship "General Gates" and the
sloop "Providence" sent prizes into Boston
which sold for 24Q,WQ. 1
The Marine Committee threatened and at
tacked the enemy s coasts and towns in the
British Isles, Canada, and the West Indies.
Two Continental vessels visited the mouth
of the Senegal river on the west coast of Af
rica. An attack on the shipping of the
Bermudas was ordered to be made, if it was
found practicable. Nassau, New Provi
dence, was twice captured by Continental
vessels, and a third time by a Spanish fleet
and a ship of war of the South Carolina
navy. Robert Morris, when vice-president
of the Marine Committee, planned to send
a fleet of five vessels against the British
possessions in the West Indies and the Flor-
idas. The movements of Captains Wickes,
Conyngham, and Jones in attacking and
alarming the British Isles are well known. 2
however, soon subsided, for between the Hours
of Three and Five in the Afternoon were safe
anchored in this Harbour the Continental
Ships of War, Providence, Queen of France
and Ranger, with Four Prize Ships laden
with Rum and Sugar, being part of a Jamaica
Fleet bound to London captured by the above
Vessels." Continental Journal and Weekly
Advertiser, August 26, 1779, published at
Boston.
1. Publications of Rhode Island Historical
Society, VIII, 259.
2. See Chapter IX and X, Naval Duties
of^ American Representatives in Foreign Coun
tries.
1/4 A ai v of the American Revolution
These expeditions against British coasts,
towns, and dependencies had several ob
jects in view. One, of course, was the cap
ture of booty. To the extent that the ex
peditions were directed against the ship
ping and commerce of the attacked ports,
their object was similar to that of fleets
which cruised against shipping and com
merce at sea. Another object is discovered
in the thought of Morris when he planned to
attack England in the West Indies. Such
a move Morris believed would force the en
emy to withdraw part of his fleet from the
coasts of the United States for the defence
of his attacked colonies; and to the extent
that he did so, the states would be relieved.
The cruises made in the waters around the
British Isles had in view the lessening of
the prestige of Great Britain, the shaking
of her credit, the alarming of her inhabi
tants, and the raising of her marine insur
ance; and also the impressing of Europe
with the power and courage of the new
American nation, and perchance, creating a
diversion in its favor. Both a psychological
and a political element entered into the pur
pose of the cruises in British waters. They
realized to both Britain and the Continent
the existence of a new flag and a new state
in the family of nations.
The naval plan devised by Morris, as
vice-president of the Marine Committee,
deserves additional notice. It was to be
Xai y of flic American Revolution 175
put into operation by John Paul Jones, with
a fleet composed of the "Alfred," "Colum
bus," "Cabot," "Hampden," and sloop
"Providence." Jones was first to proceed
to St. Christopher in the West Indies, which
island was almost defenceless, capture the
cannon, stores, and merchandise there de
posited, and then sail for Pensacola, Florida.
Morris thought Jones might find it best to
pass along the south side of Hispaniola, and
alarm Jamaica by putting in to some of its
ports. Arriving at Pensacola, he would
find it defended by two or three sloops
of war, which could be easily silenced, and
the town would fall into his hands
with its munitions of war, including one
hundred pieces of artillery. Having re
duced Pensacola, Jones was to send a brig-
antine and sloop to cruise at the mouth of
the Mississippi, in order to waylay the Brit
ish merchantmen leaving there, in March
and April with cargoes of indigo, rice, to
bacco, skins, and furs, to the value of 100,-
000 sterling. Returning from the Gulf,
he might alarm St. Augustine, and finally
he might refit in Georgia, or South or North
Carolina. He was directed to carry as
many marines as possible for his opera
tions on shore.
Morris s object in this expedition in
volved a nice bit of naval policy. He pur
posed not so much the taking of booty, as
the alarming of the whole British nation,
176 Navy of the American Revolution
and the forcing of the enemy to withdraw
some of her naval forces from the coast of the
United States. "It has long been clear to me/
he said, "that our infant fleet cannot protect
our coasts; and the only effectual relief it
can afford us, is to attack the enemy s de
fenceless places, and thereby oblige them
to station more of their own ships in their
own countries, or to keep them employed
in following ours, and either way we are re
lieved so far as they do it." Morris pro
posed his plan as a substitute for one of
Jones, which contemplated a descent on
the west coast of Africa; and to the carrying
out of which the Marine Committee had
given its consent. Morris thought that the
same results as Jones sought could be ob
tained with less risk by "cruizing Wind
ward of Barbadoes as all their Guinea Men
fall in there." 1
The Marine Committee naturally planned
and carried out naval enterprises which
had in view two or more forms of secondary
operations. Sometimes it ordered its ves
sels to take stations at sea where they
would be in position to intercept both the
West India trade, and the enemy s trans
ports plying between New York and Eng
land. Often it left the specific object of a
cruise to the Navv Board at Boston, or to
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Morris
to Jones, February, 1, 1777; Morris to Com
modore Hopkins, February 5, 1777.
Navy of the American Revolution 177
the commander of a ship, and issued merely
the general order to proceed to sea and
cruise against the enemy. Any plan of the
Committee which was directed towards
meeting an immediate emergency was rarely
carried out. The movements of the vessels
were rendered uncertain by reason of de
pleted crews, deficient equipments, and the
position of the British fleets. The Com
mittee was often in the dark as to the exact
state of a vessel in New England with ref
erence to its preparation for sea. Conse
quently it made many plans and gave many
orders which could not be put into opera
tion. The telegraph, cable, and rapid postal
services have revolutionized the direction of
naval movements.
In prize-getting the Marine Committee s
most successful years were 1776 and 1779.
Beginning with 1776 the number of prizes
taken by the Continental vessels for each
year of the Committee s incumbency was,
respectively, sixty, twenty, twenty, and
fifty. The fifty prizes captured in 1779
were probably more valuable than the one
hundred taken in the other three years.
As regards the number of Continental ves
sels lost, the years 1776 and 1779, when the
fleet was decreased by but three ships,
again prove to be the most fortunate years.
In 1777 and 1778 twenty-six vessels, ten of
which were frigates, were lost. 1 With the
1. Files of newspapers for the period of the
Revolution.
178 Nai \ of the American Revolution
memory of the misfortunes of the past two
years in mind, well might the Marine Com
mittee write, towards the end of 1778, of
"the bad success that hath hitherto attend
ed our Navy." In May, 1778, it wrote to
the Navy Board at Boston, that the "Com
mittee are entirely of Opinion with you that
it will be proper to send out a Collected force
to Cruise against our enemies that we re
cover the injured reputation of our Navy
and the losses we have sustained." 1
In 1779 the navy. retrieved the bad effects
of some of its disasters. Its changed for
tunes can in part be easily accounted for.
The transference of the scene of war to the
Southern states late in 1778, removed a
part of the British land and sea forces from
the North, and thereby gave the Naval De
partment a freer hand in its operations,
and rendered the movements of the fleet
less perilous. The Department this year
had larger success in manning and equip
ping its fleet, It was, therefore, able not
only to send the armed vessels to sea more
frequently, but also to send several of them
cruising in company. Such little fleets had
a decided advantage over single cruisers,
both in defensive and offensive operations.
No doubt, too, the experiences and past fail
ures of the navy were now telling in a better
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, May 8, No
vember 9, 1778.
Nary of the American Revolution 179
understanding of naval tactics, and were
bringing about a proper subordination and
concert of action between officers and men.
Possibly, something should be attributed
to the Department s increased experience
in marine affairs.
The reader has probably already drawn
parallels, far from fanciful, between the so
lutions of the naval problems of the Revolu
tion made by the Marine Committee and
those of the Spanish-American war made by
the Naval Board of Strategy at Washington.
The naval problems presented to the two
bodies were in certain respects widely differ
ent. Equally striking similarities appear.
In both wars the United States was fighting
a European power with possessions in the
West Indies and in the Asiatic seas. The
attacks on Nassau and Morris s proposed
expedition against the British West Indies
correspond to the movements of the Ameri
can fleet in the West Indies during the late
war. The operations of Wickes, Conyn-
gham, and Jones off the coasts of the British
Isles are matched by the proposed descent
.on the Spanish coast in 1898. The plan
made in 1777 to send a fleet of frigates to
Mauritius and from thence to operate against
the English trade in the Indian seas looks
singularly like Admiral Dewey s movement
from Hong Kong against Manila.
The hope is to be cherished that America
will never again cross swords with her kin
180 lYarv of the American Revolution
beyond seas, but if moved by some untoward
fate she should, it is not too much to say
that a Naval Board of Strategy at Washing
ton will devise plans of naval attack and de
fence quite similar to those of the Marine
Committee. The weak spots in a nation s
armor often prove to be its outlying depend
encies, especially when they are situated
near the enemy s coast. The principles of
naval strategy which led the Marine Com
mittee either to attack, or to plan to attack,
Canada, the Newfoundland fisheries, the
Bermudas, and the British West Indies, are
still operative, notwithstanding the vast
changes which the past century and a quar
ter have witnessed in the methods of naval
warfare, and in the distribution of the terri
tory of the Western Hemisphere among na
tions, new as well as old. In a world of
change the fundamental principles of naval
strategy remain immutable.
CHAPTER VII
THE BOARD OF ADMIRALTY
It is speaking tritely, although accurately,
to say that our present executive depart
ments at Washington did not spring into
perfect being in 1789 like panoplied Minerva
from the head of Jove. Not a little of the
interest and value of a study of the admin
istration of the Revolution comes from the
fact that the administrative practices and
experiences of this period gave rootage to
the later and more perfect executive organs.
The development of the Continental Naval
Department, both in the variety and in the
character of its forms, is typical of that of
the other administrative departments of
the Revolution. We have already seen how
the naval business of the Continental Con
gress was first vested in the small Naval
Committee; and how this Committee, early
in 1776, was overshadowed and absorbed
by the more numerous and more active Ma
rine Committee. We now come to the third
step in this evolution, the superseding of the
Marine Committee by the Board of Admiralty .
The Marine Committee had proved slow,
182 Xai y of the American Revolution
cumbrous, inexpert, and irresponsible. The
wiser members of Con-gress had long seen
that it was a prime defect in governmental
practice to add to the duties of a legislative
committee, those of an executive office; for
it threw upon the same men too much work
of too diverse kinds, and it removed from
the administrative organ its most essential
attributes of permanency, technical skill,
and responsibility. In December, 1776,
Robert Morris had urged the employment
of a corps of executives chosen outside the
membership of Congress, as a requisite to a
proper and orderly management of the busi
ness of the Revolutionary government. 1
As early as February ^26, 1777, William
Ellery, a member of the Marine Committee
from Rhode Island, wrote to William Ver-
non at Providence, who was soon to become
a member of the Navy Board at Boston,
that a proper Board of Admiralty was very
much wanted. "The members of Congress,"
he said, "are unacquainted with this Depart
ment. As one of the Marine Committee I
1. Force s Archives, 5th, III, 1336, Robert
Morris to American Commissioners at Paris,
December 21, 1776. Morris wrote as follows:
"So long as that respectable body persist in
the attempt to execute, as well as to deliber
ate on their business, it never will be done as
it ought, and this has been urged many and
many a time by myself and others, but some
of them do not like to part with power, or to
pay others for doing what they cannot do
themselves "
A fli v of the American Revolution 183
sensibly feel my ignorance in this respect.
Under a mortifying Sense of this I wrote to
you for Information in this Matter. Books
cannot be had here; and I should have been
glad to have been pointed to proper Authors
on this Subject when I should be in a Place
where Books may be had." 1 Early in 1779
when Congress was groping in search of a
more efficient naval executive, Ellery again
expressed regret at the lack of technical
skill in the management of the navy. He
said that the marine affairs would never be
"well conducted so long as the supreme di
rection of them is in the hands of Judges,
Lawyers, Planters, &c." 2 Even before Mor
ris and Ellery had declared for better exec
utives, John Paul Jones, while distressed by a
loss in naval rank caused by the appointing
and the placing above him of certain "polit
ical skippers," wrote that efficient naval
officers could never be obtained, until Con
gress "in their wisdom see proper to appoint
a Board of Admiralty competent to deter
mine impartially the respective merits and
abilities of their officers, and to superintend,
regulate, and point out all the motions and
operations of the navy." 3
1. Publications of Rhode Island Historical
Society, VIII, 205, Papers of William Vernon
and Navy Board.
2. Ibid., 257, Ellery to Vernon, March 23,
1779.
3. Force s Archives, 5th, II, 1106, Jones to
Morris, October 16, 1776.
184 Navy of the American Revolution
During 1778 and 1779 Congress hit upon
a system of executive departments that did
little violence to its lust for power, and at
the same time secured a permanent body
of administrators and advisors. This was
the system of executive boards, composed
jointly of commissioners selected outside
the membership of Congress, and of mem
bers of Congress. Congress and the Marine
Committee probably derived a part of their
knowledge of executive boards from the
practice of the English government and of
the states. "Board of Admiralty" was the
name during the Revolution, as now, of the
British Naval Office. Pennsylvania, Vir
ginia, and South Carolina had early in the
Revolution established "Navy Boards/
In October, 1777, Congress had formed a
Board of War composed of five commis
sioners. In October, 1778, Congress at
tempted to clip the wings of this Board and
bring it under Congressional control by sub
stituting two members of Congress for two
of its five commissiojiers. 1 On July 30,
1779, a Board of Treasury was constituted
on exactly this plan, being composed of
three commissioners and two members of
Congress-. 2
In the spring of 1779 the feeling was gen
eral that some change must be made in the
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 29, 1778.
2. Ibid., July 30, 1779.
A arv of the American Revolution 185
management of the navy. Both 1777 and
1778 had been lean, empty, and disastrous
years for the Continental fleet. The blame
for this failure was placed upon the Marine
Committee and the naval commanders. It
was in April, 1779, that Washington wrote
to John Jay asking questions and making
suggestions about the management of the
navy, which may be briefly summarized as
follows: What are the reasons for keeping
the Continental vessels in port? Had not
Congress better lend them to " commanders
of known bravery and capacity " for a limit
ed term? If additional encouragement is
necessary in order to induce seamen to en
list, why not give them the whole of their
captures? Great advantage might result
from placing the whole fleet under "a man
of ability and authority commissioned to
act as commodore or admiral." Under the
present system the Continental ships are
not only very expensive and totally useless,
but sometimes they require a land force to
protect them. 1
This arraignment of the navy is some
what severe. The last clause in the above
paragraph refers to an incident which took
place at New London in the spring of 1776.
The reader may recall that Commodore Hop
kins put into this port on his return from
1. Johnston, Correspondence and Public
Papers of John Jay, I, 207-08, Washington to
Jay, April, 1779.
186 Naz \ of the American Revolution
New Providence and just after his unfor
tunate engagement with the "Glasgow."
He then received a temporary loan from
Washington of one hundred and seventy
troops, with whom, for the time being, he
replenished his depleted crews. He kept
the troops less than six weeks.
In his reply to Washington s letter, Jay
ascribed the naval inefficiency to a defec
tive Naval Department. He said: "While
the maritime affairs of the continent con
tinue under the direction of a committee,
they will be exposed to all of the conse
quences of want of system, attention, and
knowledge. The marine committee con
sists of a delegate from each state; it fluc
tuates, new members constantly coming and
old ones going out; three or four, indeed,
have remained in it from the beginning; and
few members understand even the state of
our naval affairs, or have time or inclina
tion to attend to them. But why is not
this system changed? It is in my opinion,
inconvenient to the family compact." 1 The
"family compact" is supposed to refer to
the Lees. During the Revolution the Lees
and the Adamses formed the nucleus of a
faction, which was generally opposed to con
structive legislation in the field of adminis
tration.
1. Johnston, Correspondence and Public
Papers of John Jay, I, 209, Jay to Washing
ton, April 26, 1779.
Xai y of the American Revolution 187
When this letter of Jay s was written a
new naval system was forming. 1 On June
9 Congress resolved to vest in " commis
sioners all business relating to the marine
of these United States." 2 Apparently this
resolution of Congress meant that the naval
affairs were to be given over to a board
chosen outside the membership of Congress;
if so, Congress soon retracted it. On Octo
ber 1, 1779, Congress discharged the com
mittee that had had the new project in
hand, and directed the Marine Committee
"to prepare and report a plan of regulations,
for conducting the naval affairs of the United
States." 3 The Marine Committee reported
on October 28, 1779; thereupon, Congress
passed resolutions making provision for a
Board of Admiralty, "to be subject in all
cases to Congress." These resolutions were
in important respects based upon those of
October 17 and November 24, 1777, estab
lishing a Board of War. 4 This was natural,
as the work of a war and a naval office are
quite similar. In the composition of the
two boards there was a vital difference. The
Board of War, as has been said, consisted
of five commissioners; the Beard of Admir-
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, April 27
1779.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Tune
9, 1779.
3. Ibid., October 1, 1779.
4. Ibid., October 17, November 24, 1777.
1 88 A ttrv of the American Revolution
ally consisted of three commissioners and
two members of Congress^ being modeled
after the Board of Treasury. Any three
members of the Board of Admiralty were
empowered to form a quorum. No two
members were permitted to come from the
same state. The Board must have its office
in the same town in which Congress was
sitting. It selected its clerks, but Congress
>chose its secretary.
/ The po\vers and duties of the Board of
I Admiralty were practically ^he same as
Ithose of the Marine Committee^ The Board
V r as to order and direct the n/ovements of
all ships and vessels of war. It was to su
perintend and direct the navy boards and
see that they kept fair entries and proper
accounts of all the business transacted by
them. It was to keep a complete and ac
curate register of the officers of the navy,
giving their rank and the date of their com
missions; these were to be signed by the
President of Congress and countersigned
by the secretary of the Board. The Board
was to have the care and direction of the
marine prisoners. It was to obtain regular
and exact returns of all warlike stores,
clothing, provisions, and miscellaneous arti
cles belonging to the marine department.
Lastly the Board of Admiralty was to " exe
cute all such matters as shall be directed,
and give their opinion on all such subjects
as shall be referred to them by Congress,
Xai y of the American Revolution 189
or as they may think necessary for the bet
ter regulation and improvement of the navy
of the United States; and in general to super
intend and direct all the branches of the
marine department." 1
The officers of the navy were enjoined to
obey the directions of the Board of Admir
alty. The proceedings, records, and papers
of the Board were to be open at all times
to the inspection of the members of Con
gress. The Board of Admiralty was or
dered to examine at once the unsettled ac
counts of the navy boards and naval agents,
and report thereon to Congress. It was
further directed to form proper plans for
increasing the naval force of the United
States and for the better regulating of the
same.
The salary of each commissioner w r as
fixed at $14,000, and that of the secretary
of the Board at $8,000 a year. On
September 13, 1780, these salaries were de
creased to $1,850 and to $1,100 a year,
respectively, to be now paid quarterly in spe
cie or its equivalent. 2 When Congress in
creased the salary of its Commissioners of
the Treasury from $1,850 to $2,000, the
Commissioners of Admiralty, exhibiting
that delicate sense of the fitness of more
pay which characterizes the employees of
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 28, 1779.
2. Ibid., September 13, 1780.
190 Navy of the American Revolution
governments, petitioned for a similar in
crease in their salaries; 1 and Congress, in
accord with its subsequent character under
the Constitution, refused a favor to the
navy which it granted to a more popular
branch of its public service. 2 The Con
gressional members received no pay for
their services on the Board.
When Congress came to select Commis
sioners of Admiralty, it found no easy task.
Men who were eager for distinction and
honor felt that they were cultivating a surer
field in their home governments or in the
army. The prestige of the Continental gov
ernment was now declining. The dilution
of salaries caused by the depreciation of
the currency lessened the attractiveness of
the Continental offices. Employees of Con
gress found it hard to support their families
on their pay. Then too, the navy business
had become a thankless and disheartening
task. The class of men who will accept a
disagreeable office with little pay and no
glory is a small one at any time.
The first three commissioners elected by
Congress were William Whipple of New
Hampshire, chairman of the Marine Com
mittee, Thomas Waring of South Carolina,
and George Bryan of Pennsylvania. Each
1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
37, p. 207, Report ^f Board of Admiralty,
April 12, 1781.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, July
7, 1781.
Nary of the American Revolution 191
declined. On December 7 Francis Lewis
of New York was chosen commissioner, and
on the next day he accepted the office.
Congress on the 3rd had named the two
Congressional members of the Board, Wil
liam Floyd of New York, and James Forbes
of Maryland. The appointment of Lewis
vacated the position of Floyd, as two mem
bers from the same state could not serve
on the Board. William Ellery of Rhode
Island was now elected as the second Con
gressional member. Congress had already
chosen John Brown, the secretary of the
Marine Committee, to be secretary of the
Board of Admiralty. Lewis, Forbes, and
Ellery were sufficient to organize the Board.
Accordingly on December 8, 1779, Congress
resolved "that all matters heretofore re
ferred to the marine committee be trans
mitted to the board of admiralty." 1 On
December 10 the Board of Admiralty wrote
to the Navy Board at Boston, informing it
of the dissolution of the Marine Committee,
and directing it to address in the future all
letters and applications relating to the navy
to the " Commissioners of the Admiralty of
the United States." 2
Upon the organization of the Board of
Admiralty, its difficulties in obtaining quo-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, No
vember 26, December 3, 7, 8, 1779.
2. Marine Committee Letter Book, Board
of Admiralty to Navy Board at Boston, De
cember 10, 1779.
192 Navy of the American Revolution
rums began; and the troubles of Congress
in its search for additional commissioners
continued. On January 22, 1780, Congress
gave Brigadier-General Thomas Mifflin of.
Pennsylvania an opportunity to decline a
commissionership. 1 On March 21 Lewis was
complaining to Congress that Forbes was
sick, and that consequently there had been
no Board since the 4th instant. He hoped
Congress would fill up the vacancy and pre
vent the navy business from being longer
suspended. 2 On the death of Forbes on
March 25, Congress elected James Madison
to fill his place. Madison had but recently
arrived at Philadelphia as a delegate from
Virginia.
In June, 1780, Lewis was again in trouble
and was writing to Congress. He conceived
that the addition of members of Congress
to the Board of Admiralty was principally
intended to lay such information before
Congress from time to time as the Board
desired to give, to explain its reports, and
in the absence, or during the sickness, of
a commissioner to make a quorum. He
said that, notwithstanding the attention
which Madison and Ellery had been dis
posed to give, their necessary attendance
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Janu
ary 22, 1780.
2. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 78, XIV, 309, Lewis to President of Con
gress, March 21, 1780.
A (7T v of tJie American Revolution 193
on Congress did not admit of their being
daily and constantly present at -the sessions
of the Board; that Ellery had been super
seded in Congress; and that at present there
was no Board for lack of a quorum. 1 Con
gress once more came to the rescue of Lewis
and his Board by appointing Ellery and
Thomas Woodford as commissioners. 2 El
lery at once accepted, but Woodford for
some reason declined the appointment.
Congress never obtained a third commis
sioner. In the fall of 1780 Daniel Hunting-
ton of Connecticut and Whitmill Hill of
North Carolina were the Congressional mem
bers of the Board. On their being sup
planted in November, 1780, by new dele
gates to Congress from their respective
states, it took the urgent solicitation of
Lewis to get Congress to fill the vacancies. 3
When the Board was discontinued in July,
1781, it had but one Congressional member,
Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer of Maryland.
To all intents and purposes Lewis and
Ellery were the Board of Admiralty ; and in
many respects they were well qualified for
their positions. Both were able men, though
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 78, XIV, 337-43, 349, Lewis to Presi
dent of Congress, June 6, June 12, 1780.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, June
23, 1780.
3. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
37, pp. 291, 294, Lewis to President of Con-
gress, November 4, 6, 1780.
194 A at 3 1 of the American Revolution
not brilliant. Both had passed the meridian
of life; Lewis was in his sixty-seventh year,
and Ellery in his fifty-second. Both had
taken prominent parts in the Revolutionary
counsels in their respective states; both had
been members of the Continental Congress
and of the Marine Committee. Both were
among the immortal Signers of the Declar
ation of Independence. Lewis had amassed
a fortune as an importing merchant in New
York, and had served in the French and
Indian war. Ellery had been a merchant,
and later a lawyer in Newport, Rhode Isl
and. Both men were interested in naval
affairs, and had rendered good service on
the Marine Committee. Lewis s work on
the Board of Admiralty exceeded that of
Ellery.
From the first the Board of Admiralty
was more dependent on Congress than the
Marine Committe had been. Congress, al
ways jealous of its prerogatives, naturally
permitted a freer exercise of power to a
committee of its own members, than to a
mixed board, whose work was almost en
tirely that of commissioners selected out
side the membership of Congress. To the
Board s dependence on Congress for its
organization was added that for means to
carry out its naval program. The fre
quency with which it went to Congress ask
ing for quorums and money indicates its
helplessness and weakness.
Navy of the American Revolution 195
The work of the Board of Admiralty was,
generally speaking, that of the Marine Com
mittee under a change of name. It man
aged the dwindling business of the navy
from December, 1779, until July, 1781. It
was served by the Navy Boards and naval
agents of its predecessor, the Marine Com
mittee. Immediately after its organization,
the Board of Admiralty, in compliance with
the resolutions of Congress, urged the Navy
Boards and naval agents to transmit to it
accurate accounts of their transactions up
to December 31, 1779. Owing to the loose
methods of business w r hich obtained during
the Revolution, the agents of the Board
found it in most cases impossible to make
such statements.
The failure of the agents properly to re
port their accounts, together with a diminu
tion in the naval business of Congress, now
led to some decrease in naval machinery.
In August, 1780, the Board recommended
that the two Philadelphia prize agents be
discharged, since it had not been able to
induce them by means of its repeated writ
ten and verbal requests to exhibit their ac
counts. Congress now discontinued their
office and gave their work to the Board of
Admiralty. 1 In the winter of 1780-81 the
1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
37, p. 125, Board of Admiralty to President of
Congress, August 14, 1780; Journals of Conti
nental Congress, August 18, 1780.
196 Navy of the America)! Revolution
resignations of Winder and Wharton, as
commissioners of the Navy Board at Phila
delphia, were accepted by Congress, and the
duties of this Board were vested in its re
maining member, James Read. 1 On May 7,
1781, Congress accepted the resignation of
Deshon of the Navy Board at Boston. 2 The
work of the Navy Boards and naval agents
had now greatly diminished. Already the
settling of naval accounts was becoming one
of their principal tasks. After 1779 there
were few Continental prizes to libel. Upon
the resignation of the naval agents at Phila
delphia, those at Boston, Portsmouth, and
New London were the only ones of conse
quence.
The Board of Admiralty was called to act
upon divers letters, petitions, and memor
ials, differing little from the similar com
munications which Congress referred to the
Marine Committee. It also fell to its lot to
prepare and report not a little important
legislation. The reports of the Board,
which were in writing, were chiefly the work
of Lewis and Ellery, and were presented to
Congress by the Congressional members of
the Board. Congress usually referred these
reports to a committee, before it discussed
them or took final action upon them. Not
a few of the reports of the Board were,
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 5, 1780; January 11, 1781.
2. Ibid., May 7, 1781.
A az-v of the American Revolution 197
however, pigeon-holed by Congress, and no
action was taken upon them. The naval leg
islation of Congress during the incumbency
of the Board of Admiralty was in part ren
dered necessary by the decline of the navy.
Certain other legislation was caused by the
putting into effect of the Articles of Con
federation on March 1, 1781; and a few
Congressional resolutions on naval affairs
may be attributed to the special legislative
activity and enterprise of the Board of Ad
miralty.
In January, 1780, Congress on the recom
mendation of the Board of Admiralty passed
a resolution w r hich was no doubt in harmony
with administrative economy and thrift,
but which pressed hard upon many naval
officers. The pay of all officers in the navy
not in actual service was at once to cease.
Their commissions were to be deposited with
the most convenient Navy Board, until the
officers should be again called into service;
each officer was to retain his rank. 1 This
was merely a courteous w T ay of disestablish
ing the larger part of the navy. Owing to
the capture and destruction of many Conti
nental vessels, most of the naval officers
were not in actual service. The number of
commissioned officers in actual service in
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 37, pp. 175-77, Report of Board of Ad
miralty, January 24, 1780; Journals of Conti
nental Congress, January 22, January 25,
1780.
198 A aT v of the American Revolution
both navy and marine corps at this time
was about twenty. It is clear that the
Continental Congress was unfriendly to the
theory that an employee of a government
has a vested right in his office.
On July 1 1 , 1780, naval salaries, subsistence
money, and bounties were ordered to be
paid in specie; forty Continental dollars
were considered equal to one of specie. On the
same day, in order that the depleted crews
might perchance be recruited, Congress voted
a bounty of twenty dollars to able, and ten
dollars to ordinary seamen who should en
list in the navy for twelve months. 1 On
August 7 it provided that officers who had
served aboard vessels of twenty guns or up
wards, and who should afterwards be de
tailed to vessels of less armament, should
suffer no diminution in pay. 2 These pro
visions all indicate a declining government
and navy.
On February 8, 1780, the Board of Ad
miralty secured the re-enaction of the reso
lutions of May 6, 1778, concerning the hold
ing of courts of enquiry and courts-martial. 3
The most important provision of these reso
lutions, it is recalled, lessened the require-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, July
11, 1780; Records and Papers of Continental
Congress, 37, pp. 261-63, Report of Board of
Admiralty, July 10, 1780.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Au
gust 7, 1780.
3. Ibid., February 8, 1780.
Xai v of the American Revolution 199
ments for the membership of courts-martial
as fixed by Adams s rules. On the partial
disestablishment of the navy in January it
became increasingly difficult to assemble
courts-martial composed entirely of naval
officers. The only naval captain cashiered
by a court-martial held under the direction
of the Board of Admiralty was the eccentric
Peter Landais. 1
On May 4, 1780, the Board of Admiralty
reported and Congress adopted the following
device for a seal: "The arms, thirteen bars
mutually supporting each other, alternate
red and white, in a blue field, and sur
mounted by an anchor proper. The crest
a ship under sail. The motto, sustentans
et sustentatus. Legend, U. S. A. Sigil.
Naval. " 2 The anchor and ship under sail
are still a part of the seal of the Department
of the Navy. Instead of the arms, motto,
and former legend, there now appear an
eagle with outstretched wings, and the
words "Navy Department, United States
of America."
On April 20, 1780, Congress adopted a
new form of commission for naval officers,
which the Board of Admiralty had drafted. 3
This varied little from the one which had
been used since the beginning of the Revo-
1 See Chapter X, pages 298-300.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, May
4, 1780.
3. Ibid., April 20, 1780.
2OO Nai \ of the American Revolution
lution. With slight changes in phraseology
made to adapt it to the government under
the Constitution, it is still used in the De
partment of the Navy at Washington. It
is this form properly filled out which consti
tutes our present Admiral s title to his rank
and office. The Board also prepared a form
of commission, of bond, and of instructions
for commanders of private vessels of war. 1
In the instructions the rights of neutrals
were especially guarded. Following the
lead of "Her Imperial Majesty of all the
Russias," Congress declared that the goods
of belligerents on board neutral vessels, with
the exception of contraband, were not sub
ject to capture. It confined the term con
traband to those articles expressly declared
to be such in the treaty of amity and com
merce of February 6, 1778, between the
United States and France. 2
Congress on March 27, 1781, passed an
ordinance relative to the capture and con
demnation of prizes. This law was enacted
by virtue of the ninth article of the Articles
of Confederation, which vested the war
powers in Congress. It codified the resolu
tions of November 25, 1775, and March 23,
1776. It was more severe than these reso-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, May 2
November 27, 1780, April 7, 1781 ; Records and
Papers of Continental Congress, 37, pp. 225-41.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 5, 1780; Wharton s Diplomatic Corres
pondence, III, 860, 867,
A rti v of the American Revolution 201
lutions, and omitted certain indulgences
and exemptions, which they contained. It
prescribed the penalty of forfeiture of vessel
without trial for those captors who destroyed
or falsified their ship papers. One of its
provisions related to salvage. 1 This law and
also the one of April 7, 1781, fixing the in
structions of commanders of private armed
vessels, brought former legislation into con
formity with the Articles of Confederation.
The Board of Admiralty and Congress
were inclined to disagree as to the proper
construction to be placed upon the ninth
article of the Articles of Confederation,
which gave Congress "the sole and exclu
sive right and power of determining on
peace and war." In a report which it made
to Congress under date of May 29, 1781,
after referring to the commissions which
Massachusetts had issued to the "Protec
tor" and "Mars," two ships of the navy
of that state, it said that "the Board hum
bly conceives that Commissions issuing
from different Fountains of Power, is a
matter which may merit the attention of
the United States in Congress assembled
who are the supreme power in Peace and
War." The Board was inclined to take the
view that Massachusetts had no right to
issue these commissions. The committee
of Congress to whom the report was re-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, March
27, 1781.
2O2 A avy of the American Revolution
ferred interpreted more narrowly the war
powers of Congress than did the Board of
Admiralty. It conceived that each state
had the right to issue commissions to ships
of war under the regulations established
by Congress, and that the only step neces
sary to be taken for the present was for the
Board to transmit to each state a copy of
the present regulations governing the issu
ing of commissions. 1 This incident is note
worthy in its indicating the existence of
"strict" and "loose" constructionists with
in three months after the Articles of Con
federation w r ere adopted.
If another illustration is needed to show
the dependence of the makers of the Ameri
can navy upon British models, some words
of the Board of Admiralty are in point.
For a long time it had under consideration
a revision of the rules and regulations of
the Continental navy. Concerning its in
tention to inspect the British rules and in
corporate into its new code such of them
as were adapted to the American navy, it
observed that it did not "think it unlawful
to be taught by an enemy whose naval skill
and power, until the reign of the present
illustrious King of France, were superior to
1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
37, pp. 241-44. The Board of Admiralty
probably had in mind the sixth as well as
the ninth article of the Articles of Confeder
ation.
Xaz y of the American Revolution 203
that of any kingdom or state on earth." 1
It is believed that the work of the Board
in this particular was not brought before
Congress.
On January 15, 1780, Congress created a
permanent Court of Appeals for the trial of
prize cases appealed from state admiralty
courts. Since January 30, 1777, such cases
had been heard and determined by a stand
ing committee composed of five members
of Congress. Such a committee naturally
lacked permanency, expertness, and tech
nical and legal knowledge. The Court es
tablished in January, 1780, was to consist
of three judges, w r ho were to try, in accord
ance with the law of nations, questions of
fact as well as law. On January 22, 1780,
Congress chose as the three judges of the
Court, George Wythe of Virginia, William
Paca of Maryland, and Titus Hosmer of
Connecticut. 2
When the Board of Admiralty took charge
of the navy in December, 1779, there were
ten Continental cruisers in American waters.
The "Deane," 32, was fitting for sea at
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 37, pp. 277, 281, Reports of Board of
Admiralty, July 24, July 26, 1780.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Jan
uary 30, 1777; January 15, January 22, 1780;
Jameson, Essays in the Constitutional History
of the United States, Chapter I, Predecessor
of the Supreme Court; Carson, Supreme Court
of the United States, Part I, 50-57.
2O4 Navy of the American Revolution
Boston; the "Trumbull," 28, was still in
the Connecticut river; the "Providence,"
28, "Boston," 24, "Queen of France," 28,
and "Ranger," 18, were on their way to
Charleston, South Carolina, in whose de
fence they were to assist; the " Confederacy,"
32, was at Martinique repairing and refit
ting; and three vessels were still on the
stocks, the "America," 74, at Portsmouth,
"Bourbon," 36, at Chatham on the Connec
ticut river, and "Saratoga," 18, at Phila
delphia. The "Alliance" was at the Texel
in Holland where she had arrived after
playing an ignominious part in the cele
brated fight of Jones off Flamborough Head.
This is not a formidable fleet, and its future
movements have little bearing upon the
great naval conflict now being waged be
tween the mistress of the seas on the one
side and France and Spain on the other.
The Continental navy, however, still had
some important errands to run, both Wash
ington and the French were to ask its assist
ance, and on a few occasions the enemy
was to find its officers and sailors no mean
combatants.
In completing the vessels which were
building and in refitting those which were
in commission, the Board of Admiralty was
from the first sorely embarrassed by a lack
of money. The difficulties which the Marine
Committee had encountered were now in
tensified by the prostration of the country s
A (/IT of the American Revolution 205
finances and credit. The Board resorted to
all means within reason in its attempts to
obtain the requisites for prosecuting its
work. In January, 1780, it wrote to the
Board of Treasury that unless money was
at once forthcoming the Naval Department
would be at a standstill; and that not less
than one hundred thousand dollars would
be sufficient for its needs. 1 It eagerly sought
the proceeds to be derived from the sale of
rum, wine, fruit, and sugar, taken from
Continental prizes. In the summer of 1780
in order that its vessels might be in condi
tion to render assistance to the expected
French fleet, the Board solicited aid from
the governors of New Hampshire, Massa
chusetts, and Connecticut; pressed the
Commissary-General of Issues of the Conti
nental Army to furnish it with " 62,820
weight of Bread and 13,260 weight of Flour"
with all despatch; 2 and finally, applied to
John Holker, the Consul-General of France
at Philadelphia, for a loan of 60,000 pounds
of bread, promising to take special pains to
repay it. 3
Thus hampered, the Board was unable to
accomplish much with its little fleet. Dur-
1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Board
of Admiralty to Board of Treasury, January
7, 1780.
2. Ibid., Board of Admiralty, to Commi-
sary-General of Issues, August 21, 1780.
3. Ibid., Board of Admiralty to Holker,
August 29, 1780.
206 Navy of the American Revolution
ing its incumbency some half-dozen cruises
were made by the Continental vessels.
Twenty prizes were captured; half of them
only reached safe ports. Two of the prizes
were His Majesty s brigs "Atalanta, " 16,
and "Trepassey," 14, which were taken by
the "Alliance," 36, Captain John Barry,
in May, 1781, when returning from France.
During the fight, which lasted four hours,
the gallant Barry was wounded in the
shoulder. This voyage of Barry, during
which he captured seven prizes, was the
most successful one made under the direc
tion of the Board of Admiralty.
In June, 1780, one of the most hotly con
tested engagements fought at sea during the
Revolution occurred to the northward of
the Bermudas between the "Trumbull," 28,
Captain James Nicholson, the ranking of
ficer of the Continental navy, and the Liver
pool privateer "Watt," 32, Captain Coult-
hard. After a fight of two hours and a
half both vessels withdrew seriously dis
abled, and with difficulty made their ways
to their respective ports the "Trumbull"
to Boston and the "Watt" to New York.
A British account of the engagement places
the loss of the "Watt" at eighty-eight men,
and that of the "Trumbull" at "consider
able more." The Americans gave their own
loss as thirty-eight men, and the British as
ninety-two. The "Trumbull" had two
lieutenants killed. Gilbert Saltonstall, the
Naz v of tlic American Revolution 207
captain of marines onboard the " Trumbull,"
wrote a vivid account of the fight. He was
in the thick of it, and received eleven wounds.
He said that "upon the whole there has not
been a more close, obstinate, and bloody
engagement since the war. I hope it won t
be treason if I don t except even Paul Jones .
All things considered we may dispute titles
with him." 1 This was the first cruise of the
"Trumbull." The other twelve frigates of
the original thirteen were at this time either
destroyed or captured.
In July, 1780, a futile plan for an attack
on New York was made. The Continental
navy and army were to cooperate with the
French fleet under the Admiral the Chevalier
de Ternay. Under the direction of the
Board of Admiralty, the Continental vessels
continued to make voyages to France and
the West Indies. The losses suffered by
the navy during 1780 and the first half of
1781 were considerable. The " Boston,"
" Providence," " Queen of France," and
"Ranger" were surrendered to the British
on the fall of Charleston in May, 1780. The
"Confederacy," 32, Captain Seth Harding,
returning from Cape Francois with a load of
military stores and colonial produce, was,
on April 14, 1781, captured by the British
1. Records and Papers of New London
Country Historical Society, part IV, I, 47-56;
Boston" Gazette, July 24, 1780; Gomer Wil
liams, Liverpool Privateers, 272-75.
208 Navy of the American Revolution
naval ships, " Roebuck/ 7 44, and " Orpheus,"
32. The u Confederacy " was taken into the
British navy under the name of " Confeder
ate." In March, 1781, the " Saratoga," 18,
Captain John Young, foundered at sea and
all on board were lost. 1
Early in 1781 Congress resolved to super
sede the Board of Admiralty with a Secre
tary of Marine, but failed to find a man who
was willing to accept the new office. In
June, 1781, the plan of appointing an Agent
of Marine, and vesting in him the duties of
the Board of Admiralty, pending the selec
tion of a Secretary of Marine, was brought
forward in Congress. The commissioners
of admiralty were able to forecast the re
sults of this agitation for a new naval sys
tem. 2 On July 9, 1781, Ellery informed
Congress "that his family affairs pressed his
return home, and therefore requested leave
of absence." 3 As there was at this time
but one Congressional member serving on
the Board, on the absence of Ellery no quo
rum could be obtained. Lewis now prayed
Congress to permit him to resign, or to give
him such further directions " as they in their
1. List of Officers in Revolutionary Navy,
miscellaneous manuscripts in the Library of
Congress.
2. See Chapter VIII, Secretary of Marine
and Agent of Marine.
3. Journals of Continental Congress, July
9, 1781.
Xavy of the American Revolution 209
wisdom shall deem meet." 1 On July 17
Congress accepted his resignation. 2 On July
18 Congress put the marine prisoners in
charge of the Commissary of Prisoners of
the army, and ordered the seal of the ad
miralty to be deposited with the Secretary
of Congress until a Secretary of Marine
should be appointed. 3 The Revolutionary
Naval Department was without a head.
The Board of Admiralty was not a satis
factory executive. It was at all times de
pendent on its Congressional members for
quorums. It proved to be slower, more
cumbersome, and less responsible than the
Marine Committee. The management of
the navy still lacked unity and concentra
tion. On the other hand, had the Board
not been superseded, its commissioners would
no doubt in time have developed greater
expertness and technical skill than did the
members of the Marine Committee. It
should also be said that under more favor
able auspices the Board of Admiralty would
have shown a higher administrative efficien
cy than it did ; for its lines had indeed fallen
in unpleasant places, and a bankrupt federal
treasury and a decadent Congress denied it
the means requisite to the successful prose
cution of its work.
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 78, XIV, 445-47.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, July
17, 1781.
3. Ibid., July 18, 1781.
CHAPTER VIII
THE SECRETARY OF MARINE AND THE
AGENT OF MARINE
On the question of the proper organiza
tion of the executive departments, the lead
ers of the Revolution were divided into two
factions. Moved by their love of liberty,
their distrust of governments, and their jeal
ousy of delegated and concentrated powers,
the members of one faction favored the vest
ing of the executive business in Congres
sional committees. The members of the
other faction, who stood for governmental
authority and control, for constructive legis
lation in the field of administration, and for
the application of the principles of business
to the affairs of state, declared for a system
of permanent and single-headed executives
chosen outside of the membership of Con
gress. The issue that was here joined in the
special field of administration was of course
a part of that perennial and perpetual con
flict between the freedom of the individual
and social control. In this case, as every
where and always, the political doctrinaires,
the iconoclasts and radicals, and the men
Navy of the American Revolution 211
of heart rather than of head, lined up on the
side of liberty; while the practical and con
servative men, the representatives of vested
interests, and the cold, logical thinkers,
stood together on the side of governmental
control.
The faction which distrusted power and
wished to keep it scattered, may be called
the "dispersive school;" and the faction
which wished to gather up the power and
lodge it with a few men, may be called the
"concentrative school." To the "disper
sive school" belonged Samuel Adams, the
Lees, Patrick Henry, and William Whipple;
to the "concentrative school", Hamilton,
Washington, the Morrises, and Jay. Early
in the Revolution the advantage lay with
the "dispersive school." Its executive plan
of Congressional committees needed little
work to put it into operation; it was more
flexible than the scheme of permanent single-
headed executives; and it was more in har
mony with the ultra anti-monarchical spirit
of the times. The Revolutionary govern
ment, originating as a congress of delegates,
organized itself, after the manner of con
gresses, by means of committees of its own
members. When the Congress became a
Government, and had entrusted to it a mul
tiplicity of executive duties, it naturally
continued and adapted the old organization
for the transaction of its new business. The
executive system of Congressional commit-
212 Navy of the American Revolution
tees, in this way becoming fixed, could not
be easily changed.
By 1780 the "concentrative school" was
winning its way. Indeed, the adoption in
1779 of mixed boards composed of men both
in and out of Congress was a compromise
between the two schools, in which the "con-
centrative school gave up its contention
for simplicity in the executive organs, in
order to secure, in part at least, another of
its objectives, permanency in the tenure of
the administrators. By 1780 both com
mittees and boards had been tried and
found wanting. Then too, there was a
greater need for a change in the executive
system, than in the first years of the war.
As Congress became imbecile, the quality of
its committees and of their work deterio
rated ; and as the country wearied of the war,
and its finances tightened, the necessity for
greater economy and efficiency in admin
istration increased. In 1780 the feeling
among the leaders was general that a crisis
in the army, in the finances, and in the busi
ness of the government, which could be met
only by some thorough and far-reaching
reform, was approaching. The leaders of
the "concentrative school" proposed a com
plete change in the administrative system
of Congress as a solution of the serious prob
lems that confronted the country. By the
end of 1780 a movement for a reform of this
sort was in progress. It was diligently fur-
Navy of the American Revolution 213
thered by one school and zealously opposed
by the other.
"If Congress/ Washington wrote in De
cember, 1780, "suppose that Boards com
posed of their own body, and always fluctu
ating, are competent to the great business
of war (which requires not only close appli
cation, but a constant and uniform train of
thinking and acting), they will most assured
ly deceive themselves. Many, many in
stances might be adduced in proof of this/ 7
Washington was convinced that extrava
gant and improper expenditures of the pub
lic money, inexpertness in the transacting
of business, and needless delays resulted
from vesting all or a part of the duties of
an executive office in Congress. 1 Hamilton
declared specifically for the substitution of
single executives for plural ones, and he
named three men whom he considered espe
cially qualified for departmental posts,
General Schuyler for Minister of War, Gen
eral McDougall for Minister of Marine, and
Robert Morris for Minister of Finance. He
conceived that there were always more
knowledge, energy, responsibility, decision,
despatch, zeal, and attraction for first-rate
1. Ford s Washington, IX, 75-76, Washing
ton to James Duane, December 26, 1780; 33-5,
Washington to John Sullivan, November 20,
1780; 125, Washington to R. R. Livingston,
January 31, 1781; 131-34, Washington to John
Sullivan, February 4, 1781; 246, Washington
to John Sullivan, May 11, 1781.
214 -Vary of the American Revolution
ability "where single men, than where bod
ies are concerned." 1 Gouverneur Morris
contributed to the agitation in behalf of
better executives an enumeration of the
qualifications requisite in the men who were
to become heads of the leading departments.
He held, as still do some of the writers on
naval administration, that a Minister of
Marine should possess a practical and tech
nical knowledge of naval affairs ; and he pre
sented a unique list of his qualities in the
following words:
"A minister of the marine should be a
man of plain good sense, and a good econo
mist, firm but not harsh; well acquainted
with sea affairs, such as the construction,
fitting, and victualling of ships, the conduct
and manoeuvre on a cruise, and in action,
the nautical face of the earth, and maritime
phenomenon. He should know the temper,
manners, and disposition of sailors; for all
which purposes it is proper, that he should
have been bred to that business, and have
followed it, in peace and war, in a military,
and commercial capacity. His principles
and manners should be absolutely republi
can, and his circumstances not indigent." 2
It has been said that the debate in Con
gress over the change in the executive sys-
1. Hamilton s Hamilton, I, 127, note, Ham.
ilton to Robert Morris, 1780; 154-55, 159^
Hamilton to James Duane, September 3,1780
2. Sparks s Gouverneur Morris, I, 229-30.
Xai y of the American Revolution 215
tem was long, and was marked by the work
ings of party spirit, the self-interest of some
members, and the doubts and fears and di
vided opinions of others. 1 Samuel Adams
placed himself at the head of the advocates
of the old system. On January 10, 1781,
the friends of the new system gained their
first decisive victory; for on this day Con
gress resolved to establish a Department of
Foreign Affairs, and to appoint for its chief
officer a Secretary for Foreign Affairs. 2 Five
days later Adams wrote to Richard Henry
Lee a letter which is almost pathetic in its
earnestness and seriousness. "My friend,"
he said, "we must not suffer anything to dis
courage us in this great conflict. Let us re
cur to first principles without delay. It is
our duty to make every proper exertion in
our respective States to revive the old patri
otic feelings among the people at large, and
to get the public departments, especially the
most important of them, filled with men of
understanding and inflexible virtue. Our
cause is surely too interesting to mankind
to be put under the direction of men, vain,
avaricious, or concealed under the hypocrit
ical guise of patriotism, without a spark of
public virtue/ Adams recognized that the
public service needed reforming. This he
1. Sparks s Gouverneur Morris, I, 227-28;
Reed s Reed, II, 296.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, Janu
ary 10, 1781.
216 Navy of the American Revolution
would accomplish, not by a change of the ad
ministrative system, but by the introduction
of more competent and more virtuous men
into Congress and into its committees. This
latter was to be brought about by a revival
of civic interest in the several states. 1
On February 7, 1781, Congress "resumed
the consideration of the plan for the ar
rangement of the civil executive depart
ments." It this day resolved that there
should be a Superintendant of Finance, a
Secretary of War, and a Secretary of Marine.
It summed up the duties of the Secretary of
Marine in the following brief paragraph:
"It shall be the duty of the secretary of
marine to examine into and to report to
Congress the present state of the navy, a
register of the officers in and out of com
mand, and the dates of their respective
commissions; and an account of all the na
val and other stores belonging to that de
partment; to form estimates of all pay,
equipments, and supplies necessary for the
navy; and from time to time to report such
estimates to the superintendant of finance,
that he may take measures for providing
for the expences, in such manner as may best
suit the condition of the public treasury;
to superintend and direct the execution of
all resolutions of Congress respecting naval
1. Wells, Samuel Adams, 111,127, Adams to
Lee, January 15, 1781; 128, extract from a letter
of Luzerne.French minister to the United States.
Navy of the American Revolution 217
preparations; to make out, seal, and count
ersign all marine commissions, keep registers
thereof, and publish annually a list of all
appointments; to report to Congress the
officers and agents necessary to assist him
in the business of his department; and in
general to execute all the duties and powers
specified in the act of Congress constituting
the board of admiralty."
Speaking generally, the Secretary of Ma
rine was to succeed to the duties and powers
of the Board of Admiralty. It is, however,
significant that the Secretary was not spe
cifically charged with the ordering and
directing of the movements of the vessels of
war, as was the Board. The specified duties
of the new office are largely secretarial.
Congress was disposed to be less liberal in
granting powers to a Secretary chosen out
side its membership than to a Board partly
composed of Congressmen. On February
9th the salary of the Secretary of Marine
was fixed at $5000 per annum. 1
On February 27, 1781, Congress, with a
promptness which was exceptional, elected
Major-General Alexander McDougall of New
York to be Secretary of Marine, for which po
sition he had been recommended by Alex-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Feb
ruary 7, February 9, 1781. On October 1,
1781, the salary of the Secretary of Marine
was fixed at $4,000 per annum, payable in
specie.
218 Narv of the American Revolution
ander Hamilton. McDougall s qualifica
tions for the office were above the average.
In the French and Indian War he had been
a commander of privateers. Later he be
came a merchant in New York City. He
was a leader of the Revolution in that state,
and had risen to the rank of a major-general
in the Revolutionary army. McDougall de
clined to accept the position preferred him
unless permitted to hold his rank in the
army, and to retain the privilege of return
ing to the field when his services were re
quired. He based this partial refusal on
patriotic grounds. Congress did not wish
a Secretary of Marine on these conditions;
and it therefore voted that it did not expect
the acceptance of Major-General McDougall,
and that it had a due sense of his zeal "for
the safety and honour of America, and ap
plaud his magnanimity in declining to re
tire from the toils and perils of the field in
the present critical condition of the United
States in general, and that of New York in
particular. " l Congress made no other
choice of a Secretary of Marine.
During the summer of 1781 the control of
naval affairs gravitated towards Robert
Morris. Soon after assuming the office of
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Feb
ruary 27, March 30, 1781. Three states were
willing to accept McDougall on the conditions
he proposed. Samuel Adams and his friends
voted against acceptance.
Navy of the American Revolution 219
Superintendant of Finance in May, 1781,
he was brought into close relation with the
navy. He was invited to take upon him
self more or less of the naval business by
the urgent need of sending the cruisers on
important errands, the helplessness of the
Board of Admiralty, the inertia of Congress,
and the interregnum in the headship of the
Naval Department, which lasted from the
discontinuance of the Board of Admiralty
early in July, 1781, until the appointment
of an Agent of Marine on September 7. The
figure that Morris presents at this time is that
of the strong and confident man of affairs,
sagacious, expeditious, and painstaking,
who is surrounded by weaker men, hesitat
ing, vacillating, and procrastinating in their
administrative attempts.
In June, 1781, Morris wrote to the Pres
ident of Congress recommending the ap
pointment of a captain for the 74-gun ship
America/ and explaining how money for
completing her might be obtained. He
says that he is aware that John Jay has lib
erty to sell this ship at the Court of Madrid ;
that he thinks and hopes that Jay will not
succeed, for the sale of the "America" would
be injurious to the United States; and that
it would be "more consistent with Oeconomy
and with the dignity of Congress to have her
finished than to let her Perish." On the
receipt of this letter, Congress authorized
Morris to take measures for launching the
22O Navy of the American Revolution
" America" and fitting her for sea. 1 Morris
now hinted to the Board of Admiralty that
the frigate "Trumbull" could perform an
essential public service if put under his di
rection, and pursuing his plan, he obtained
a resolution of Congress giving him control of
this vessel. 2 During the summer of 1781,
while the reorganization of the Naval De
partment was in suspense, Morris, on his
own initiative, directed the fitting out of the
"Alliance" and "Deane," and ordered them
to proceed to sea, "being convinced that
while they lay in port, an useless Expence
must necessarily be incurred." 3
Meanwhile, a movement to place the Na
val Department under the control of Morris
had been set on foot in Congress. On June
26 Meriwether Smith of Virginia reported
a series of resolutions providing for the re
organization of the Naval Department, a
work which he considered necessary because
the present naval system was "inefficient
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 47, 55, Morris to President of
Congress, June 22, 1781; Ibid., 28, p. 145, Re
port of Committee respecting "America";
journals of Continental Congress, June 23,
1781.
2. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, T, 77; Journals of Continental Con
gress, July 11, 1781.
3. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 137, Morris to President of Con
gress, September 10, 1781.
Nai v of the American Revolution 221
and expensive." 1 The most important of
these resolutions was one which dissolved
the offices of the Board of Admiralty, the
navy boards, and the naval agents; and an
other, which empowered the Superintend-
ant of Finance to appoint some discreet
agent to manage the navy under the order
and inspection of the said superintendant,
until a Secretary of Marine should be ap
pointed, or until the further pleasure of Con
gress. On the day of their introduction
these resolutions were referred to a com
mittee, consisting of Meriwether Smith of
Virginia, Roger Sherman of Connecticut,
and Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, of Mary
land. On July 2, having made a slight
change in the phraseology of the resolutions,
this committee reported them to Congress; 2
and on July 6 it again reported them, hav
ing now added a few additional resolutions.
One of the latter was to the effect that the
election of a Secretary of Marine should be
postponed until the first Monday in Novem
ber. On the putting of this resolution, it
passed in the negative. The states divided
sectionally; the four New England states
and Delaware voted in the negative ; Penn
sylvania and the five Southern states, ex
cept South Carolina which was divided,
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 28, p. 135, Resolutions of M. Smith.
2. Ibid., p. 133, Report of Committee on
Smith s resolutions.
222 Navy of the American Revolution
voted in the affirmative; delegates from
New York and New Jersey were not pres
ent in Congress. The vote seems to indicate
the defeat of those who were in favor of
placing the navy under the control of Mor
ris. On the same day, July 6, the remain
ing resolutions were referred to a committee
consisting of Thomas McKean of Delaware,
Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut, and Theo-
doric Bland of Virginia. 1
On July 18 the new committee reported a
series of resolutions, differing little from
those which had been referred to it, with the
exception of one important change; the
Agent of Marine was now to be appointed,
not by Morris, but by Congress. On this
day Congress passed two of the committee s
resolutions. One of these transferred the
care of the marine prisoners from the Board
of Admiralty to the Commissary of Pris
oners of the army; and the other ordered
the seal of the admiralty to be deposited
with the Secretary of Congress, and em
powered him to use it in countersigning na
val commissions. The remaining resolu
tions again went over. Congress w r as able
to agree on the discontinuance of the Board
of Admiralty, but not on the arrange
ments for its successor. 2
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 28, p. 149, Resolutions of Committee;
Journals of Continental Congress, July 6, 1781.
2. Records and Papers of Continental Con-
Nar\ of the American Revolution 223
Finally, the whole business of the re
organization of the Naval Department was
referred to a third committee, composed of
Theodoric Bland of Virginia, James M. Var-
num of Rhode Island, and James Duane of
New York. On the report of this commit
tee on August 29, Congress agreed "that for
the present an agent of marine be appoint
ed, with authority to direct, fit out, equip,
and employ the ships and vessels of war be
longing to the United States, according to
such instructions as he shall, from time to
time, receive from Congress." The Agent
of Marine was to direct the selling of all
prizes. He was to settle and pay the naval
accounts, and keep a record of his work.
As soon as he entered into the execution of
his office, the functions and appointments
of the board of admiralty, the several navy
boards, and all civil officers, appointed
under them, should cease and be determined.
The salary of the new head of the Naval De
partment was fixed at $1,500 a year, and
that of his clerk at $500. Both the Agent
of Marine and his clerk were required to
take an oath "well and faithfully to exe
cute the trust reposed in them, according
to the best of their skill and judgment";
and to give good and sufficient bond. 1
gress, 28, p. 147, Report of Committee on July
18; Journals of Continental Congress, July 18.
1781.
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con-
224 -VflT v of the American Revolution
These resolutions of August 29 were to
be only temporary; and they did not dis
place those of February 7, 1781, which pro
vided for a Secretary of Marine. A second
temporary , expedient was resorted to on
September 7, when Congress resolved:
"That until an agent of marine shall be ap
pointed by Congress, all the duties, powers,
and authority assigned to the said agent,
be devolved upon and executed by the said
superintendant of finance." 1
The reason why Congress appointed an
Agent of Marine instead of a Secretary of
Marine is not at all points clear. Having
failed to secure the acceptance of McDougall
as Secretary of Marine, Congress may have
decided that the small and disheartening
business of the navy would not attract first-
rate talent; or that for the transaction of this
business a full-fledged executive department
was not necessary. It is more probable
that the appointment of an Agent of Marine,
under the circumstances of a disagreeing
Congress, the failure of the Board of Admi
ralty, and the improbability of securing an
efficient Secretary, was merely a temporary
and feasible expedient for conducting the
affairs of the navy. There are obvious rea
sons why the proposal to give the Superin-
gress, 28, p. 157; Journals of Continental Con
gress, August 29, 1781.
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep
tember 7, 1781.
Navy of the American Revolution 225
tendant of Finance the power to appoint
the Agent of Marine, or the selection of Mor
ris as Agent, should have aroused vigorous
opposition. Men of Samuel Adams s way
of thinking would oppose it, among other
reasons, because it placed too much power
in the hands of one man. The friends of
the navy would dislike to see the Naval De
partment swallowed up by the Department
of Finance. But on the other hand, man}
considerations recommended the step which
was finally taken. It was the most econom
ical disposition of the naval business which
could be made. Morris had superior quali
fications for the office, and he was at once
available. Indeed, he was the only man in
sight that promised to be equal to the task
of straightening out the tangle of marine
accounts, of financing a bankrupt navy, and
of wielding effectively that arm of the mili
tary service. He was admirably qualified
for the headship of the Naval Department
by his experience as a man of business, fa
miliar with accounts and the selection of
employees, as the owner of a fleet of mer
chantmen, and as one of two or three of the
most influential members of the Marine
Committee during the years 1776 and 1777,
when the navy was founded. Whatever
may have been the shortcomings of the navy
while Morris was directing it, they did not
spring from the lack of an efficient execu-
226 Nai v of the American Revolution
live. For the first time during the Revo
lution its management was marked by
despatch, decision, and an expert and ade
quate understanding of its problems.
On September 8, 1781, Morris wrote to
the President of Congress accepting, in
words of modesty and reluctance, his ap
pointment as Agent of Marine. " There
are many Reasons," he said, "why I would
have wished that this Burthen had been
laid on other Shoulders, or that at least I
might have been permitted to appoint a
temporary Agent untill the further Pleasure
of Congress. As it is I shall undertake the
Task however contrary to my Inclinations
and inconsistent with the many Duties
which press heavily upon me, because it
will at least save Money to the Public."
He then added, in a characteristic way,
some observations on his new task. "True
Oeconomy in the public business," he de
clared, "consists in employing a sufficient
Number of Proper persons to perform the
Public Business." He wished the accounts
of the marine department to be speedily set
tled. 1
Morris filled the office of Agent of Marine
from September 7, 1781, until November 1,
1784. It is believed that he received no sal
ary as Agent of Marine. In addition to Mor-
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 133, Morris to President of Con
gress, September 8, 1781.
Navy of the American Revolution 227
ris the personnel of the Marine Office con
sisted of James Read, Secretary to the
Agent of Marine, at a salary of $1,000 a
year; Joseph Pennell, paymaster, at a sal
ary of $1,000; and George Turner, Commis
sary of Naval Prisoners, at a salary of $1,-
200 ; the latter officer was authorized on July
24, 1782. 1 Read, who had been one of the
commissioners of the Navy Board of the
Middle Department, was of great service to
Morris in conducting the business of the
Marine Office. The clerical work of the
Office was performed by the clerks of the
office of the Superintendant of Finance, an
instance of Morris s economies.
According to the resolutions of Septem
ber 7, 1781, the positions of the commis
sioners of the navy boards were abolished
and the positions of the prize agents were va
cated. .The Navy Board at Boston con
tinued however to fit out vessels until
March, 1782. It was not until some time
later that it delivered over the books and
papers of the Board to John Brown, the for
mer secretary of the Board of Admiralty,
whom Morris had appointed naval agent for
settling the business of the navy in New
England. In the four New England states,
North and South Carolina, and Georgia,
Morris either re-appointed the prize agents
of the Board of Admiralty, or appointed new
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, II, 183.
228 Navy of the American Revolution
ones; in the other states, he served in this
capacity himself. 1
The Agent of Marine, like the Board of
Admiralty, communicated with Congress
by means of written reports, which that body
referred to special committees of its own
members. Accordingly, when naval busi
ness was discussed in Congress, it usually
came up in the form of a report of a com
mittee on the report of the Agent of Marine."
The subjects upon which the Agent of Ma
rine reported were similar to those dealt
with by his predecessors in naval adminis
tration. Not a few of his reports were con
cerned with the settling of marine accounts,
and the satisfying of claimants against tho
government, which business was now in
sistent. During his tenure of the office of
Agent of Marine, Morris prepared the larger
part of the naval legislation of Congress.
The changes or additions to his work which
were made by committees of Congress were
unimportant.
The law that provides for a change in a
governmental system is often incomplete,
and experience under the new order f of busi
ness soon suggests the need of supplemen
tary legislation. This was the case with
the laws which transferred the naval busi
ness from the Board of Admiralty to the
Agent of Marine. Morris, in one of his first
~T SE I. J. Griffin, Commodore John Barry,
169.
Navy of the American Revolution 229
reports, explained to Congress that he had
no power to hold courts of enquiry; there
upon, Congress, on November 20, 1781, re
vived the law of February 8, 1780, on the
holding of courts of enquiry and courts-mar
tial, which had lapsed with the passing of
the Board of Admiralty. Morris s busi
ness-like care for the saving of time and ef
fort is well shown, when in this report he
tactfully suggests that Congress adapt their
act not only to the Agent of Marine, but
also to the Secretary of Marine, so that
when the latter is appointed, "it may not
be necessary for him to bring this matter
again under Consideration/ 1
By the law of November 20 Morris was
empowered to constitute a court of enquiry
with three persons; and to constitute a court-
martial with three captains and three first
lieutenants of marines, "if there shall be so
many of the marines then present". But
in the event that so many officers for a court-
martial could not be conveniently assem
bled, he might appoint any five persons to
hold it. Morris, convinced of the impro
priety of constituting naval courts with
civilians, did not wish to avail himself of
this latter alternative. Accordingly, on
June 8, 1782, he made a report on naval
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 233, Morris to President of Con
gress, November 17, 1781; Journals of Conti
nental Congress, November 20, 1781.
230 Navy of the American Revolution
courts, which became the basis of the reso
lutions of Congress of June 12 on this sub
ject. These provided that in the future a
marine court of enquiry or court-martial
for enquiring into and trying capital cases
should consist of five navy and marine of
ficers, two of whom should be captains; and
in all cases not capital, should consist of
three navy and marine officers, one of whom
should be a captain in the navy. No sen
tence in capital cases was to be executed
until approved by the Agent of Marine. All
naval courts for. commissioned officers must
be appointed by the Agent of Marine. A
captain in the navy might appoint a court-
martial for the trial of offences committed
by any other than a commissioned officer,
provided that the sentencing of a warrant
officer to be cashiered should have the con
firmation of the Agent of Marine. 1
During the incumbency of Morris, no cap
tain in the navy was cashiered. The find
ings of a court-martial, which was held in
Boston in the early summer of 1781, possess
a peculiar interest, because of the light which
they throw upon the penal code of the Conti
nental navy, and because this case is one
of the first in which a seaman in the Ameri
can navy was sentenced to be hanged.
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 543, Report of Morris, June 3,
1782; Journals of Continental Congress, June
12, 1782.
Xaz y of the American Revolution 231
Three seamen, who were enlisted on board
the " Alliance," were tried for a breach of
the 29th article of the rules and regulations
of the navy. 1 Of Patrick Sheridan, the
court adjudged that he should be whipped
three hundied and fifty-four lashes upon
the naked back, one hundred and seventy-
seven thereof alongside the ship "Alliance,"
and the remainder alongside the ship
"Deane." John Crawford was sentenced
to wear a halter around his neck, arid receive
fifty lashes. Sheridan and Crawford were
to lose certain wages and their share of
prize money. The court found the third
seaman, William McClehany, "peculiarly
Guilty of a breach of all the Clauses in the
Article aforesaid," and it adjudged that he
should suffer the punishment of death,
and that he be hanged by the neck on the
starboard fore Yard Arm of the said ship
Alliance until he is dead."
The Board of Admiralty laid the pro
ceedings of this courtr-martial before Congress
in July, 1781, but owing to the confusion of
the naval business at this time, and to the
carelessness of Congress, no action was
taken on them. When John Brown, the
naval agent of the Agent of Marine, reached
1. The 29th article of Adams s rules as
adopted by Congress in 1775 fixed penalties
for desertion and cowardice. It is not likely
that the numbering was changed. I know of
no earlier instance of the sentencing of a sea
man in the American navy to be hanged.
232 Navy of the American Revolution
Boston, towards the end of 1781, he found
the three men in prison, waiting the execu
tion of their sentences, and "perishing with
cold for want of Cloathing." The fate of
the three men is best told in Brown s words :
"Under these circumstances it was the opin
ion of the Board (and I agreed with them)
that as the proceedings had lain so long be
fore Congress without anything being done,
and it being uncertain when they would act
upon them, to save expence it was best to
dispose of the Men in the best manner we
could. Accordingly the two who were sen
tenced to be whipped were put on board the
Deane, the other was sold by the Sheriff
to pay his bill of fees, keeping, &c., and with
the surplus of the money he procured us
three good seamen for the Deane. My mo
tive for concurring in this proceeding was to
save expence and preserve the public Money
in my hands for more Material purposes/ 31
In December, 1781, and January, 1782,
Congress passed an ordinance, "in pursu
ance of the powers delegated by the Con
federation/ which codified in great part the
previous legislation on captures and con
demnation of prizes, recaptures and sal
vage, contraband, and the sharing of prizes
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 367, Finding of Court Martial,
dated June 28, 1781; 365, Morris to President
of Congress, March 25, 1782, containing ex
tract from Brown s letter.
Navy of the American Revolution 233
between the captors and the government
and between the captors themselves. Sev
eral changes were made in previous resolu
tions, and a few new ones were added. On
their receiving a reasonable salvage, the re-
captors of negroes, mulattoes, Indians,
and indented servants, were to return all
such property to its owners. The new or
dinance specified in some detail the various
forms of property which were subject to cap
ture. It contained a revised list of articles
of contraband. It declared that the rules
of decision in the several admiralty courts
should be "the resolutions and ordinances
of the United States in Congress assembled,
public treaties when declared to be so by an
act of Congress, and the law of nations, ac
cording to the general usages of Europe; 7
public treaties were given precedence over
the two other classes of rules. 1 This ordi
nance went into operation on February 1,
1782. Its importance is diminished by
reason of its being in force during only the
last year of the war, when the naval activi
ties of the American fleets had decreased.
It is believed that this ordinance was en
tirely the work of Congress. Indeed, it soon
appeared that there was at least one pro
vision, the giving of the whole of certain
prizes to captors on board of Continental
vessels, which the Agent of Marine disap-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, De
cember 4, 1781, January 8, 1782.
231 Navy of the American Revolution
proved. In June, 1782, Morris made a re
port to Congress in which he showed that,
owing to the government s liberality to its
officers and seamen, it had lost ten thousand
dollars on the late successful cruise of the
frigate "Deane," during which she had cap
tured five prizes of considerable value. He
thought that wages, bounties, and one-half
of prizes were quite sufficient inducements
for manning the fleet. In all cases, however,
in which the capture of a vessel of the enemy
was especially meritorious, Morris would have
Congress encourage and stimulate effort
and merit in the navy by giving the. captors,
by a special act of Congress, the w r hole of
their prizes. On July 10, 1782, Congress
passed an ordinance embodying Morris s
recommendations. 1
When Morris, on September 7, 1781, be
came Agent of Marine, the direction of the
movements of the Continental vessels was
vested in him, but with a serious limitation ;
he was authorized to employ the armed
cruisers "according to such instructions as
he shall, from time to time, receive from
Congress." Morris could never abide in
definite grants of power which confused
authority; and he therefore, by means of a
cleverly written letter, elicited a resolution
from Congress giving him full power "to fit
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 559, Morris to President of Con-
gress, June 20, 1782; Journals of Continental
ongress, July 10, 1782.
Navy of the American Revolution 235
out and employ the ships of war belonging
to these United States, in such manner as
shall appear to him best calculated to pro
mote the interest of these United States." 1
When Morris fell heir to the duties of the
Naval Department, in the summer of 1781,
the Continental navy was reduced to small
numbers. There were in active service only
five captains and seven lieutenants in the
navy, and three captains and three lieuten
ants in the marine corps. Including with
these, those officers who were unemployed,
were in private service, were prisoners, or
were on parole, there w^ere twenty-two cap
tains and thirty-nine lieutenants in the
navy, and twelve captains and twelve lieu
tenants in the marine corps. 2 Only three
vessels were now in commission; the frigate
"Trumbull," 28, at Philadelphia, and the
"Alliance," 36, and "Deane," 32, at Boston.
The "America" and "Bourbon" were still
on the stocks. About the first of Septem
ber, 1782, Morris purchased the ship "Wash
ington," 20, and in October he took over
into the Continental service in payment for
a debt the ship "Due de Lauzun," 20.
The movements of the fleet under Morris s
direction were marked, as formerly, by bits
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 137, Morris to President of Con
gress, September 10, 1781; Journals of Con
gress, September 12, 1781.
2. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 37, p. 473.
236 A ai y of the American Revolution
of good and bad fortune, encounters with
naval ships, privateers, and merchantmen, .
and voyages to France and the West Indies.
From the summer of 1781 until the end of
the war the little fleet captured twenty
prizes, some fifteen of which reached safe
ports. The last of his Majesty s vessels to
surrender to a Continental ship was the
schooner "Jackall," 20, Commander Logic,
which was taken in the spring of 1782 by
Captain Samuel Nicholson, when in com
mand of the "Deane," or the "Hague," as
she was now called. By a singular coinci
dence the first, and the last, valuable prize
captured by a Continental ship during the
Revolution, were taken by Captain John
Manly. On one of the last days of Novem
ber, 1775, he received the surrender of the
brig "Nancy," a transport; and in January,
1783, while in command of the "Hague" he
captured the ship "Bailie" of 340 tons bur
den, with a cargo consisting of sixteen hun
dred barrels of provisions. 1
One of the most interesting, varied, and
fortunate cruises of the war was made by
Captain John Barry in the "Alliance," 36,
one of the largest and best-built vessels of
the Continental navy. Barry left New
London on August 4, 1782, and having
visited the region of the Bermudas, and the
Grand Banks of Newfoundland, he sailed
eastward and overhauled a fleet of Jamai-
1. Boston Gazette, January 27, 1783.
Xai y of the American Revolution 237
camen, and arrived at L Orient on October
17. He had captured nine prizes, four of
which he carried into L Orient. These four
ships were Jamaicamen, and with their rich
cargoes of rum and sugar, they sold f or 620,-
610, one of the largest sums realized on
any cruise during the Revolution. On De
cember 8, Captain Barry left France for the
West Indies. Having made a call at Ma
deira, Barry early in January, 1783, an
chored at St. Pierre, Martinique, where he
found a letter from the Agent of Marine or
dering him to proceed to Havana and con
voy the "Due de Lauzun" to Philadelphia.
About the first of February the "Alliance"
arrived at Havana, after she had put into
St. Eustatius and Cape Francois, and had
been chased by one fleet off Porto Rico and
another off Hispaniola. On account of the
closing of the port of Havana, Barry was
detained here a month. After consider
able correspondence with the Governor of
Havana, Barry on March 6 was permitted
to sail with his convoy, which had on board
seventy-two thousand dollars in specie. On
March 10, 1783, Barry fell in with a British
vessel, which is said to have been the frigate
"Sibylle," 32, and he now fought the last
naval engagement of the Revolution. It
lasted forty-five minutes, ended indecis
ively, and resulted in the loss of ten men on
board the "Alliance;" the loss of the British
is unknown. The two American vessels
238 Navy of the American Revolution
now parted company, and each soon reached
a safe port; the "Alliance" arrived at New
port, Rhode Island, on March 20, and the
"Due de Lauzun" anchored at Philadelphia
on March 21. It was now two months since
the Preliminary Articles of Peace had been
signed at Versailles. 1 The naval move
ments of the Continental vessels during the
Revolution ended with the arrivals of these
two vessels.
While Morris had the direction of the
fleet, only one vessel was captured by the
enemy, and this before he became Agent of
Marine. In July, 1781, he ordered the
"Trumbull," 28, Captain James Nicholson,
to proceed to Havana with despatches, let
ters, and a cargo of flour. The "Tronbull"
had scarcely cleared the Capes of the Dela
ware, on August 8, when she was chased by
the frigate "Iris," 32, Captain George Daw-
son. Encountering a storm, the "Trum-
bull" was dismasted, and thus crippled she
was overtaken by the "Iris." The "Trum
bull V crew were a sorry lot; some of them
were British deserters, and others were cow
ardly and disaffected. It was late in the
evening when the fight began. Many of
the crew now put out their battle lanterns
and flew from their quarters. Captain
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, II, 103; M. I. J. Griffin, Commodore
John Barry, 162-248, prints many contempora
neous papers relating to Barry s cruise.
Nai v of the American Revolution 239
Nicholson and his officers, with a handful of
seamen, bravely defended their ship against
impossible odds for an hour before they sur
rendered. Nicholson lost sixteen men; two
of his lieutenants were wounded. It is re
called that the "Iris" was originally the
"Hancock," of the Continental navy, and
that she was the first of the thirteen origi
nal frigates to surrender to the enemy.
The "Iris" was a fast ship, and is said to
have made the fortunes of all the British
captains that commanded her. It was the
irony of fate that the first of the thirteen
frigates to be captured should receive the
surrender of the last remaining one. A let
ter from New York, dated August 11, 1781,
informs us that "this day arrived the cel
ebrated rebel frigate named the Trumbull." 1
The attempts of Morris, in 1782, to ob
tain an increase in the naval force of Con
gress, form one of the most interesting and
characteristic parts of his naval work. The
surrender of Cornwallis on October 19, 1781,
was not considered by many contemporane
ous Americans as an event that must neces
sarily end the Revolution. Indeed, the
final outcome of the war was in doubt for
more than a year. The Agent of Marine
was too cautious and conservative to count
on peace before its actual accomplishment
had been sealed by a formal treaty. After
1. Clowes, Royal Navy, IV, 72, 73; Penn
sylvania Packet, August 16, 1781.
240 Xaz y of the American Revolution
the surrender of Corn wall is he not only con
tinued to send the Continental cruisers
against the enemy, but whenever an occa
sion presented, he vigorously urged on Con
gress the necessity of a naval increase. To
the mind of Morris the need of a navy in 1782
was greater than it had been at any previous
time during the Revolution. He conceived
that up to this time Britain had attempted
to conquer the Colonies on land by means of
her army; since she had been defeated in
this, it was now her purpose to starve the
Colonies into submission by means of her
navy $hd superior sea-power. The United
States must meet the enemy s change of tac
tics by building a navy.
In April, 1782, Morris took steps to have
the frigate "Bourbon" completed. Con
gress was not convinced of the expediency
of this, and was inclined to sell the frigate
in its unfinished state. Morris wrote re
provingly to Congress that the most econom
ical thing to do was to complete the vessel;
and that "there is also a degree of Dignity
in carrying through such measures as Con
gress have once adopted, unless some change
of circumstances renders the execution im
proper." He then added: "The present
circumstances of the United States I appre
hend to be such as should induce our atten
tion to the re-establishment of a Naval
Force, and altho former attempts have
proved unfortunate, we must not take it for
Navy of the American Revolution 241
granted that future Essays will be unsuc
cessful. Altho 7 the Naval Force of our ene
my is powerful, and their Ships Numerous,
yet that Force is opposed by equal Numbers,
so as to give them much more employment
than at the time our infant Fleet was
Crushed." 1
On May 10, 1782, in response to a request
of Congress, Morris submitted an exhaustive
report on the state of American commerce.
Referring to the intentions of the British,
he declared that having been compelled to
abandon the idea of conquest, their avowed
design was to annihilate the American com
merce. The plans of the enemy could be
frustrated and the American trade protected
by so small a fleet as two ships of the line
and ten frigates. The ships of the line, to
gether with two frigates, should be stationed
in the Chesapeake, to cruise as occasion
might require. The frigates should be di
vided into two equal squadrons, each of
which should serve as a convoy of the Amer
ican trade between the United States and
France. By each squadron making two
round trips a year, a quarterly communica
tion both ways between these two countries
would be established. The United States
of course could not provide this service, but
the ships which the plan required might
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, I, 415, Morris to President of Con
gress, April 24, 1782.
242 A fli v of the American Revolution
be detailed from the French or Spanish fleet .
"It is to be hoped," Morris said, "that if the
war continues much longer, the United
States will be able to provide the necessary
force for themselves, which at present they
are not, tho if the above arrangements take
place, they might now provide for the trade
from America to the West Indies." Con
gress authorized Morris to apply to both
Spain and France for the needed vessels. 1
But a more extensive naval plan than this
was in Morris s mind, and one which could be
undertaken independent of foreign ships.
On July 30, 1782, he submitted to Congress
an estimate for the public services of the
United States for the year 1783, amounting
in all to eleven millions of dollars. More
than one-fifth of this sum was to be spent
on the navy. " Congress will observe," he
said, 1 " that the estimates for the Marine De
partment amount to two Millions and a
half, whereas there was no Estimate made
for that Service in the last year any more
than for the civil list." Morris based this
most remarkable recommendation for a na
val increase on the belief that the enemy
had changed his mode of warfare, and that it
was now his purpose to annihilate the com
merce of America, and thus starve her into
submission. With this sort of a campaign,
conducted by the enemy, an American army
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, 1, 447, Report of Morris, May 10, 1782.
Navy of the American Revolution 243
without a navy would be burdensome with
out being able to accomplish anything.
With a navy, we could prevent the enemy
from making predatory excursions, ruining
our commerce, and capturing our supplies;
he would either be compelled to keep a su
perior naval force in this country, which
w r ould give our allies a naval superiority
elsewhere; or else he must permit the bal
ance of naval strength in America to be on
our side; in which latter case we could pro
tect our trade, annoy his commerce and cut
off the supplies which he w r ould be sending to
his posts in America. Then, concluded
Morris in words which remind one of the an
nual report of some recent Secretary of the
Navy asking for the yearly quota of battle
ships: "By oeconomizing our Funds and
constructing six ships annually we should
advance so rapidly to Maritime importance
that our enemy would be convinced not
only of the Impossibility of subduing us,
but also of the Certainty that his forces in
this Country must eventually be lost with
out being able to produce him any possible
Advantage; 5 and we should in this way
regain the "full Possession of our Country
without the Expence of Blood, or treasure,
which must attend any other Mode of Oper
ations, and w^hile we are pursuing those
Steps which lead to the Possession of our
natural Strength and Defence." 1
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con-
244 A orc v of the American Revolution
The signing on November 30, 1782, of the
Provisional Articles of Peace between the
United States and Great Britain, news of
which reached America early in the spring
of 1783, removed the necessity of a naval
increase, and in the minds of many the need
of a navy at all. Morris did not at once
give up the notion that the government on
a peace footing should maintain a respect
able marine. In May, 1783, he asked Con
gress to relieve him of his naval duties.
"The affairs of the Marine Department," he
writes, "occupy more time and attention
than I can easily spare. This Department
will now become important, and I hope
extensive. I must therefore request that
Congress will be pleased to appoint an
Agent of Marine as soon as their conven
ience will admit/ 1 He became convinced
however that not much could be done for
the navy until the finances of Congress were
placed on a better and more permanent
basis. In July, 1783, Morris made a report
on a proposition of Virginia offering to sell
her naval ship "Cormorant" to the United
States. Congress agreed to his report,
which was as follows: "That although it
is an object highly desirable, to establish a
respectable marine, yet the situation of the
gress, 137, I, 713, Estimate for public services
for 1783, July 30, 1782.
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, II, 425, Morris to President of Con
gress, May 3, 1783.
Naz>y of the American Revolution 245
public treasury renders it not advisable to
purchase ships for the present, nor until the
several states shall grant such funds for the
construction of ships, docks, naval arsenals,
and for the support of the naval service, as
shall enable the United States to establish
their marine upon a permanent and re
spectable footing." 1
Meanwhile, Congress had been rapidly go
ing out of the naval business, by formally
ending the war at sea, by providing for the
settlement of marine accounts, and by dis
posing of its naval stock. Oh March 24,
1783, it ordered the Agent of Marine to re
call all armed vessels cruising under the
American colors. On April 11 it issued a
" Proclamation, Declaring the Cessation of
arms, as well by Sea as by Land, agreed
upon between the United States of America
and His Britannic Majesty; and enjoining
the observance thereof/ On April 15 it
ordered the Agent of Marine to set free all
the naval prisoners of the enemy. 2
During the last year of the Revolution
and for several years after its close, one of
the principal administrative tasks of the
government was the settling of the outstand-
ing accounts of the several executive de-
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, II, 725, Report of Morris, July 31,
1783; Journals of Continental Congress, Au
gust 5, 1783.
2. Journals of Continental Congress March
24, April 11, April 15, 1783.
246 Navy of the American Revolution
partments. This was a work fraught with
extraordinary difficulties. The administra
tion of a government founded and conducted
amid the distractions of war was necessarily
marked by irregularities in official procedure,
the lack of system in accounting, and in
general by haphazard ways of business. On
February 27, 1782, Congress acting on the
recommendation of Morris authorized him
to appoint five commissioners with full
power and authority to liquidate and finally
settle the Revolutionary accounts. Each
commissioner was paid $1,500 a year; he
was permitted to employ a clerk. The
states were recommended to empower the
commissioners to examine witnesses under
oath. Each commissioner was given charge
of a certain class of accounts; to one of the
five men fell the settling of the accounts of
the Naval Department. Owing to Morris s
caution in making appointments, and to the
obstacles that stood in the way of a wise
choice, the " commissioner for settling the
accounts of the marine department" was
not selected until June 19, 1783, when Jo
seph Pennell, the paymaster of the Marine
Office, was named for the place. 1 By the
fall of 1783 Pennell was settled in his work,
and was complaining of its arduousness.
He soon found himself involved in a dispute
with the members of the old Naval Com-
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Feb
ruary 27, 1782, June 19, 1783.
A aT v of the American Revolution 247
mittee. He said that they had received
money from Congress for which they had
not accounted; and that, according to the
vouchers, they had paid one debt twice.
He found that the members of the Marine
Committee were individually charged with
the moneys they had received; and that
when they left the Committee, they made
no settlement. In many instances vouchers
were lacking. Statements from members of
the Navy Boards and from the naval agents
could be obtained only with great difficulty,
as these men were now discharged, and they
were often scattered. He discovered that
the prize agents made no uniform charge
for their services; some exacted five, and
others two and a half per cent on the re
ceipts from the sale of prizes. Offices for
settling the naval accounts were opened in
Philadelphia, New York, and Boston. On
the retirement of Morris, Pennell became re
sponsible to the new Board of Treasury. 1
In the last year of the war Congress began
to dispose of its naval craft. On September
3, 1782, the 74-gun ship " America" now at
last almost ready for launching was on the
recommendation of the Agent of Marine
given to France to replace the ship of the
line "Magnifique," 74, which the French
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, III, 651, 655, Morris to President of
Congress, May 26, 1784, enclosing extract of
letter of Pennell.
248 A aiT of the American Revolution
fleet had recently lost in Boston harbor.
Congress, " desirous of testifying on this oc
casion to his Majesty, the sense they enter
tain of his generous exertions in behalf of
the United States/ directed the Agent of
Marine to present the " America" to Lu-
zerne, the French minister at Philadelphia,
for the service of His Most Christian Majes
ty. 1 It was a gracious act of international
friendship. In April, 1783, the "Due de
Lauzun" was lent to the French minister
to carry home some French troops, after
which service she was to be sold. 2 In July
Morris ordered the "Hague" to be sold,
and recommended to Congress a like dispo
sition of the "Bourbon," which latter ship
in all probability had been recently
launched. 3 In March, 1784, Morris recom
mended the sale of the "Alliance," as she
was "now a mere bill of costs;" and also
the "Washington," because much money
would be required to repair her, and there
was no need to employ her as a packet,
since the French and English had estab
lished a mail service. 4 Lieutenant Joshua
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep
tember 3, 1782.
2. Ibid., April 21, 1783.
3. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 137, III, 677, Report of Morris, July 22,
1783.
4. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
137, 3, p. 243, Report of Morris, March 19,
1784.
Navy of the American Revolution 249
Barney, acting as the agent for the Naval
Department, sold the " Washington" in
Baltimore in the summer of 1784.
The members of Congress were not unani
mous on the question of the proper disposi
tion of the "Alliance." On January 15,
1 784, a committee of three reported : " That
the honour of the Flag of the United States
and the protection of its trade and coasts
from the insults of pirates require that the
Frigate of Alliance should be repaired." 1
A committee in March, 1784, and another in
May, 1785, recommended her sale. 2 Final
ly, on June 3, 1785, Congress directed the
Board of Treasury "to sell for specie or
public securities, at public or private sale,
the frigate Alliance, with her tackle and
appurtenances." 3 In August, 1785, the
Board of Treasury sold this vessel for 2,887,
to be paid in United States certificates of
public debt. The purchasers afterwards
sold the "Alliance" at a great profit to
Robert Morris. In June, 1787, this vessel
sailed for Canton, China, as a merchantman. 4
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 28, p. 221, Report of Committee, Janu
ary 15, 1784.
2. Ibid., 28, pp. 213, 225-27, Reports of
Committees.
3. Journals of Continental Congress June
3, 1785.
4. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 140, 11,45, Board of Treasury to Presi
dent of Congress, August 5, 1785; M. I. J.
Griffin, Commodore John Barry, 258-59.
250 Aavy of the American Revolution
From the sale of the Alliance" until the
establishment of a new navy under the
Constitution in 1794 it was left to the stars
and stripes floating from American mer
chantmen to familiarize foreign ports and
seas with the symbol of the new Nation.
Congress did not formally end the naval
establishment by act or resolution, unless
one considers that such was the effect of
the resolution of January 25, 1780, which
provided that the pay of all naval officers
except those in actual service should cease.
After this date it would seem that as the
vessels were captured, sold, or thrown out
of commission, the names of the officers were
taken from the pay-roll. In September,
1783, an unsuccessful attempt was made in
Congress to discontinue the Agent of Mar
ine. 1 Morris continued in office until No
vember 1, 1784, when he retired from public
service. Congress made no move to fill his
place as Agent of Marine, for there was little
need for such an official. Certain unimpor
tant naval business, chiefly concerned with
the settlement of naval accounts, remained,
however, to be transacted. This for the
most part naturally fell to the Board of
Treasury, organized in the spring of 1785.
This Board, aided by the commissioner for
settling the marine accounts, and by James
Read, the efficient secretary to the Agent
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep
tember 16, 1783.
Xai y of the American Revolution 251
of Marine, with whom Morris on retiring
left the books and papers of the Naval De
partment, wound up the small, unimportant,
and dwindling business of the navy.
CHAPTER IX
NAVAL DUTIES OF AMERICAN REPRE
SENTATIVES IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES
On the outbreak of the war between the
Colonies and the mother-country, Congress
turned with true political insight to France
for aid. The self-interest of no other coun
try in Europe gave so good a basis for friend
ship and alliance with America. To France,
the success of the revolting British Colonies
meant the humbling of a victorious rival,
the turning of a part of Britain s valuable
colonial trade into French channels, and
probably a reopening of the trial at arms of
the Seven Years War and a reversal of some
of its humiliating decisions. Common inter
ests led the two countries to cooperate in
achieving and furthering their objects and
ambitions; and this led to the establishing
of intimate diplomatic, commercial, and
naval relations between them. Many of the
duties that grew out of these three classes
of relations had to be transacted in France,
and they therefore necessitated the appoint
ment of American representatives to be
resident in that country. The naval duties
Navy of the American Revolution 253
of these representatives were numerous and
important. They involved the renting, pur
chase, and building of naval vessels; the
officering, manning, and fitting out of ves
sels; the directing of cruises; the purchase
of naval supplies; the disciplining of officers;
the paying of officers and crews; the dispos
ing of prizes; the devising of naval plans; the
commissioning of privateers ; the caring for
naval prisoners and the negotiating for
their exchange; and the disseminating of
naval intelligence. The vesting of these
duties in the American representatives in
France virtually constituted the establish
ment of a Branch Naval Office at Paris. 1
Besides the above duties, which may be
considered strictly naval in character, the
American representatives had other busi
ness closely related to their admiralty work,
but which was also intimately connected
with their diplomatic and commercial work.
For instance, dealings with breaches of neu
trality committed by American ships had
to do equally with diplomatic and naval
affairs. The selling of colonial products
which the Commercial Committee of the
Continental Congress exported to France,
1. For convenience the term "Naval Of
fice" will be used in this chapter. It will be
understood of course that there existed no
"Naval Office" apart from the Office of the
American representatives at Paris, in whom
were vested diplomatic, naval, and commer
cial duties.
A arv of tJic American Revolution
and the buying of French manufactures
which the American representatives shipped
to America, were of course commercial du
ties. These transactions, however, came
into contact with naval affairs when the
goods purchased in France happened to be
naval stores, or when naval ships carried
the goods or convoyed the merchantmen
which carried them. For the sake of ob
taining a complete view of the admiralty
work of the American representatives in
France, this chapter will touch upon naval
duties of all sorts even though their diplo
matic and commercial aspects stand out the
most prominently.
The first naval business of the Colonies in
France fell to Silas Deane, a political and
commercial agent of the Continental Con
gress, who arrived at Paris in July, 1776.
In December, 1776, Deane was succeeded
by three American commissioners to the
Court of France, Benjamin Franklin, Silas
Deane, and Arthur Lee. These three men
shared the naval duties of their office until
the spring of 1778, when Deane was super
seded by John Adams. In February, 1779,
Franklin, who had been chosen Minister
Plenipotentiary at the Court of France, fell
heir along with the other duties of the com
missioners to those of a naval character;
and he continued in this office until the end
of the Revolution. Of the first three com
missioners Silas Deane had the most to do
Navy of the American Revolution 255
with the naval business. He says that the
management of the Continental ships of
war and of their prizes which was a "most
complicated and embarrassing part of our
affairs " fell entirely upon himself. 1 When
Deane was superseded, it would seem that
his naval duties fell to Franklin rather than
to Adams. Franklin had at all times the
chief part of the work of exchanging naval
prisoners with Great Britain; and Adams
excelled the other commissioners in trans
mitting to the home government naval in
telligence.
The headquarters of the Naval Office were
of course situated at Paris, several hundred
miles from the ports frequented by the Con
tinental vessels. This was a great disad
vantage, as it caused delays in communicat
ing with the naval officers and naval agents,
besides other inconveniences. The Office
gave its orders as a rule by letter, but now
and then when its officers and agents visited
Paris, it communicated with them by word
of mouth. Its official correspondence with
the home government was carried on al
most exclusively with the " Foreign Office"
at Philadelphia that is, at first with the
Committee of Secret Correspondence, then
with the Committee of Foreign Affairs, and
finally with the Secretary for Foreign Affairs.
A few letters passed between the Naval
1. Ingraham, Papers relative to Silas Deane,
67.
256 Navy of the American Revolution
Office at Paris and the Naval Department
in America. The secretary and the clerks,
first of the Commissioners, and later of the
Minister at the Court of France, assisted in
transacting the naval business.
The American representatives at Paris
employed agents in a number of the chief
Atlantic ports of France to transact their
naval and commercial business. The prin
cipal agencies were at Nantes, L Oricnt,
Bordeaux, Brest, and Dunkirk. There were
also agencies at Bilbao, and Coruiia, Spain;
and in Holland. It is difficult to separate
the naval and commercial duties of these
agencies, as they were vested in the same
men. The whole subject is exceedingly
complicated. For transacting naval busi
ness, Nantes was the most important agency,
although L Orient was not far behind it. At
Nantes in 1777 within a comparatively short
period of time one finds Thomas Morris, a
half-brother of Robert Morris, William Lee,
a brother of Richard Henry Lee, Jonathan
Williams, a nephew of Franklin, John Ross,
a Philadelphia merchant, and a certain Ger
man merchant by the name of Schweig-
hauser exercising similar duties. William
Lee was for a time commercial agent for all
of France, and his authority of course came
in contact with that of the Commissioners
at Paris. 1 Such divisions and duplications
17 Wharton s Diplomatic Correspondence
and Ford s Letters of William Lee are the best
sources for the work of these agents.
Navy of the American Revolution 257
of powers resulted in much contention, mis
understanding, and jealousy. John Adams
tells us that when he arrived in France in
the spring of 1778 he found in some places
two or three persons claiming the character
of American agents; and that at one port,
three agents had been appointed, one by
the Commissioners at Paris, another by the
commercial agent of France, and a third
by the Commercial Committee of Congress.
"We have such abuses and irregularities
every day occurring as are very alarming.
Agents of various sorts are drawing bills
upon us, and the commanders of vessels of
war are drawing upon us for expenses and
supplies which we never ordered." Moved
by the reformatory zeal that so often char
acterizes the new appointee to public office,
Adams attempted to reduce the business
of Congress in France to some system. 1
The Naval Office at Paris appointed sev
eral naval officers by filling out blank com
missions and warrants, which had been
signed and sent by the President of Congress
for that purpose. Late in the war the
question arose as to the proper rank in the
navy of some of these appointments. In
certain specific cases which were referred to
Robert Morris as Agent of Marine, he rec
ommended that new commissions be granted
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence
II, 595, Adams to Commercial Committee,
May 24, 1778.
258 Navy of the American Revolution
dated as the old, and that the officers re
ceiving them take rank according to the
dates of their old commissions. The Naval
Office granted commissions of captain to
Gustavus Conyngham, Samuel Nicholson,
Peter Landais, and John Green. On the
recommendation of John Paul Jones it ap
pointed Richard Dale to be a lieutenant on
board the "Bon Homme Richard/ Dale
became an officer of distinction in the new
navy under the Constitution, where he rose
to the rank of commodore. Landais was
the only Frenchman who received a perma
nent commission as captain in the Continen
tal navy.
Silas Deane had a penchant for recom
mending French officers; and he was very
credulous as to the compliments expressed
by themselves and their friends in their be
half. On November 28, 1776, Deane wrote
to the Committee of Secret Correspondence
as follows, having just referred to certain
army officers whom he was sending to
America: "As to sea officers, they are not
so easily obtained, yet some good ones may
be had, and in particular two, one of whom
I have already mentioned; the other is
quite his equal, with some other advantages;
he was first lieutenant of a man-of-war,
round the World with Captain Cook, and
has since had a ship, but wants to leave
this for other service where he may make a
settlement and establish a family. These
Xai y of the American Ra^olution 259
two officers would engage a number of
younger ones, should they embark. I send
herewith the plans of one of them for
burning ships." The French officer who
designed these plans, also made " drafts of
ships and rates for constructing and regu
lating a navy," of which Deane had the
" highest opinion." This officer, Deane said,
"has seen much service, is a person of study
and letters, as well as fortune, and is ambi
tious of planning a navy for America, which
shall at once be much cheaper and more
effectual than anything of the kind which
can be produced on the European system." 1
That Deane gave too ready an ear to the
soft words of the French, is clear from his
extravagant recommendations of the er
ratic and troublesome French captain, Peter
Landais. Deane said that Landais would
be a "valuable acquisition to our Navy;"
and that he was a "skilful seaman of long
Experience in every Part of the World, of
good judgment and the most unsuspicious
honor and Probity." In May, 1778, Con
gress continued Landais in the naval service ;
but directed "the commissioners of the
United States at foreign courts" not to
"recommend any foreign sea-officers, nor
give any of them the least expectation of
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence
II, 191, 200, Deane to Committee of Secret
Correspondence, November 6, November 28,
1776.
260 Xai y of the American Revolution
being employed as captains in the navy." 1
The Naval Office at Paris issued a few
commissions to prhateers. As early as
October, 1776, Deane was writing -to the
Committee of Secret Correspondence for
blank commissions. Private as well as pub
lic interests were involved in the cruises of
Captain Gustavus Conyngham in European
waters. Carmichael, a Marylander and an
employee in France of Congress and the
Commissioners at Paris, asserted that Deane
in 1777 intended to equip a vessel in the
Mediterranean sea partly on public and
partly on private account, that an agent
was employed who succeeded in buying a
vessel, but that the state of Genoa inter
posed and stopped the enterprise. 2 Two fa
mous, or better infamous, letters of marque
were fitted out at Dunkirk and commis
sioned by the Naval Office in 1779. They
were named the " Black Prince" and the
" Black Princess." Their crews were a
malodorous medley, containing "a few
Americans, mixed with Irish and English
smugglers." These smugglers had recently
broken prison in Dublin, recaptured their
smuggling vessel, and escaped to Dunkirk,
Should they be recaptured by the English
1. Collections of New York Historical So
ciety, Deane Papers, II, 122; Journals of Con
tinental Congress, May 9, 1778.
2. Ingraham, Papers relative to Silas
Deane, 141-49.
Navy of the American Revolution 261
and their identity be discovered, they would
be forced to suffer the penalty for smuggling.
As they spoke English, it was thought that
their past character might be best concealed
by giving them an American commission,
instead of a French one. These two priva
teers captured or destroyed upwards of one
hundred and twenty sail of the British, and
insulted "the coasts of these lords of the
ocean." In the summer of 1780, the
"Black Prince" was wrecked on the coast
of France, and the commission of the "Black
Princess," upon the request of Vergennes,
the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, was
recalled by Franklin. 1 In 1780 certain
American prisoners, who had escaped, fitted
out a privateer at Cadiz in Spain and asked
Jay, the American minister at Madrid, for
a commission. He referred them to Frank
lin. 2
When the American Commissioners as
sembled in Paris in December, 1776, to begin
their mission, they had with them the orders
of Congress to purchase, arm, and equip a
frigate and two cutters. They were to send
the frigate cruising against the enemy in
the English channel, and were to employ
the cutters in transporting supplies to
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
III, 802-03; IV, 26, 33; Kale s Franklin in
France, I, chapter XVI, Privateers from Dun
kirk.
2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence
III, 731.
262 Navy of the American Revolution
America. The Commissioners were fur
ther directed to hire or buy at the French
Court eight line of battle ships. 1 They be
gan to carry out these orders in January,
1777, when Captain Samuel Nicholson was
sent to Boulogne to purchase one of the
cutters; in the spring a lugger was obtained
at Dover, England ; and in the early summer
another cutter was bought at Dunkirk. In
the two latter transactions William Hodge,
a merchant from Philadelphia, acted as the
agent of the Commissioners. Early in the
year Captain Lambert Wickes, who had in
December, 1776, arrived in France in the
Continental sloop " Reprisal" with Dr.
Franklin on board, was inspecting vessels for
the Commissioners. Nicholson s cutter was
named the " Dolphin;" and Hodge s two
vessels were called, respectively, the " Sur
prise" and the " Revenge." It is believed
that the "Revenge" was purchased jointly
on public and private account. After this
vessel s first cruise it is known that Hodge
and possibly others were pecuniarily inter
ested in its ventures.
By the fall of 1777 the Commissioners had
completed the construction of a 32-gun fri
gate at Nantes, which they called the
"Deane." They also purchased a ship
which they fitted out as a 28-gun frigate
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo
ber 3, 1776; Wharton, Diplomatic Correspon
dence, II, 177.
XcK y of the American Revolution 263
and named the "Queen of France." Early in
1778 they sent the "Deane" under the
command of Captain Samuel Nicholson, and
the "Queen of France" under the command
of Captain John Green, both vessels laden
with supplies, to Boston. The "Deane" re
mained in the navy until the end of the
Revolution. The "Queen of France" was
surrendered to the British in May, 1780, on
the fall of Charleston, South Carolina. On
the application of the Commissioners to the
French Court for the loan or sale of some
ships of the line, they were told that the
French government considered it absolutely
necessary to keep the whole of its fleet at
home ready for the defence of France in
case of a rupture with Great Britain; but,
that, since England was apprehensive of
a war with France, such a disposition of the
French naval forces was serviceable to
America in so far as it forced England to
retain an equal force in the British seas. 1
In the spring of 1777 the Commissioners
received orders from Congress to build six
vessels of war; but before this, they had on
their own responsibility contracted with
"one of the ablest sea officers of France,
skilled in all the arts relating to the marine,"
who had offered "his services to our States,
with the permission of the minister/ to
"superintend the building of two ships of
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
264 A ai y of tlie American Revolution
war, of a particular construction, which,
though not of half the cost, shall be superior
in force and utility to ships of sixty-four
guns." This officer had already built a
vessel of this type for the King of France
which the Commissioners were told "ex
ceeds everything in swift sailing." 1 Only
one of these frigates, which was named the
"Indian," was placed upon the stocks, and
this one at Amsterdam. To conceal its
ownership and destination it was built in
the name of a private individual. The
Commissioners wrote in the fall of 1777,
when the ship was almost finished, that it
was a large frigate and was supposed to
equal a ship of the line, as it would carry
thirty 24-pounders on one deck. The ship
did not get to sea under Continental colors.
Owing to the many difficulties of equipping
and manning so large a ship in a neutral
port, and to the lack of money necessary
for such work, the Commissioners sold it to
the King of France for a sum equal to that
which they had expended upon it; the King
at the same time agreed to pension well the
officer who had built it, 2 With the sale of
this frigate the work of the Naval Office at
Paris in naval construction came to a close.
The "Indian" was finally rented to the state
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 284-85.
2. Ibid., 433, Commissioners to Committee
of Foreign Affairs, November 30, 1777.
A a-t v of the American Revolution 265
of South Carolina. In 1779 and 1780 the
French government loaned several vessels
to the Naval Office.
During the years 1777, 1778, and 1779,
the fitting out of Continental armed vessels,
as well those which were sent to France
from America, as those which were originally
obtained by the Commissioners, was a se
vere tax on the slender resources of the Con
tinental treasury at Paris. After a long
voyage or cruise a wooden sailing vessel
needed much repairing. Perchance, it must
be careened and cleaned or repaired below
the water line; new masts and spars were
often needed; and old sails had to be mended
and new ones provided. Always, the vessel
before beginning a new cruise must be fresh
ly provisioned; and its crew, depleted by
battle, desertion, and the dispensations of
Providence, had to be replenished. The en
listing of a few recruits was not a difficult
thing at this time, for there was human drift
wood in every port of Christendom, of divers
nationalities, willing to ship under any flag.
Many Frenchmen enlisted in French ports
on board American vessels. In 1782 Frank
lin said he was continually pestered by such
Frenchmen, who, being put on board prizes,
had been captured by the English, and were
now demanding arrears of pay. 1 In May,
1779, Franklin was complaining to Congress
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence
V t 512,13.
266 Navy of the American Revolution
that the expense of fitting out each Conti
nental cruiser which it sent to France
amounted to 60,000 or 70,000 livres. He
said that Mr. Bingham, the Continental
agent at Martinique, had recently drawn
upon him for the expense of fitting out two
Continental cruisers which had recently put
in to that island, but for lack of money he
would be obliged to protest Bingham s bill. 1
The American representatives in France
fitted out and loaded with supplies for Amer
ica both Continental vessels and French and
American merchantmen. This work prop
erly forms a part of their commercial duties.
Deane tells us that while he was in France
he expended more than ten million livres
for stores, goods, and ships; and that he
loaded sixteen ships for America. 2 The
commercial agents had much to do with
this work; Nantes was the principal shipping
port.
Before the treaties of February, 1778, be
tween the United States and France, the dis
posing of prizes captured by American ves
sels in French ports was exceedingly infor
mal. Since France was obliged to at least
make a pretence of observing her treaties
with England and the laws of neutrality,
she could not permit a trial of American
\. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
III, 189, 193, Franklin to Committee of Foreign
Affairs, May 26, 1779.
2. Collections of New York Historical So
ciety, Deane Papers, IV, 159.
Navy of the American Revolution 267
prize cases in her admiralty courts. Conse
quently, prizes captured by American ves
sels were disposed of without trial and legal
condemnation; they were taken into the
offing of French ports and secretly sold to
French merchants at a great sacrifice to the
captors. After February, 1778, the prizes
were legally tried, but not according to a
uniform practice. Some cases were tried
by the French admiralty courts ; but in other
cases the French courts prepared the proces
verbauXj which they sent to Franklin; he
then condemned the prizes and ordered the
court to sell them. After July, 1780, Frank
lin ceased to exercise such judicial func
tions. 1
One of the objects of the cruises of Conti
nental vessels in European waters was to
capture Englishmen and exchange them for
American naval prisoners languishing in
prisons in England. These imprisoned
Americans were confined chiefly at Forton
prison at Portsmouth, and Mill prison at
Plymouth. A list of prisoners confined at
Mill prison during the Revolution, which
contains 947 names, has been made out. 2 In
April, 1782, there were eleven hundred
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence
III, 801-03, 880-81; Bigelow s Franklin VII
54-55, 58-59.
2. Pennsylvania Packet, May-June, 1782.
Another list will be found in New England
Historical and Genealogical Register for 1865
74, 136, 209.
268 Navy of the American Revolution
Americans in the jails of England and Ire
land, all committed to prison as charged
with high treason. 1 A few Americans were
confined at Gibraltar. These prisoners often
suffered greatly from a lack of sufficient food,
clothing, bedding, and fuel. This was in
part caused by the cruelty and fraud of
those whom the British government en
trusted with the supply and control of its
prisons. The rigors of their captivity w T ere
softened, and their deprivations in a meas
ure relieved by money which Franklin sent
from Paris, and by private subscriptions in
their behalf made by generous English
men.
To escape their penury and distress some
prisoners enlisted in the enemy s navy, or
joined the British whaling fleets. Others
escaped from prison; some of these burrowed
their way out, committing treason through
His Majesty s earth, to use a phrase of Cap
tain Conyngham, who, with sixty compan
ions, in this way escaped from Mill prison
in November, 1779. These escaped prison
ers gradually found their way into Holland,
the seaports of France, or even Paris; and
they often became a tax upon Franklin s
pity, and the Continental treasury in his
keeping. Franklin was deeply moved by
the sufferings of these men, whether con
fined in England or at liberty in France. His
1 Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
V, 326-27.
Nai v of the American Revolution 269
efforts in their behalf are an important part
of his work and achievements in France.
A long correspondence directed towards
securing an exchange of Englishmen cap
tured by American vessels and confined in
France for Americans confined in England
was conducted by Franklin with his friend
Hartley in England. Hartley was a noble-
minded and humane Englishman, who was,
at the time, a member of the House of Com
mons. The first letters on the exchanging
of prisoners were written, however, by the
American Commissioners, to Lord Stor-
mont, the British Ambassador at Paris.
The Commissioners stated that Captain
Wickes, of the Continental cruiser "Re
prisal," had in his possession one hundred
captured British seamen, and they wished
to exchange them for an equal number of
American seamen, prisoners in England.
The first letter of the Commissioners Lord
Stormont ignored. To the second letter,
or possibly to the third, he replied in those
well-known words: "The King s Ambas
sador receives no applications from rebels,
unless they come to implore His Majesty s
mercy." The reply of the Commissioners
was equally spirited: "In answer to a let
ter which concerns some of the most ma
terial interests of humanity, and of the two
nations, Great Britain and the United States
of America, now at war, we received the en
closed indecent paper, as coming from your
270 A^az v of the American Revolution
Lordship, which we return for your Lord
ship s more mature consideration." 1
Until after the treaties of February, 1778,
between the United States and France,
Great Britain resisted the exchange of naval
prisoners, confined in England, on three
grounds : that it involved the recognition of
belligerent rights in the insurgents; that
France being neutral, the Colonists would be
compelled either to free captured British
seamen taken in European waters, or else
to take them to America; and that since
British seamen were far more numerous
than American, an exchange would tell more
favorably for the Americans than for the
British. 2 Not until France had entered into
the war, did Britain take a broader and
more generous position, and begin to listen
to Franklin s overtures for an exchange of
prisoners. During 1778 the negotiations
proceeded slowly and vexatiously, and it
was not until March, 1779, that the first ex
change was made. One hundred American
prisoners from the Mill prison at Plymouth
were then sent to France by the British gov
ernment in the Milford cartel-ship; and in
August one hundred more were exchanged.
In October, 1779, when Captain Jones ter-
1. Hale s Franklin in France, I, Chapter
XI, American Prisoners, prints many original
letters.
2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 724.
Navy of the American Revolution 271
minated his famous cruise, he carried into
the Texel, Holland, 472 prisoners; and Frank
lin had high hopes that at last considerable
numbers of the unfortunate American
prisoners would be released. Since the
Texel was a neutral port, complications
growing out of the laws of neutrality
now arose. If Jones s prisoners were
to be exchanged for Americans, it was
decided that they must first be brought
to France. Rather than risk their recap
ture, Franklin agreed to permit them to
be considered as the prisoners of France
and to be exchanged for an equal number
of Frenchmen imprisoned in England. In
return, the French were to give Franklin
472 English prisoners confined in French
prisons, which were to be exchanged for
American prisoners. Franklin had diffi
culty in securing the Englishmen from
France; after England had sent over one
hundred prisoners, misunderstandings arose,
and in May, 1780, she refused to exchange
Americans except for Englishmen taken by
American cruisers. One of the main ob
jects of Jones s famous cruise, the releasing
of American prisoners in England, seems to
have partly failed. 1 In March, 1782,
Franklin considered a proposed plan for
rescuing the American prisoners in Forton
prison, and bringing them to France on
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence
III, 535, 608, 681-82, 745-46.
272 Xai y of the American Revolution
smuggling vessels, but he concluded that
the project was impracticable. 1
After France and Spain entered into the
war, the American Commissioners confined
British prisoners in French and Spanish
prisons. Before the French treaties, the
Commissioners had no place, except in their
own ships, to stow away their prisoners.
The American captains were therefore
forced to free many captives. They often
exacted of a prisoner a pledge or parole that
he would, on returning to England, be re
sponsible for the release of an American pris
oner; but of course the British government
refused to take cognizance of such pledges,
or to listen to the claims of the Commission
ers that these released captives should be
considered as returned prisoners. Begin
ning with 1778, the burden upon the Com
missioners for the maintenance of English
prisoners was considerable. In May, 1779,
Franklin thought it would take more than
100,000 livres to pay all the accounts arising
from expenditures in their behalf. 2 Could
satisfactory and expeditious exchanges have
been effected with England, this item of ex
pense would have been greatly reduced.
When the Revolution came to an end, there
was still a considerable number of Americans
in English prisons.
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
V, 27G.
2. Ibid., Ill, 189.
Navy of the American Revolution 273
A number of alleged breaches of neutrality,
said to have been made by American armed
vessels, was brought to the attention of the
American representatives at the Court of
France. For example, in 1777 the French,
Spanish, and Dutch governments complained
that either their ships or their merchandise
had been unlawfully captured. In 1778
the Spanish and Swedish Courts asserted
that Captain Conyngham had violated the
laws of neutrals. The Dutch found fault
with Captain Jones for sending the brigan-
tine "Berkenbosch" to America. In 1780
the Portuguese Ambassador at Paris pre
sented Franklin with papers which alleged
that the Massachusetts state cruiser "Mars"
had illegally taken a Portuguese ship and
had sent it to New England. The American
representatives at Paris regularly disposed
of such cases as the above by referring them
to Congress, and to the American courts of
admiralty. In the case of the Portuguese
ship, Franklin wrote to Congress that he
hoped that it would forward a speedy de
cision; and that it would give orders to the
American cruisers not to meddle with neu
tral vessels, for this was a practice "apt to
produce ill blood." Complaints having
been made of violences done by American
armed vessels to neutral nations, the Com
missioners, in November, 1777, issued a proc-
lamation enjoining the American command
ers to obey the laws of neutrality. In
274 -Voz v of the American Revolution
1780, in view of the First Armed Neutrality
which had been proposed by Catherine of
Russia, and which was then being concerted
by certain European nations, Franklin wrote
to Congress, asking whether it would not be
proper to confine American captures to the
principle that "free ships shall make free
goods/ since it was likely that this would
become the law of nations. 1
Many miscellaneous duties, more or less
naval in character, fell to the Commission
ers at Paris and to their successor, the Amer
ican Minister. In August, 1778, the Com
missioners offered a few observations on
some regulations for prizes and prisoners,
which Sartine, the French Minister of Mar
ine, had prepared with a view of making uni
form certain rules of France and the United
States on these subjects. 2 In June, 1778,
Franklin issued a curious passport in the
form of a proclamation to all commanders
of American armed vessels, not to attack a
certain British vessel, which was bound to
the Moravian mission on the coast of Lab
rador. "I do therefore hereby [inform you]
that the sloop Good Intent/ burthen about
75 tons, Capt. Francis Mugford, carrying
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 425, 435, 784, 827; IV, 24, 180; Stevens s
Facsimiles, 1967, 1969; Bigelow s Franklin,
VII, 308; C. H. Lincoln, Calendar of John Paul
Jones Manuscripts, 163.
2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 682-83, 684-87.
Navy of the American Revolution 275
in the present voyage about 5000 bricks for
building chimneys, with provisions and
necessaries for the missionaries and their as
sistants, and some ironmongery and tin ware
for the Indians the crew consisting of the
Captain, Mate, three men, and a boy, and
the passengers one man and three women -
is the vessel employed in the above service
this year." 1 Coming amid the cruelties, re
sentments, and misunderstandings of war,
this document, which breathes a humane
spirit and declares that the philanthropic in
terests of nations are inviolable, is indeed a
most welcome one. In October, 1778, the
Commissioners provided the Ambassador
of Naples at the Court of France, whose
country had lately opened its ports to Amer
ican vessels, with a description of American
flags. After describing the flag of the Unit
ed States, they added: "Some of the States
have vessels of war distinct from those of
the United States. For example, the ves
sels of war of the state of Massachusetts
Bay have sometimes a pine tree; and those
of the state of South Carolina a rattlesnake
in the middle of thirteen stripes. Merchant
ships have only thirteen stripes, but the
flag of the United States ordained by Con-
1. Hale s Franklin in France, I, 245.
Franklin issued a similar proclamation in be
half of the celebrated navigator, Captain Cook.
Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, III,
75.
2?6 Navy of the American Revolution
gress is the thirteen stripes and the thirteen
stars above described/ 1
The Naval Office at Paris served as a,
channel for the communication of foreign
naval intelligence; it also proposed to Con
gress several important naval plans. John
Adams, while Commissioner, and later while
on a diplomatic mission in Holland, wrote
long letters to Congress on the armament of
the foreign navies, the movements of the
British, French, and Spanish fleets, and the
captures made by these fleets. In Novem
ber, 1776, Silas Deane, always fertile in
schemes, proposed to the Committee of Se
cret Correspondence the sending of frigates
against the Newfoundland fisheries; after
destroying these, the frigates were to sail
for the Baltic and cruise after the enemy s
ships bound for Russia. In the same letter
he proposed a second project. A number of
frigates with merchantmen under their con
voy should be loaded with tobacco, rice,
wheat, and other colonial products, and
should sail for Bordeaux. After unloading
their cargoes and refreshing their crews the
frigates should strike a blow on the British
coast which would "alarm and weaken Great
Britain most effectually. The city of Glas
gow might at any hour be destroyed by
a single frigate capable of landing two hun
dred men." After their descent on England
~~1 Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 759-60.
A flT v of the American Revolution 277
the frigates should sail northward and in
tercept the Baltic ships, or else return to
France and wait for a good opportunity to
strike a second blow. Ships engaging in
such expeditions could obtain any number
of recruits in France. By issuing commis
sions, individuals would "join you in the ad
venture under your flag, with stout frigates,
several of which are now building absolutely
with the design, viz., the hopes of getting
into the service of the United States of
North America/ 71 Deane s letters at this
time are somewhat extravagant, nor are
they always based on an accurate knowledge
of the facts. "Would it not be well/ 7 he
asks, "to purchase at Leghorn five or six
stout Frigates, which might at once trans
port some companies of Swiss and a quan
tity of stores and the whole be defended by
the Swiss soldiers on their passage?" 2
In May, 1777, the recommendations made
by Deane in November, 1776, were in sub
stance repeated by the Commissioners at
Paris to the Committee of Foreign Affairs.
These new recommendations were in all
1. Collections of New York Historical So
ciety, Deane Papers, I, 339-40. The letter of
Deane here published, it is believed, was writ
ten to the Committee of Secret Correspon
dence, and not to the Secret Committee as
given.
2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 199. Deane to Committee of Secret Cor
respondence, November 28, 1776.
278 Navy of the American Revolution
probability drafted by Dearie. The Com
missioners thought that a blow might be
struck on the coast of England which would
"alarm and shake Great Britain, and its
credit, to the center." The burning and
plundering of Liverpool or Glasgow would
do more essential service to the Colonies
than a million of treasure and blood spent in
America. It would raise our reputation to
the highest pitch, and lessen in the same de
gree that of our enemy. The Commission
ers were confident that the plan was prac
ticable, and could be carried out with very
little danger. They also recommended the
sending of two or three Continental frigates
with some small cruisers into the German
ocean, where, about the middle of August,
they might seize the greater part of the en
emy s Baltic and northern trade. One
frigate, they said, would be sufficient to de
stroy the "Greenland whale fishery, or take
the Hudson Bay ships returning." 1
In the fall of 1778 the Commissioners called
the attention of both the Committee of For
eign Affairs and the French Minister of Ma
rine to the ease with which a single frigate or
privateer of twenty or twenty-four guns
could capture the valuable whale fishery
which the English maintained off the coast
of Brazil. The seventeen vessels employed
in this industry were manned and officered
1 Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 324-27.
A rti v of the American Revolution 279
almost entirely by Americans belonging to
Nantucket and Cape Cod. These men had
been captured by Great Britain, and having
been given their choice of entering the Brit
ish naval service or the whale fishing indus
try, had chosen the latter. By their re
capture four hundred and fifty of the best
kind of American seamen would be added to
the Continental service, and moreover the
cargoes of oil which would be taken were
very valuable. 1
In December, 1777, the Committee of
Foreign Affairs proposed to the Commis
sioners at Paris the most extensive naval
expedition planned for the Continental fleet
during the Revolution. The plan was to
be carried out by two or three of the frigates
which the Marine Committee were sending to
France. These, being well manned, were
early in February, 1778, to be despatched to
the French island of Mauritius in the In
dian ocean, where they should refit and re
plenish their stores. The frigates should
next proceed to the Coromandel Coast, a
twenty days sail from Mauritius. Here
they should intercept the enemy s China
ships, and also distress the internal trade of
India. The prizes could be sold in Mauritius
and the proceeds sent to Paris by bills of ex
change. Goree was recommended as a bet
ter port of call than the Cape of Good Hope,
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 818-19, 832-33.
280 Nai y of the American Revolution
where there was danger to be apprehended
from British vessels. In the same letter
the Committee wrote that "another bene
ficial attempt may be conducted along the
coasts of Africa. The French and Dutch
settlements, and perhaps the Portuguese,
will purchase the prizes, and give bills on
Europe." 1 No reply was made by the Com
missioners relative to the proposed East In
dian expedition until in July, 1778, when
Arthur Lee wrote to the Committee of For
eign Affairs that the Commissioners con
sidered the plan "impracticable at the pres
ent." "Better order/ he said, "must be
established in our marine, and the ships
companies better sorted, before it will be
safe to attempt enterprises at such a dis
tance, and which require a certain extent of
ideas in the captain and entire obedience in
the crew." 2 One must agree with Lee s con
clusion, although more weighty objections
to the complicated plan of che Committee
might be adduced.
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 440-41.
2. Ibid., 673-74.
CHAPTER X
NAVAL DUTIES OF AMERICAN REPRE
SENTATIVES IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES
(Continued)
In 1777 the work of the Naval Office at
Paris was greater and more varied than
during any other year. Naval vessels were
both built and purchased. Continental
ships, and merchantmen chartered from the
French, were laden for America with mus
kets, cannon, powder, cordage, duck, tents,
blankets, and clothing. The naval prison
ers in England and the violations of neutral
rights committed by Continental ships and
by privateers demanded much attention.
In the spring the Continental brig "Lexing
ton," and in the fall the "Raleigh," "Al
fred," and "Independence," arrived in
France. The "Reprisal," 16, "Lexington,"
14, "Dolphin," 10, "Surprise," 10, and "Re
venge," 14, were fitted and refitted in French
ports and sent cruising off the British coasts ;
and the prizes of these vessels were sold in
France. The "Dolphin," "Surprise," and
Revenge" were officered and manned in
282 A ai v of the American Revolution
France. The task of conducting all these
naval activities in a neutral country the
Commissioners found to be a most delicate
one.
Among the earlier undertakings of the
American representatives at Paris were
their attempts to obtain the freedom of
French ports for American vessels. Nor
was their work of this sort confined wholly
to the French Court, for in the spring of
1777 Arthur Lee sought at Madrid permis
sion for American vessels to sell their prizes
and to refit in Spanish ports; and later in
the year he went on a similar errand to Ber
lin. Both the Spanish and Prussian Courts
refused his requests. 1 Prizes were, how
ever, without difficulty secretly disposed of
in Spain.
As early as August, 1776, Deane wrote
from Paris that he was "not without hopes
of obtaining liberty for the armed vessels of
the United Colonies, to dispose of their
prizes in the ports of this Kingdom, and also
for arming and fitting out vessels of war di
rectly from hence." 2 When Franklin ar
rived in France, early in December, 1776,
he carried instructions for the Commission
ers to apply immediately to the Court of
France for the protection of its ports to
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 296-97, 355-58, 370.
2. Ibid., 119-20, Deane to Committee of
Secret Correspondence, August 18, 1776.
Navy of the American Revolution 283
American ships of war, privateers, and
prizes. If this favor were granted, he was
to ask for permission to sell American prizes
and their cargoes in French ports. In case
both requests met with favorable responses,
the Committee of Secret Correspondence
would obtain the consent of Congress to em
power the Commissioners to appoint a judge
of admiralty in France; this judge would try
all American prize cases, arising in the ports
of France, in accordance with the rules and
regulations of Congress. Pending the ob
taining of the consent of Congress, the Com
missioners were authorized to consult with
the French Ministry whether it would per
mit the erection of American admiralty
courts in France and the French West In
dies. 1 Of course France could not grant
such requests as these if she wished to re
main at peace with England. During 1776
the Americans generally overestimated the
friendliness of France. They either failed
to see that the laws of neutrality must set
quite definite limits to her overt favors, or
else they thought her eager for an excuse to
go to war with Great Britain. The attitude
of France towards permitting American ves
sels of war and their prizes the freedom of
French ports was disclosed sooner than the
Commissioners had reason to expect.
It is remembered that the Reprisal" ar-
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence.
II, 178-79.
284 Navy of the American Revolution
rived in France with Franklin on board
early in December, 1776. She was the first
Continental vessel to reach European wa
ters. Not far from the French coast she
captured two small British brigantines, and
carried them into Nantes. These were the
first American prizes to enter French ports.
It may be guessed that the captains of the
two prizes were not long in communicating
with Lord Stormont, the British Ambassa
dor at Paris; and that Lord Stormont was
not long in communicating with the French
government. On December 17 he held a
conference with Vergennes, the French Min
ister of Foreign Affairs, to whom he de
clared that the prizes were unlawfully cap
tured, since the "Reprisal" had no commis
sion from a sovereign power as a letter of
marque; that he expected that the prizes
would be immediately restored to their own
ers; and that the permitting of their sale
would be a violation of the treaty of Utrecht
between Great Britain and France. Though
conciliatory, Vergennes s reply was not al
together satisfactory to the British Ambas
sador, who records that the French Minister
ended "with expressions which seemed to
shew an Intention of taking some Middle
Way, and leaving the Point undetermined." 1
During 1777 Lord Stormont held many
1. Stevens s Facsimiles, 1392, 1-2, Lord
Stormont to Lord Weymouth, December 18,
1776.
Navy of the American Revolution 285
similar conferences with Vergennes in which
the naval liberties permitted the Americans
in French ports were the subject of discus
sion. Vergennes set forth the position of
his government in a way that was reason
ably acceptable to England. He declared
that its purpose was to prevent every vio
lation of its treaties and of the law of na
tions. He gave orders that the prizes cap
tured by the Americans should not be sold
in French ports. At different times he
commanded the American vessels of war to
sail within twenty-four hours from French
harbors. When the British wrath flamed
out at some overt act of the Americans, Ver
gennes appeased it by vigorous and decisive
acts of repression, aimed at the American
captains and agents. A past master in
soft and plausible answers, he excused fla
grant violations of British rights by explain
ing that every government had some tem
pestuous spirits which were hard to control,
and that the "avidity of gain 77 in merchants
could not always be restrained.
The British government could not object
to the public acts of the French government,
or to the reception which it gave to the
American Commissioners, whom it received
"privately with all civility/ 7 but avoided an
open reception, as it was "cautious of giving
umbrage to England." As regards its ob
servance of the treaty of Utrecht, and its in
ability to grant the freedom of its ports to
286 Naz y of the American Revolution
American vessels and their prizes, its dec
larations to the Commissioners were in line
with those which it made to Lord Stormont.
On the other hand, the Commissioners were
given to understand, through secret and in
formal channels, that the Colonies had the
sympathy of the French government; that
so far as was consistent with French treaties,
they might expect favors and indulgences;
that the ports of France were open to Amer
ican ships "as friends;" that ways of dispos
ing of American prizes which would not be
offensive to England might be found; and
that other irregularities would be permitted
unnoticed. 1 The Commissioners pressed their
favors as far as they could safely go ; indeed,
so far, that at one time they endangered the
continuance of their friendly relations with
the French Court.
The two prizes which the "Reprisal" car
ried into Nantes in December, 1776, were ta
ken into the offing of that port and privately
sold. The "Reprisal" was quietly refitted,
and in February, 1777, she made a cruise
off the coast of Spain and returned to L Or-
ient with the Falmouth packet and four
other English vessels. Lord Stormont made
vigorous remonstrances. The French gov
ernment at once ordered the "Reprisal" and
her prizes to put to sea within twenty-four
hours. Nothing of this sort was done. The
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 283-84, 364, 379.
Navy of the American Revolution 287
* Reprisal" remained in port, on the ground
that she had sprung a leak; and her prizes
were secretly sold for one-seventh of their
value to French merchants, who, for the
sake of large profits, eagerly overlooked the
irregularity of the transaction. 1 Confident
of the accuracy of the cues they were re
ceiving, the Commissioners now fitted out,
manned, and officered at Dunkirk the "Sur
prise," Captain Gustavus Conyngham, and
early in May, 1777, sent her cruising. With
in a few days after his leaving Dunkirk,
Conyngham returned with the Harwich
packet, and one other prize. The storm
raised by the British at so open and un
doubted a violation of their rights could be
pacified only by more rigorous measures.
The French government therefore impris
oned Captain Conyngham and his crew,
and returned his prizes to their owners. 2
Not at all disconcerted, the Commission
ers fitted out a fleet, consisting of the "Re
prisal," "Lexington," and "Dolphin," to in
tercept the Irish linen ships. Captain
Wickes was placed at its head as commo
dore, and was instructed not to return to
France unless he found it absolutely neces
sary. Wickes got to sea during the first
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
II, 379-80; Stevens s Facsimiles, 1445, 1536
1568.
2. Stevens s Facsimiles, 1529, Lord Stor-
mont to Lord Weymouth, May 8, 1777.
288 Navy of the American Revolution
of June. Missing the linen ships, he sailed
quite around Ireland, and captured or de
stroyed seventeen or eighteen sail of vessels ;
he "most effectually alarmed England, pre
vented the great fair at Chester, occasioned
insurance to rise, and even deterred the Eng
lish merchants from shipping goods in Eng
lish bottoms at any rate, so that in a few
weeks forty sail of French ships were load
ing in the Thames, on freight, an instance
never before known." 1 The three vessels
returned to French ports about July 1.
Obviously there was a limit to the for
bearance of the English government, and
it made it plain that this limit had been
reached. Lord Stormont was instructed to
tell the French government that, however
desirous the British king might be to main
tain peace, he would not submit "to such
strong and public instances of support and
protection shewn to the Rebels by a Nation
that at the same time professes in the strong
est terms its Desire to maintain the present
Harmony subsisting between the two
Crowns. The shelter given to the armed
Vessels of the Rebels, the facility they have
of disposing of their Prizes by the conni
vance of Government, and the conveniences
allowed them to refit, are such irrefragable
proofs of support, that scarcely more could
1. Stevens s Facsimiles, 703, 1539; Whar-
ton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 379-80,
Deane co Robert Morris, August 23, 1777.
Navy of the American Revolution 289
be done if there was an avowed Alliance be
tween France .and them, and We were in a
state of War with that Kingdom." 1
This last cruise of Wickes also threatened
to endanger the friendliness of the French
Court and the Commissioners. Vergennes
wrote to them with some spirit, and insinu
ated that they had broken their promises.
" After such repeated advertisements/ he
said, "the motives of which you have been
informed of, we had no reason to expect,
gentlemen, that the said Sieur Wickes would
prosecute his cruising in the European seas,
and we could not be otherwise than greatly
surprised that, after having associated the
privateers the Lexington and the Dolphin
to infest the English coast, they should all
three of them come for refuge into our ports.
You are too well informed, gentlemen, and
too penetrating, not to see how this conduct
affects the dignity of the king, my master,
at the same time it offends the neutrality
which his majesty professes/
In their reply the Commissioners exhib
ited some knowledge of the pleasing
phrases of diplomacy. They said that
they were "very sensible of the protection
afforded to us and to our commerce
since our residence in this kingdom,
agreeable to the goodness of the king s
gracious intentions and to the law of na-
1 Stevens s Facsimiles, 1562, Lord Wey-
mouth to Lord Stormont, July 4, 1777.
290 A ai v of the American Revolution
tions, and it gives us real and great concern
when any vessels of war appertaining to
America, either through ignorance or in
attention, do anything that may offend his
majesty in the smallest degree." They
tried to shift the blame of their captains re
turn to French ports to the British men of
war that had chased the American vessels
into safe retreats. "We had/ they con
tinued, "some days before we were honored
by your excellency s letter, dispatched by an
express the most positive orders to them to
depart directly to America, which they are
accordingly preparing to do." There can
be no doubt about the honesty of these or
ders, for it was plain to the Commissioners
that the French government was not dis
posed to forgive further infringements of
neutral rights. By express orders of the
French king the fleet of Wickes was seques
tered until it gave security that it should
return directly to America. 1
Meantime the Commissioners had ob
tained the release of Conyngham and his
crew. He was now placed in command of
the "Revenge;" and in July, eluding the
British, he sailed from Dunkirk, ostensibly
for America. He first cruised along the
eastern coast of England, into the North
IT Stevens s Facsimilies, 1677; Wharton,
Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 364-66, Ver-
gennes to Commissioners at Paris, July 16,
1777, and Franklin and Deane to Vergennes,
July 17, 1777.
Naz y of the American Revolution 291
Sea and the region of the Baltic, then back
through the straits of Dover and into the
Irish Channel, and finally into the Bay of
Biscay, anchoring at Ferrol, Spain, about
the first of October. The terror of his
name, which his recklessness and daring
greatly increased, spread great alarm among
the inhabitants of the British Isles. He
did not return again to France with the
"Revenge/ This fact made his cruise less
annoying to the Commissioners, than the
last cruise of Wickes. Hodge, the agent of
the Commissioners, who had given bond to
the French admiralty that the "Revenge"
would not engage in operations against the
British, was arrested and thrown into the
Bastile; and Vergennes wrote a most severe
letter, to be shown to the Commissioners.
Presently, when the wrath of the British
had abated, Hodge was released on the rep
resentation of the Commissioners that he
was a person of character, and that they
could not "conceive him capable of any will
ful offence against the laws of this nation." 1
About the middle of September the "Re
prisal" and the "Lexington" sailed for Amer
ica; the "Reprisal" foundered on the Grand
1. C. H. Jones, Captain Gustavus Conyng-
ham, 15-17; Outlook for January 3, 1903,
71-83, James Barnes, Tragedy of the Lost
Commission; Hale s Franklin in France, I, 139;
Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II 375
377, 406.
292 Xai y of the American Revolution
Banks of Newfoundland, losing all on board
except the cook; and the "Lexington" was
taken by the British off Ushant. With the
departure of these vessels the movements of
the Continental fleet for 1777 in European
waters came to an end; as did also the nice
task of the Commissioners of conducting a
naval war from a neutral country as a base,
without losing the friendship of that coun
try, or involving it in war. Had not hos
tilities broken out in 1778 between France
and England by reason of other causes, a
repetition of the naval operations of 1777, if
permitted by the French, would very
likely have brought them on.
During 1778 two cruises were made in Eur
opean waters, one by Captain Tucker, and
the other by Captain Jones. On April 1,
1778, the frigate "Boston/ Captain Samuel
Tucker, arrived at Bordeaux with John
Adams, the new Commissioner who was to
succeed Silas Dcane, as a passenger. After
refitting, Tucker made a short cruise in
which he captured four prizes. In August
the "Boston," in company w r ith the frigate
"Providence," and the ship "Ranger,"
sailed for America. Some months previous
the "Ranger," when under the command
of Captain Jones, had made an important
cruise. Jones arrived in this vessel in
France on December 2, 1777. He expected
to receive command of a frigate or a ship
of the line; but in this he was disappointed.
Navy of the American Revolution 293
On January 18, 1778, the Commissioners
wrote to him that they could not procure
such a ship as he expected; and that they ad
vised him, "after equipping the Ranger/
in the best manner for the cruise you pro
pose/ to proceed "with her in the manner
you shall judge best for distressing the en
emies of the United States, by sea or other
wise, consistent with the laws of war and the
terms of your commission/ 1
From these orders it may be seen that
Jones had in mind a descent on the British
coast. On April 10, 1778, he sailed for the
Irish sea. After capturing or destroying
four vessels, he made an unsuccessful at
tempt to burn the shipping at Whitehaven in
Cumberland. He next tried to take pris
oner the Earl of Selkirk from his summer
home at St. Mary s Isle, off the southwest
coast of Scotland, but failed to find him.
These movements ashore naturally struck
terror to the inhabitants of the British Isles.
Jones now crossed to Ireland, and in the
neighborhood of Belfast attacked the Brit
ish naval ship "Drake," 20, Commander
George Burdon. After an engagement of
seventy-four minutes, during which the
"Ranger" was "skillfully handled and well-
fought," the "Drake" struck her colors.
Jones arrived in Brest with his prize on May
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence
II, 471-72.
294 A r az j of the American Revolution
10. x Many plans and suggestions were now
made by both the Commissioners and the
French government to supply Jones with
some large ship from the French navy, or to
give him the command of a small fleet, but
they all miscarried. The ambitious and
energetic American captain, chafing under
his enforced idleness, was not to make an
other cruise until fifteen months had elapsed.
During 1779 and 1780 the Naval office at
Paris was chiefly concerned with the move
ments, conduct, and achievements of two
captains in the Continental navy, John Paul
Jones and Peter Landais. Never have the
fortunes of war thrown into close association
two men of more striking contrasts. Jones
was ardent, hopeful, and magnetic; Landais
sullen, quarrelsome, and repellent. Jones
was a master of men; from unpromising ma
terials, swept together by the winds and
waves of diverse fortunes, he made most
effective crews. Landais was seldom on
good terms with his officers or seamen, some
of whom were always dissatisfied and muti
nous. Called to play their parts on the
same theater of war, the Scotchman achieved
signal success and distinction, and won the
plaudits of the French king, of Congress,
and of his countrymen ; while to the French
man fell the ill-will of his own government,
1. Sherburne s John Paul Jones, 43-53,
Jones to Commissioners, May 27, 1778;
Clowes, Royal Navy, IV, 11-13.
Navy of the American Revolution 295
the hatred of Americans, and, in his dismis
sal from the navy of the United States, dis
honor and professional disgrace.
In the spring of 1779 Franklin now
American minister at the Court of France
the French government, and Lafayette
planned an expedition against the coast of
England, which had in view especially the
striking of some of the larger English towns.
Lafayette was to command the French
troops which were to be lent for the expedi
tion, and Jones, to whom the French govern
ment had, in February, given the command
of the "Bon Homme Richard," formerly the
"Duras," an old East Indiaman, was to
command the sea forces. The "Alliance,"
Captain Landais, which vessel had recently
arrived in France from America, was to be
a part of Jones s fleet. This plan miscar
ried.
It was not until August 13 that Jones
finally got to sea with a fleet consisting of
five naval vessels and two privateers. The
two chief vessels of the little fleet were the
"Bon Homme Richard/ 42, Captain Jones,
and the "Alliance," 36, Captain Landais.
These two officers had of course permanent
commissions in the Continental navy; the
three French officers in command of naval
vessels were given temporary commissions
in the Continental navy. The expense
of the cruise was borne by the French
government; and the fitting out of the
296 Navy of the American Revolution
fleet was superintended by Chaumont,
the joint agent of the French gov
ernment and the American minister. 1
The destination of the fleet was determined
by the French government; and the orders
cf Jones, the commodore of the fleet, were
prepared by the French Minister of Marine,
translated and signed by Franklin, and sent
to Jones by Chaumont. The fleet sailed
under the American flag. Its principal ob
ject was the intercepting of the Baltic
fleet of the enemy.
The details of this memorable cruise are
familiar to the reader, and need not be re
peated here. The fleet was scarcely at sea
before Landais became insubordinate, as
serted his independence of Jones, and left
and rejoined his commodore when and
where he chose. Sailing first along the
west coast of Ireland and then around Scot
land, Jones reached the east coast of York
shire, on September 23. He had by this
time taken seventeen ships, and had made
an unsuccessful attempt to reach Leith and
Edinburgh, and lay them under contribu
tion. Off Flamborough Head Jones s fleet,
which was now reduced to the "Bon Homme
Richard/ "Alliance," and "Pallas," fell in
with the Baltic trade of forty-one sail and
convoyed by His Majesty s ships, "Serapis,"
44, Captain Richard Pearson, and "Countess
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
III, 242.
Navy of the American Revolution 297
of Scarborough/ 20, Commander Thomas
Piercy. There now ensued an engagement
between the "Bon Homme Richard" and
the "Serapis," which lasted more than three
hours. It was one of the fiercest fights re
corded in the annals of naval warfare. For
the greater part of the engagement the two
vessels were lashed together, stem to stern,
starboard to starboard, and with the muz
zles of their guns touching. Both ships were
set on fire in various places, and the "scene
w r as dreadful beyond the reach of language/
to use Jones s phrasing. The "Bon Homme
Richard" won the fight only through the
brilliant daring, the remarkable naval skill,
and the intelligence in action of her com
mander. She was so badly injured that
she sank the second day after the fight;
her own crew were transferred to the "Ser
apis." The loss to the "Bon Homme Rich
ard" was 116 men; to the "Serapis," 129.
During the fight of the "Bon Homme Rich
ard" and the "Serapis," the "Pallas," Cap
tain Cottineau, and the "Countess of Scar
borough/ Commander Piercy, engaged each
other, with the result that the British ship
was compelled to surrender. The "Alli
ance" took little or no part in the contest,
as her commander was sulking throughout
the engagement. The two prizes, the "Al
liance," and the "Pallas" arrived at the
Texel in Holland on October 3, 1779. 1
1. Sherburne s John Paul Jones, 111-125,
298 Navy of the American Revolution
A naval discord now arose, which tried the
patience and temper of Franklin. No soon
er did Jones and Landais reach the Texel,
than each wrote to Franklin making charges
against the other. Jones accused Landais
of gross insubordination and misbehavior
and specifically charged him with inten
tionally firing into the "Bon Homme Rich
ard" and killing a "number of our men and
mortally wounding a good officer." The
French government, which was inclined to
attribute the loss of the "Bon Homme Rich
ard" and so many of her crew to the conduct
of Landais, took a hand in the dispute, and
asked Franklin to call Landais to account at
Paris. In cases of this sort the Naval Office
had little authority or means to effect disci
pline in the navy. A sufficient number of
commissioned officers could not be assem
bled in France to hold a court-martial; and
if they could, it was doubtful whether the
Naval Office had the power to order such a
court. Their inability to hold courts-mar
tial had been regretted more than once by
the American Commissioners. Landais
came to Paris, and Franklin investigated the
case before friends of the two disputants;
but satisfactory evidence and witnesses
could not be obtained to prove or disprove
the charges, so Franklin did the only thing
Jones to Fsanklin, October 3, 1779, giving an
account of cruise; Clowes, Royal Navy, IV,
33-39.
Xai y of the American Revolution 299
possible, by referring the dispute to Con
gress, and a properly constituted court-mar
tial in America. Franklin thought his in
quiry had one good effect, the preventing of
a duel in Holland between the two officers. 1
On the coming of Landais to Paris, Frank
lin placed Jones in command of the " Alli
ance." After cruising through the English
Channel to Spain, Jones, in February, 1780,
brought his vessel into L Orient. Act
ing under Franklin s orders, Jones now re
fitted his vessel with the purpose of return
ing to America with a cargo of supplies. In
the spring of 1780 Landais began to beseech
Franklin to restore him to the command of
the "Alliance," and he soon raised the ques
tion whether the American minister at
Paris had the power to remove him from the
command of a vessel to which Congress had
appointed him. His request was refused
by Franklin in bald and vigorous terms.
"I think you," Franklin wrote, "so impru
dent, so litigious, and quarrelsome a man,
even with your best friends, that peace and
good order, and consequently the quiet and
regular subordination so necessary to suc
cess, are, where you preside, impossible." 2
1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
III, 375-77, 378-79, 535, 547-49, 562-63; IV,
293; Bigelow s Franklin, VII, 108-09.
2. Hale, Franklin in France, I, 327-28;
Chapter XVII, Captain Landais, prints ma>ny
original letters connected with the dispute.
300 A fli v of the American Revolution
Later -he charged Landais "not to meddle
with the Alliance or create any disturb
ance on board her, as you will answer the
contrary at your peril/ 1 About the first
of June Jones left his vessel, and came up to
Paris to hasten the sale of his prizes. Lan
dais now appeared at L Orient, raised a mu
tiny on board the "Alliance," and, acting
on Arthur Lee s advice, took charge of her.
Early in July, without taking the stores
which had been assigned to his ship, Lan
dais sailed for America. It was on this
passage that he developed a strangeness, a
madness, some say, that incapacitated him
for his command. He was removed, and
the "Alliance" was sailed into Boston in
charge of her lieutenant. Landais was now
tried by a court-martial and dismissed from
the naval service.
Meantime Jones and Franklin had suc
ceeded in obtaining from the French govern
ment the loan of the "Ariel." Having
loaded her with supplies, Jones sailed for
America on October 7, 1780; but, encounter
ing a storm which dismasted his vessel, he
was compelled to return to port. On De
cember 18 he again put to sea; and in Feb
ruary, 1781, he reached Philadelphia.
With the departure of Jones, the Euro
pean waters, for the first time in four years,
were clear of the armed vessels of the Conti
nental fleet. The venerable Franklin, vexed
1. Hale, Franklin in France, I, 330-31.
Ncri y of t/ic American Revolution 301
with the discords and details of naval affairs,
must have drawn a sigh of relief when the
last Continental vessel and captain had
withdrawn from France. The most dis
agreeable of his duties as "Admiral," to use
John Adams s word in this. connection, now
came to an end. Concerning his vexations,
Franklin wrote to one of his agents in the
summer of 1780: "I have been too long in
hot water, plagued almost to death with the
passions, vagaries, and ill humours, and
madnesses of other people. I must have a
little repose." 1 He had now for some time
been writing to Congress, asking to be re
lieved of his naval duties. An example of
his requests may be extracted from a letter
of March 4, 1780, to the President of Con
gress: "As vessels of war under my care
create me a vast deal of business (of a kind,
too, that I am unexperienced in), I must re
peat my earnest request that some person
of skill in such affairs may be appointed, in
the character of consul, to take charge of
them. I imagine that much would by that
means be saved in the expense of their vari
ous re fittings and supplies, which to me ap
pears enormous." 2
From the beginning of 1781 until the close
of the Revolution the duties of the Naval
1. Bigelow s Franklin, VII, 97-98, Frank
lin to Jonathan Williams, June 27, 1780.
2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence,
III, 535.
302 A ai y of the American Revolution
Office at Paris were comparatively light.
Few armed vessels were sent from America
to France; and those that were, remained
only long enough to refit, load with supplies,
and receive letters and despatches for Amer
ica. Over such ships Franklin exercised
little or no control. The Agent of Marine,
not wishing his vessels to slip from his grasp
when within the reach of orders from Paris,
sometimes directed his captains who were
about to sail for France to return home on a
specified date. In May, 1782, he wrote dis
approvingly to Congress concerning the "de
lays and exorbitant expenses which have
accrued from the detention of public vessels
in Europe." 1 Acting under the direct or
ders of Morris, Captain Barry, in the "Alli
ance," in February, 1782, left L Orient and
cruised without success for seventeen days.
This was the last cruise in European waters
which was made by a Continental vessel dur
ing the Revolution.
On July 10, 1781, Congress gave Thomas
Barclay a commission as vice-consul to
France in the place of William Palfrey, who
had, in November, 1780, been appointed
consul to France, and had gone down with
the vessel on which he took passage. 2 In
addition to his strictly consular duties, Bar-
1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
137, 3, p. 313.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, No
vember 4, 1780; July 10, 1781.
Navy of the American Revolution 303
clay was authorized to "assist in directing
our Naval affairs." 1 When Barclay entered
upon his duties in France, our naval busi
ness was narrowing to the settling of ac
counts. He was in time, however, to rep
resent his country in the trial and sale of a
few prizes, to assist in the shipping of some
supplies, and to sell the Continental ship,
"Due de Lauzim." In November, 1782,
Congress appointed Barclay a commissioner
for settling the Revolutionary accounts of
the United States in Europe; and in Decem
ber Morris gave him his instructions. 2 Bar
clay was directed to inquire into the ac
counts of the agents for fitting out armed
vessels in Europe, and to make a settlement
with the various prize agents into whose
hands prizes or moneys derived from their
sale had come. Barclay s duties, both as
consul and as commissioner, came to an end
in the fall of 1785, when he was appointed
to negotiate a treaty with Morocco.
Some of the duties of Barclay as commis
sioner for settling accounts were in Decem
ber, 1783, vested in John Paul Jones. In
accordance with a resolution of Congress,
Franklin appointed Jones agent of the Unit
ed States to solicit the payment of prize
1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
137, 1, p. 463, Instructions to Barclay.
2 Journals of Continental Congress, No
vember 18, 1782; Force Transcripts, 137, p.
55, Instructions to Barclay.
304 Navy of the American Revolution
money, "in whose hands soever the money
may be detained," arising from prizes cap
tured by vessels under Jones s command in
European waters. 1 Jones was engaged in
this work during 1784 and 1785. Under
the sanction of Thomas Jefferson, the Amer
ican Minister at Paris, Jones in 1786 set out
for Copenhagen, to settle a dispute with the
Danish Court over three of his prizes.
These ships had been captured, in 1779, by
the fleet under his command, and had been
sent into Bergen, Norway. The Danish gov
ernment had restored them to the British.
Jones s journey was interrupted and he did
not reach Copenhagen until 1788. The Dan
ish government now transferred the settle
ment of the disputed claims to Paris, plead
ing that Jones had not sufficient authority
to treat. By June, Jones had left Copen
hagen, had accepted the commission of
Vice-Admiral in the Russian navy, and was
writing from his flagship "Wolodimcr" to
his friend Jefferson at Paris. The Revolu
tionary accounts in Europe possessed the
usual vitality, not to say immortality, of
government claims. Certain Revolutionary
claims of South Carolina, growing out of ex
penses which that state incurred in Europe
in connection with the ship "Indian," are
1. Journals of Congress, November 1,
1783; C. H. Lincoln, Calendar of John Paul
Jones Manuscripts, 188, Franklin to Jones,
December 17, 1783.
Navy of the American Revolution 305
now pending before the government at
Washington.
In the West Indies the chief naval station
for the Continental vessels was St. Pierre,
Martinique. Bound on commercial errands,
our vessels occasionally visited St. Eustatius,
until its capture by the British in February,
1781; Cape Francois, Hispaniola; and in the
late years of the war, Havana. The United
States had commercial agents at these three
ports. But at Martinique our vessels were
refitted, repaired, and provisioned when
ever convenience suggested, or stress of
weather compelled, the seeking of a friendly
harbor in this part of the Atlantic. In June,
1776, William Bingham, who had been the
secretary of the Committee of Secret Corre
spondence, went to Martinique as the com
mercial agent of Congress; and in March,
1780, he was succeeded by Parsons, Alston
and Company.
The commercial agent at Martinique did a
varied and lively business. He was em
ployed in shipping supplies, obtaining con
voys for his merchantmen, refitting priva
teers, and now and then Continental vessels,
disposing of prizes, and forwarding to Con
gress naval intelligence concerning the West
Indies and Europe. Congress at times sent
despatches and supplies to France by the
way of Martinique; and the American rep
resentatives and commercial agents in
France, now and then, communicated with
306 Nary of tJie American Revolution
the United States through the same island.
In October, 1777, Bingham wrote to Con
gress that, if France should declare war
against Great Britain, many prizes would
naturally be sent into Martinique, and that
he wished to be directed about proper forms
and methods for trying and selling them. 1
In December American prizes and privateers
were being publicly received into the ports
of Martinique, and Bingham was shipping
arms to America on board American vessels
under the convoy of a frigate which he had
hired for that purpose. In January, 1778,
the permitting of these favors was causing
spirited letters between the "General" of
Martinique and the Governor of the British
island of Antigua. 2
During 1779 three Continental vessels, the
"Deane," " General Gates," and " Confed
eracy/ put into Martinique to refit, repair,
and obtain provisions. The expense to
which Bingham s empty treasury was sub
jected caused him to complain to Congress.
The only Continental armed vessel purchased
at Martinique was the little schooner
"Fame," 7 guns. The commercial agent
made this purchase on his own responsibility
in February, 1781, in order to carry to Phila
delphia the news of the capture of St.
Eustatius by the British. But unfortun-
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con-
ess, 90, p. 9.
2. Ibid., 90, pp. 21, 27.
A"(7T v of the American Revolution 307
atcly, the "Fame" was forced to bequeath
her errand to a better-fated conveyance, as
the British carried her into Antigua. 1
Our naval affairs on the Mississippi during
the Revolution, although conducted on a
small scale, are not devoid of interest; nor do
they entirely escape the glamour of romance
which seems to touch everything connected
with the early history of this region. Oliver
Pollock, originally a Pennsylvania!!, and a
man of ability, integrity, and patriotism,
who freely spent his private fortune for his
country, was the commercial agent at New
Orleans during the Revolution, and to him
fell sundry naval duties. Pollock was re
sponsible to the Commercial Committee, the
third committee of Congress that was simul
taneously purchasing and arming vessels.
He was intelligently and heartily assisted in
his work at New Orleans by the Governor of
Louisiana, Galvez, "that worthy Noble
man," as Pollock called him, who "gave
me the delightful assurance that he would
go every possible length for the interest of
Congress." 2 It is refreshing to find for once
American and Spanish officials acting in
concert and inspiring mutual confidence and
affection. Early in 1777, immediately after
1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
137, 1, p. 357.
2. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 50, pp. 1-13, Pollock to President of
Congress, a resume of Pollock s services as
commercial agent at New Orleans.
308 Navy of the American Revolution
Galvez became governor, he, with slight
limitations, opened the port of New Orleans
to American vessels of war and their prizes.
Galvez s favors to Americans called down
upon him the threats of the British at Pen-
sacola to have his conduct brought to the
attention of the Court at Madrid.
Pollock received from Congress blank
commissions both for officers in the Conti
nental navy and for privateers. One of the
privateers which he commissioned, the " Re
prisal," Captain Calvert, sent into a safe
port, in April, 1778, a prize whose cargo con
sisted of flour, sugar, coffee, and forty-eight
slaves. 1 In March, 1778, Captain Willing
and a small party of men arrived in New
Orleans from Pennsylvania, having come by
the way of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers.
They captured several prizes on the Misssis-
sippi, which were sold in New Orleans to the
value of $37,500. One of these, the " Rebec
ca," Pollock bought for Congress on his own
responsibility. He obtained permission
from Galvez to fit out his ship in a warlike
manner; and he decided upon an armament,
consisting of "16 six pounders upon one
Deck, 2 Bow and 2 Stern Chacers, 8 four
pounders upon her quarter Deck, with Swiv
els, Cohorns, &c." 2 He intended to enlist
one hundred and fifty men and send his ship
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 50, p. 66.
2. Ibid., 50, pp. 77-81.
Xary of the American Revolution 309
against His Majesty s sloop of war " Sylph/
which was defending Manchac on Lake Pont-
chartrain. Pollock planned to obtain most
of his armament from Havana, but the
Spanish authorities refused to permit its
shipment even after Galvez had written to
the Cuban government. 1
By July, 1779, Pollock had succeeded in
obtaining and mounting twenty-four guns
on the decks of his ship, which he had now
christened the " Morris " in honor of his
well-known friend at Philadelphia. He had
appointed a full quota of officers ; and he had
engaged seventy-six men, with " English de
serters arriving daily" to swell the comple
ment. The captain of the "Morris" was
William Pickles, a man found to be " cap
able and steady to our Cause. " Pollock had
now for some time been waiting for orders
for his vessel from Philadelphia; and tired
of delay he was on the point of sending the
"Morris" cruising, when a severe hurricane
swept over New Orleans doing great damage
to the town and its shipping. The " Morris "
was lost, and eleven of her crew were
drowned; the rest were rescued nine miles
below the city clinging to the wreckage of
their vessel.
Governor Galvez s heart was touched by
the loss of the Americans. He now " spared"
Pollock an armed schooner, which was soon
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 50, p. 97.
310 Xarv of the American Revolution
fitted out, and by September Pickles was
cruising on Lake Pontchartrain. On Sep
tember 10 Pickles had a short, but hot, dis
pute with the British armed sloop "West
Florida," which was forced to surrender,
although it lost but four men to Pickles s
eight. Pollock now fitted out the "West
Florida," and sent her cruising on the Lake.
On September 21 Pickles captured a small
British settlement on the north side of Lake
Pontchartrain. He made prisoners of all the
inhabitants who refused to swear allegiance
to the United States. This capitulation,
Pollock wrote to Congress, gave them an
undoubted right to that part of the colony
of West Florida which lay along Lake Pont
chartrain; and he conceived, in language
that sounds familiarly like that of later ex
pansionists, that the capitulation was "a
proper Ground on which to claim (at any
convenient period) the Sovereignty of the
Soil and the Allegiance of the Inhabitants." 1
In October, 1779, the "West Florida"
cruised on the Lake at the request of Galvez
for the protection of trade. Letters from
Philadelphia now made it evident to Pollock
that Congress wished the naval force on
the Mississippi to proceed to that town.
He therefore on January 20, 1780, gave
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con-
fress, 50, p. 120, Copy of Capitulation of
nhabitants of the Settlements on Lake
Pontchartrain, dated October 16, 1779, with
signatures of nineteen men.
Nary of the American Revolution 311
Pickles orders to sail for Philadelphia after
taking on a cargo of tafia and sugar at Ha
vana; but he directed Pickles, before enter
ing on this detail, to join the fleet of Galvez
and to assist in the reduction of Mobile and
Pensacola. 1 This was an undertaking which
Pollock had long assigned to an American
fleet and army; and since 1777 he had urged
it most audaciously upon Congress. After
aiding in the capture of Mobile and taking
a small prize which she sent into that town,
the "West Florida" proceeded to Philadel
phia, w r here she arrived about the first of
June, 1780. Since it appeared to a com
mittee of Congress that the "West Florida"
was not fit for a cruiser, she w r as sold, and
her crew was assigned to other Continental
vessels. 2 Captain Pickles was placed in
command of the " Mercury " packet and de
tailed to take Henry Laurens to Amster
dam. Here ends the story of the Revolu
tionary navy on the Mississippi.
1. Records and Papers of Continental Con
gress, 50, pp. 123-25, Pollock to Pickles,
January 20, 1780.
2. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress,
137, 2, p. 281; 37, p. 95.
PART II
THE STATE NAVIES
CHAPTER XI
THE NAVY OF MASSACHUSETTS
With the exception of New Jersey and
Delaware, each of the thirteen original states
during the Revolution owned one or more
armed vessels. Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and
South Carolina had the largest fleets. New
Hampshire with its one ship and Georgia
with its four galleys just escaped from
being in the same class with New Jersey and
Delaware. The navies of Rhode Island,
New York, and North Carolina were small.
The navy of no one state was so large as
that of Congress. The total number of
state craft, however, greatly exceeded the
number of vessels in the Continental navy.
The state vessels on the average were smaller
and not so well armed as the Continental
vessels. The states generally had less means
for naval purposes at their disposal than had
Congress, and were therefore not so well
able to build large vessels. Then, too, the
chief need of each state for a navy was to
defend its seaports, coasts, and trade. For
such service small craft, adapted for run-
316 Navy of the American Revolution
ning in and out of shallow harbors, rivers,
and bays, was demanded. The states
therefore provided themselves with armed
boats of various sizes, galleys with and
without sails, half-galleys, floating batteries,
barges, and fire-ships. Besides such vessels
as these, most of the states had a few larger
and stouter sailing craft, mounting gener
ally from ten to twenty guns, and fairly well
fitted for deep-sea navigation. The one
state whose deep-sea exceeded its inshore
craft was Massachusetts.
The history of naval administration in
the several states possesses some common
features. It will be recalled that in most of
the states the provincial government about
the year 1775 was superseded by a revolu
tionary government, and this in turn about
a year later w r as succeeded by a permanent
state government. The revolutionary gov
ernment consisted of a legislative body, or
provincial congress, and an executive body,
or committee of safety. The permanent
state government consisted of a legislature
of one or two houses and an executive,
which was either a council, or a governor
and council. The initial naval administra
tion in the states usually fell to the com
mittee of safety, or revolutionary executive,
which, upon the change to a permanent
state government, bequeathed its naval
duties to the council or to the governor and
council. In most of the states the details
Navy of the American Revolution 317
of naval administration were at some time
during the Revolution lodged with an execu
tive board. Some states had separate boards
for naval and military affairs; in other
states, one board performed both functions.
The history of naval administration in
the states falls into two periods, one em
bracing the years from 1775 to 1778, the
other the years from 1779 to 1783. In the
first period each state procured a naval arm
ament, as a rule, for the general purpose of
providing a naval defence, and not to meet
some specific call for armed vessels. By
1779 the first naval craft had been largely
captured, destroyed, or sold; and often the
first machinery of naval administration had
been in large part removed. In response to
special needs for armed vessels, calls for
which came most often from those who were
suffering from the ravages of the British
fleets, the states now procured additional
vessels, and often devised new administra
tive machinery to manage them.
In defensive warfare, the problem in each
state was to provide for the defence of its
ports, trade, coasts, and shipping. The
offensive warfare of the state navies, which
was quite secondary in importance, con
sisted chiefly of commerce-destroying, con
ducted along the great ocean-paths of
British trade. The principal problem here
was for the American vessels in leaving
home ports and in returning with their
318 Navy of the American Revolution
prizes to elude the British vessels, which
hovered along the American coast, especially
at the mouths of the Chesapeake, Delaware,
and Narragansett bays. It is always to be
remembered that in all the states the priva
teers exceeded the state craft, which were
often insignificant in comparison.
The reader recalls that in June, 1775, the
battle of Bunker Hill was fought, a British
army occupied Boston, and British vessels
sailed the New England seas with little or
no opposition. These vessels had already
committed depredations and " piracies"
upon the coasts and trade of Massachusetts,
and were obstructing the importation of
ammunition and provisions for the Conti
nental army. It was under these circum
stances that Massachusetts took her first
step towards procuring a naval armament.
On June 7 her third Provincial Congress ap
pointed a committee of nine " to consider the
expediency of establishing a number of
small armed vessels, to cruise on our sea
coasts, for the protection of our trade, and
the annoyance of our enemies." The Pro
vincial Congress, which moved very cau
tiously, enjoined secrecy on the committee.
On June 10 three additional members were
added to the committee; but later in the
day a new committee consisting of seven
members was apparently substituted for the
old one. On June 12 the committee "ap
pointed to consider the expediency of estab-
Navy of the American Revolution 319
lishing a number of armed vessels " made a
report which provided for the fitting out of
not less than six vessels, to mount eight to
fourteen carriage guns, and to cruise un
der the orders of the Committee of Safe
ty the chief executive organ of the
Provincial Congress consisting of nine
members, three of whom were from
Boston. This report came up several
times between June 12 and June 20. Fi
nally on the latter date "the matter was
ordered to subside. 71 The Battle of Bunker
Hill which was fought on June 17 may have
had something to do with this action of the
Provincial Congress.
On July 19, 1775, the Revolutionary gov
ernment in Massachusetts was superseded
by a permanent government consisting of
a House of Representatives and a Council
of eighteen members elected by the House;
the two houses were called the General
Court. The continued depredations of the
British now caused several endangered ports
to ask the General Court to provide them
with a naval defence. The part of Massa
chusetts which during the Revolution was
most exposed to the attacks of the British,
1. Journals of Third Provincial Congress
of Massachusetts, June 7, June 10, June 11,
June 12, June 13, June 16, June 19, and June
20, 1775. All references to the state records
of Massachusetts refer to the manuscripts or
early printed copies to be found in the State
Library or State Archives at Boston.
320 Navy of tJic American Revolution
and which was most troublesome to defend,
was the coast of Maine, then often referred
to as the Eastern Coast. In August, 1775,
a petition came to the General Court from
Machias, a town situated on the Maine coast
a few miles west of the present Eastport,
asking that commissions be granted to offi
cers and men on board two armed vessels
which citizens of Machias had fitted out for
the defense of their town. In response the
General Court took into the service of the
state the sloop "Machias Liberty" and the
schooner "Diligent." 1 Jeremiah O Brian,
one of the men who had signed the petition,
was commissioned by the Council com-
mander-in-chief of the two vessels; and he
was directed to enlist a number of men, not
to exceed thirty, for each vessel. The " Ma
chias Liberty" and the "Diligent" were in
the service of the state until October, 1776,
when they were discharged. About the first
of October, 1775, Salem and Newburyport
each asked the General Court for naval aid
similar to that granted to Machias, but did
not receive it. 2
The General Court of Massachusetts next
turned its attention to privateering. The
1. Journals of Massachusetts House of
Representatives, August 21, 1775. O Brian s
name is found spelled in various ways.
2. Ibid., September 29, October 2, Octo
ber 4, 1775; Records of General Court of
Massachusetts, October 4, 1775.
Nary of the American Revolution 321
acts of the states on this head fall into two
general classes; those which in terms estab
lished state privateering, and those which
adopted Continental privateering or accom
modated state laws to the same. After the
first half of 1776 all the states used Continen
tal commissions and bonds. Massachusetts,
moving in this matter before Congress, nec
essarily established state privateering. On
September 28, 1775, her House of Repre
sentatives, having such establishment in
view, appointed a committee of seven to
consider the "Expediency of fitting out a
Number of Armed Vessels. On October 9,
this committee reported in favor of institut
ing privateering and a prize court to try
cases of capture. On October 14 a bill em
bodying the committee s recommendations
was introduced. It now passed slowly
through the legislative mill, and on Novem
ber 1 it became a law. 1 John Adams once
referred to this statute of Massachusetts as
one of the most important documents in the
history of the Revolution. Its preamble
was the work of Elbridge Gerry, and the
body of the law was drafted by James Sulli
van, many years later Governor of Massa
chusetts. 2 Gerry stated the sanctions for
1 . Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep
resentatives, September 28, October 6, 9 14
17, 18, 19, 27, November 1, 1775.
2. Austin s Gerry, I, 94-95; Works of John
Adams, X, 37.
322 Navy of the American Revolution
the law. These he found in the arbitrary
and sanguinary acts of Great Britain, in the
charter of Massachusetts granted by King
William and Queen Mary, and lastly in the
resolution of the Continental Congress of
July 18, 1775, recommending each colony
to provide by armed vessels or otherwise
for the protection of its harbors and naviga
tion.
The Massachusetts law provided that all
vessels convicted of making unlawful inva
sions or attacks on the seacoasts or naviga
tion of any part of America should be for
feited. The Council was authorized to
grant letters of marque and reprisal to mas
ters and owners of vessels upon their enter
ing into bond faithfully to discharge the
duties of their office and to observe the naval
laws of the colony. Three admiralty dis
tricts embracing the counties on the Massa
chusetts seacoast were established. The
Southern district with the seat of its
court at Plymouth embraced Plymouth
county and the counties to the southward;
the Middle district with the seat of its
court at Ipswich embraced the counties of
Suffolk, Middlesex, and Essex and extended
from Plymouth county to New Hampshire;
and the Eastern district with the seat of its
court at North Yarmouth embraced the
seacoast counties of Maine. The form of
procedure in these courts was fixed for both
captured and recaptured vessels. In the
Nary of the American Revolution 323
latter case salvage was from one-third to
one-fourth of the selling price of the vessel.
The facts in prize cases were to be tried by
twelve good and lawful men. At this time
the people of Massachusetts were so enraged
at the judges of the former Provincial ad
miralty court that they would have univer
sally condemned the trying of facts in prize
cases by judges. 1
The Council soon appointed three judges
of admiralty, Nathan Gushing for the
Southern district, Timothy Pickering for
the Middle district, and James Sullivan for
the Eastern district. Elbridge Gerry de
clined the judgeship for the Middle district.
After trying about one hundred and fifty
prize cases, Pickering in June, 1777, re
signed, and was succeeded by Nathan Gush
ing, who now served as judge in both the
Southern and Middle districts. 2 Compara
tively few cases were tried in the Southern
and Eastern districts. Timothy Langdon
was for a long time judge of the Eastern
district.
During the fall of 1775 the General Court
took no steps towards establishing a state
navy. It was at this time assisting Wash
ington in obtaining and arming vessels for
1. Amory s Sullivan, II, 378-79, James Sul
livan to Gerry, December 25, 1779.
2. Records of Massachusetts Council, No
vember 14, December 9, December 12, 1775;
Pickering s Pickering, I, 79-80; Amory s Sulli
van, I, 63.
324 Nai y of the American Revolution
the Continental military service around
Boston. Early in December the House of
Representatives, acting on a recommenda
tion contained in a letter from John Adams
at Philadelphia, resolved to obtain statis
tics on the number of officers, seamen, and
vessels, suitable for naval purposes, in the
seaports of Massachusetts. On December
29 the Council declared for a navy by passing
the following resolution : " Whereas several
of the United Colonies have of late thought
it expedient and necessary to fit out armed
Vessels for the Defence of American Liberty,
and it appears to this Court necessary that
Measures be taken by this Colony for our
further Protection by Sea: Therefore, Re
solved that John Adams and Joseph Palmer,
Esqurs. with such as the Hon. House shall
join be a committee for fitting out one or
more Vessels for the Defence of American
Liberty." 1
The House at once appointed its members
of the committee, which on January 12,
1776, made a report favorable to the estab
lishment of a navy. 2 Accordingly, on Feb-
1. Records of General Court of Massachu
setts, December 29, 1775.
2. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep
resentatives, January 12, 1776. On January
11 the Council resolved that two ships, one
of 36, and the other of 32 guns, should be
built. On the same day both House and
Council voted to recommit the resolution in
order that the committee which prepared it
might report on the expense to be incurred
Navy of the American Revolution 325
ruary 7 a resolution passed the General
Court to build ten sloops of war, of 110 or
115 tons burden, each, suitable for carrying
fourteen to sixteen carriage guns, 6-pounders
and 4-pounders. A joint committee of the
two houses was appointed to build the ves
sels, and 10,000 was voted for that pur
pose. 1 On the 16th the committee was au
thorized to contract for the building of only
five vessels, until there was a prospect of
procuring materials for ten; it was author
ized to buy five vessels, if it thought best. 2
By July, 1776, the sloop " Tyrannicide "
built at Salisbury, the brigantine " Rising
Empire" built at Dartmouth, and the brig
antine " Independence " built at Kingston
were ready for sea; and by September the
sloops "Republic" and "Freedom" built at
Swanzey, and the "Massachusetts" built at
Salisbury were completed.
Meanwhile the General Court had pre
pared and adopted the legislation necessary
to establish a navy. It had drafted proper
naval forms ; and it had appointed a number
of naval officers. A partial pay-table was
in building and fitting the two ships. It does
not appear that further action was taken.
Records of Massachusetts Council, January
11, 1776.
1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep
resentatives, February C, 1776; Records of
Massachusetts Council, February 7, 1776.
2. Journals of Massachusetts House of
Representatives, February 16, 1776.
326 Navy of the American Revolution
established on February 8. 1 This on April
12 was succeeded by a new one, which gen
erally raised wages, and which provided for
a number of new offices. A captain was now
to receive a monthly wage of 8; a first
lieutenant, 5, 8s.; a second lieutenant, 5;
a master, 4; a mate, 3; a surgeon, 7;
and an ordinary seaman, 2. Each vessel
was to be provided with 115 officers and
seamen. No better proof of the rawness of
the naval service is needed than that af
forded by the regulation that recruits,
whether officers, seamen, or marines, should
furnish themselves with "a good effective
Fire Arm, Cartouch Box, Cutlass, and
Blanket/ The captains were ordered to
recommend to the Council a list of inferior
officers and to enlist the proposed number
of seamen and marines. Captors were given
one-third of the proceeds of prizes. 2
On April 27, 1776, the General Court fixed
the respective shares of the proceeds of
prizes for officers and seamen: a captain
was to receive six shares, and "all the Cab-
bin Furniture;" a first lieutenant, five
shares; a drummer, one and one-fourth
shares; a seaman, one share; and a boy, one-
half a share. 3 On April 29, in order to en-
1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep
resentatives, February 7, 1776; Records of
Massachusetts Council, February 8, 1776.
2. Journals of Massachusetts House of
Representatives, April 12, 1776.
3. Ibid., April 27, 1776.
Xtu y of the American Revolution 327
courage enlistment, an advance of one
month s wages was voted to recruits. On
the same day it was decided that "the Uni
form of Officers be Green and White, and
that the Colours be a white Flagg, with a
green Pine Tree, and an Inscription, l Appeal
to Heaven. m On July 26 the Council ap
pointed a prize agent in each of the three
admiralty districts, whose duty was to rep
resent the state in receiving, trying, and
selling prizes. 2 At times the prize agents
assisted in fitting out vessels.
During the first half of 1776 the law of
November 1, 1775, establishing privateering,
was three times amended and remodelled. 3
The law was thereby accommodated to the
resolutions of the Continental Congress fix
ing the kinds of property subject to capture,
and the respective shares of captors and re-
captors. Doubts which had arisen as to
the proper construction of the original act
were now removed. The procedure before
admiralty courts was made more specific.
In cases of captures made by Continental
vessels, appeals were permitted from state
admiralty courts to the Continental Con
gress; in all other cases, appeals were al
lowed to the superior state courts. In each
1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep
resentatives, April 29, 1776; Records of Massa
chusetts Council, April 29, 1776.
2. Ibid. (Records), July 26, 1776.
3. Goodell, Laws of Massachusetts Febru
ary 14, April 13, May 8, 1776.
328 Nary of the American Revolution
of the three admiralty districts in Massa
chusetts additional towns were named where
court might be held. The towns named for
the Middle district were Boston, Salem, Ips
wich, and Newburyport.
During the summer and fall of 1776 the
instructions and orders to the captains of
the armed vessels were issued to them by
the Council, having been previously pre
pared by a committee. The following in
structions, which were drafted by Thomas
Gushing and Daniel Hopkins, were given to
Captain John Fisk, and will suffice as a
sample of such documents :
"The Brigantine Tyrannicide under your
Command being properly Armed and Man d
and in other respects fitted for a Cruise you
are hereby Ordered and directed immedi
ately to proceed to sea and use your utmost
Endeavors to protect the Sea Coast and
Trade of the United States and you are also
directed to exert yourself in making Cap
tures of all Ships and other Vessels Goods
Wares and Mechandise belonging to the
King of Great Britain or any of his subjects
wherever residing excepting only the Ships
and Goods of the Inhabitants of Bermuda
and the Bahama Islands You are directed
not to Cruize further Southward than Lati
tude Twelve North nor farther East than Lon
gitude Nine Degrees West from London nor
farther West than the Shoals of Nantucket.
At all times using necessary precautions to
Navy of the American Revolution 329
prevent your Vessel from falling into the
hands of the Enemy.
"And Whereas you have received a Com
mission authorizing you to make Captures
aforesaid and a set of Instructions have
been delivered you for regulating your Con
duct in that matter; these Instructions you
are Hereby directed diligently to attend to,
and if you are so fortunate as to make any
Captures you are to Order them to make
the first safe Harbor within the United
States. and you are further Ordered not
to expend your Ammunition unnecessarily
and only in time of Action or firing Alarm
or Signal guns." 1
Until October, 1776, the Massachusetts
navy was administered by the General
Court, committees of its members, the Coun
cil, and naval agents. The General Court
for the period of its recess in May, 1776,
placed the armed vessels in the charge of
"the committee for fortifying the harbor of
Boston." By the fall of that year it realized
that "secrecy, dispatch, and economy in
conducting the war" demanded a special
executive department. Accordingly, on
October 26 it established a Board of War
consisting of nine members, any five of
whom constituted a quorum. The Board
1. Records of Massachusetts Council, Octo
ber 29, 1776. The naval documents intro
duced in the narrative on the Massachusetts
navy are typical of similar ones in other states.
330 Navy of the American Revolution
of War was " empowered to Order and Direct
the Operations of the Forces in the Pay of
this State, both by sea and land, by giving
the Commanders of the Troops, Garrisons,
and Vessels of War, such Orders for their
Conduct and Cruizes from time to time as
they shall think proper." 1 It organized by
electing a president and secretary; and it
rented permanent quarters near the State
House in Boston. In December, 1776,
James Warren, later Commissioner for the
Continental Navy Board at Boston, was
president of the Board of War. Philip Hen
ry Savage was for a long time its president.
Savage presided at the meeting in 1773 at
Old South Church which decided that the
tea should not be landed. 2 The Board of
War entered upon its work with vigor in
November, 1776. It was yearly renewed,
until it was dissolved in February, 1781.
The principal business of the Board of
War was the administration of the naval,
commercial, and military affairs of the state.
Its naval and commercial duties were quite
engrossing. The Board kept fairly distinct
the activities of its "armed" and "trading"
vessels. It is true that the armed vessels
were now and then sent on commercial er
rands, or combined in a single voyage naval
1. Resolves of Massachusetts, October 26,
1776.
2 Winsor s Memorial History of Boston,
II, 543.
Navy of the American Revolution 331
and trading duties. The sloop Republic, "
used for a short time as a naval vessel, was
taken into the commercial service. The
Massachusetts Archives contain a list of
thirty-two trading vessels owned or char
tered by the Board of War. 1 These vessels
visited Nantes, Bilbao, Martinique, Guada-
loupe, St. Eustatius, Cape Francois, Balti
more, and the ports of North and South Car
olina. They carried as staple exports, fish,
lumber, and New England rum.
1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives,
XL, 110-11. The influence on the naming
of vessels of the friendly relations existing
between the United States and France during
the Revolution early manifested itself. On
December 27, 1776, the Massachusetts Board
of War changed the names of its trading
vessels as follows: ships, "Julius Csesar"
to "Bourbon," "Venus" to " Versailles,"
and "Friend" to "Paris;" brigantines,
"Charming Sally" to "Penet," and "Isabella"
to Count D Estaing. " The brigantine" Penet,"
which was named for a French merchant at
Nantes, a member of the firm of Pliarne, Penet
and Company, agents for the United States,
has been sometimes confused with the brig
antine "Perch," which was obtained by Mas
sachusetts in the fall of 1777 for the sole pur
pose of conveying the news of Burgoyne s sur
render to the American Commissioners at
Paris. The letters and dispatches were in
trusted with Jonathan Loring Austin, secre
tary of the Board of War, who after a passage
of thirty days reached the Commissioners at
Passy on December 4, 1777. Board of War
Minutes, December 27, 1776; Kale s Franklin
in France, I, 155.
332 Naz>\> of the American Revolution
As a rule the work of the Board of War in
looking after its trading vessels exceeded its
naval work. At times, as in the case of the
Penobscot expedition, the naval duties were
the important ones. A week s work of the
Board in behalf of its armed vessels shows
a curious mixture of orders on the commis
sary-general for clothing and provisions,
and on the state storekeeper for naval
stores; and of directions to the prize agents,
the agents for building armed vessels, and
the naval captains. The General Court per
mitted the Board a rather free hand in its
management of the navy. The Board car
ried on a considerable correspondence with
the commanders of the armed vessels. The
following letter written to the Board by
Captain John Clouston of the armed sloop
" Freedom" on May 23, 1777, from Paim-
boeuf, France, will illustrate this correspon
dence from the Captain s side. Clouston s
disregard of orthography and punctuation
is exceptional even for a Revolutionary
officer.
"Gentlemen:
I have the pleasure of Informing
your Honours by Capt. Fisk of the Massa
chusetts That on the first Instant I arrived
safe in this Port after taking twelve Sail of
Englis Vessels Seven of which I despatched
for Boston Burnt three gave one smal Brigg
to our Prisners and one Retaken by the
A az j 1 of the American Revolution 333
Futereange which Chast us fore Glasses
and finding she Could not Cume up with us
she gave Chase to our Prize and toock her
in our sight I have Cleaned & Refited my
Vessel and Taken in forty Tons of War like
Stores and have bin waiting for a wind to
go this fore days Capt. Fisk being short
of Provisions I have supplied him with
foreteen Barels of Pork and Eleven of Beef
and have Suffisantse for my Vessel left." 1
In January, 1777, a new sea establishment
w r as effected. Wages were generally raised,
no doubt chiefly to meet their decrease
caused by the depreciation of the currency.
A captain was now to receive a monthly
wage of 14, 8s.; a lieutenant or a master,
7, 4s. ; a seaman, 2, 8s. ; and a boy, 1, 4s.
The offices established in the Massachu
setts na\y, while not quite so many, were
in general the same as those in the Conti
nental navy. The Massachusetts navy,
however, had the offices of prizemaster,
pilot, and boy, which did not occur in the
Continental list. Following the regulations
of Congress, the General Court now gave
captors one-half of their captures. The ra
tions for seamen were modelled on the Con-
tinental_ bill of fare. 2 On March 21, 1777,
1. Board of War Letters, Massachusetts
Revolutionary Archives, May 23, 1777.
2. Massachusetts Resolves, January 8, Jan
uary 24, 1777. On December 6, 1776, six
naval offices were established, which included a
captain s clerk, prizemaster, and sergeant of
marines.
334 Naz v f ^ ie American Revolution
the General Court adopted rules and regu
lations for its ships of war; and it ordered
that they should be read by the command
ing officer of a vessel at least once a week.
These rules, while briefer than the Conti
nental rules, naturally followed the same
general lines. They show either the influ
ence of the Continental rules or of the Eng
lish rules upon which the Continental rules
were based. The following curious rule in
part parallels quotations made from the
Continental rules in Chapter I:
"And if any Person belonging to either
of such Vessels shall be convicted of Theft,
Drunkenness, profane Cursing, or Swearing,
disregarding the Sabbath, or using the
Name of God lightly, or profanely, or shall
be guilty of quarreling or fighting, or of any
reproachful or provoking Language tending
to make Quarrels, or of any turbulent or
mutinous Behavior, or if any Person shall
sleep upon his Watch, or forsake his Station,
or shall in any wise neglect to perform the
Duty enjoined him, he shall he punished
for any of the said Offences at the Discretion
of the commissioned Officers of such Vessel,
or the Major Part of them, according to the
Nature and Aggravation of the Offence, by
sitting in the Stocks, or wearing a wooden
Collar about his Neck, not exceeding 4
Hours, nor less than one, or by whipping,
not exceeding 12 Lashes, or by being put
in Irons for so long Time as the said Officers
Navy of the American Revolution 335
shall judge the Safety and well being of
the Ship and Crew requires, or otherwise
shall forfeit to the State not more than
six, nor less than two Days Pay for each
offence." 1
During every year of the Revolution at
tempts were made to increase the Massa
chusetts navy. In the fall of 1777 the brig-
antine "Hazard" was added. On August
6, 1777, the General Court resolved that,
since the armed vessels at the lowest com
putation had netted the state 55,000, the
Board of War should purchase or build two
vessels mounting 28 and 32 guns, respec
tively. In January, 1778, it reduced the
sizes of these vessels almost one-half; and
finally it gave up building them. 2 In the
spring of 1779 a prize of the "Hazard," the
brigantine "Active," taken in April off the
island of St. Thomas in the West Indies,
was purchased. 3 In April, 1778, the Gen-
1. Massachusetts Resolves, March 21, 1777.
2. Ibid., August 6, 1777; January 17, 1778.
3. The following is an extract from the en
listing contract of the armed brig "Active,"
which was signed by officers, seamen, and
marines: "And we hereby bind ourselves to
Submit to all orders and regulations of the
Navy of the United States of North America
and this State and faithfully to observe and
obey all such orders, and Commands as we
shall receive from time to time from our Su
perior Officers on board or belonging to the
said Brig Active and on board c r/y Such
Boats or Vessel or Vessels as foresaid~
336 Navy of the American Revolution
eral Court resolved to build a frigate of 28
guns, which would carry two hundred offi
cers and men. 1 This vessel was built at
Newburyport and was named the " Protec
tor. 7 In the fall of 1779 it was nearing
completion. The launching of the " Pro
tector/ which was the largest ship in the
Massachusetts navy, was a matter of more
than usual local interest. Stephen Cross
who was in charge of the construction of the
frigate wrote a letter to the Board of War
in July, 1779, which throws light upon
the minor naval duties of the Board.
Cross s language is somewhat involved,
but his meaning is clear; it is hardly
necessary to say that the " souring" refers
to lemons.
" Gentlemen.
it being customary for the owners
of Vessels when they are Launched to give
the Workmen something Better than New
England Rum to drink & Likewise some
thing to Eat and also all those Persons who
"And it is on the part of the State that such
persons as by Land or sea shall loose a Limb
in any Engagement with the Enemies of these
United States of America or be otherwise so
disabled as to be rendered incapable of getting
a Lively Hood Shall be entitled to the same
Provisions as the disabled Persons in the Con
tinental Service." Massachusetts Revolution
ary Archives, XL, 20.
1. Massachusetts Resolves, April 21, 1778.
Navy of the American Revolution 337
Attend the Launching Expect to be asked
to Drink and Eat something and Especially
Publick Vessells it will be Expected that
something be Provided and it is my opinion
about sixty Galls of West India Rum &
sugars for the same & souring if to be had
and one Quarter Cask of Wine and A Ham
per of ale or Beer together with a Tierce
hams Xeet Tongs or Corn Beef will be ne
cessary to comply with the Customs in
these Cases." 1
After August, 1779, when the disaster on
the Penobscot occurred, the naval duties of
the Board of War were slight. For a time
the " Protector" was the only vessel in the
navy. With the coming in of a new gov
ernment under a Constitution on October
25, 1780, there was no longer much need for
a Board of W"ar. According to the provi
sions of the new Constitution, the Governor
was commander-in-chief of the navy; and
he was authorized to " train, instruct, exer
cise, and govern it," and to call it into serv
ice in time of war. On February 8, 1781,
the Board of War was discontinued, and
Caleb Davis, who was appointed Agent of
the Commonwealth, succeeded to its minis
terial duties. 2 The Governor and the Agent
1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives,
XLIV, 279.
2. Massachusetts Resolves, February 8,
1781. Three members of the Board of War
and two clerks were continued for a few months
to settle the accounts of the Board.
338 Nai y of the American Revolution
now shared the naval duties. The Governor
commissioned officers, issued orders to the
naval commanders, and was responsible
to the General Court; the Agent had direct
oversight of the fitting out of vessels, the
selling of prizes, and was responsible to the
Governor. As the Revolution spent itself
the simplification of the administrative ma
chinery of the state continued. On Janu
ary 1, 1783, the Agent was discontinued.
His naval duties fell to the Commissary-
General. 1
During each year from 1780 to 1783 the
General Court made one or more attempts
to increase the naval force of the state. It
was spurred to action by the ravages of the
British cruisers on the Eastern Coast. On
March 21, 1780, two armed vessels mount
ing not less than ten or more than fourteen
4 s or 6 s were ordered. The expense in
curred was to be met by the sale of the " Ris
ing Empire " and of the confiscated estates
of Loyalists, and from the rents of the
property of absentees. On March 6, 1781,
the Agent was directed to obtain a small
vessel of eight to twelve guns to serve as a
tender for the "Mars;" and on April 23, he
was ordered to procure by hire or purchase
two small craft to be employed as "guard a
coasta." On November 12, 1782, a com
mittee was appointed to purchase a^ vessel
of twelve or sixteen guns to be used in pro-
1. Massachusetts Resolves, October 4, 1782.
Naz y of the American Revolution 339
tecting the coast. On March 26, 1783, the
Commissary-General was ordered to obtain
a small vessel and a whale boat to cruise
against the enemy in Casco Bay and along
the Eastern Shore. 1 As the result of these
resolutions, four armed vessels were added
to the navy: in the spring of 1780 the
"Mars;" in the summer of 1781, the " De
fence; in the winter of 1781-1782, the
"Tartar/ 7 which was built by the state; and
in the spring of 1782, the "Winthrop."
Private naval enterprise throughout the
Revolution was exceedingly active in Mas
sachusetts. In 1775, some months before
the General Court granted letters of marque,
Massachusetts citizens, unauthorized, were
capturing the vessels of the enemy. Scarce
ly a fortnight after the battles of Lexington
and Concord men from New Bedford and
Dartmouth fitted out a vessel and attacked
and cut out from a harbor in Martha s Vine
yard a prize of the British sloop of war
"Falcon," 16. This act was called forth by
the captures which the " Falcon" had made
from the people of Buzzard s Bay. On
June 12, 1775, the inhabitants of Machias,
Maine, had captured the King s sloop "Mar-
garetta," Lieutenant Moore, after mortally
wounding the commander and inflicting a
loss of fourteen men. Still other British
1. Massachusetts Resolves, March 21, 1780;
February 19, March 6, April 23, 1781; Novem
ber 12, 1782; March 26, 1783.
34-O Navy of the American Revolution
vessels were captured off the coast of Maine
during the summer of 1775. 1
With the act of November 1, 1775, grant
ing to the Council the power to issue letters of
marque and reprisal, all such private enter
prises as the above, when done under the
authority of a commission, were legal. It
does not appear however that Massachusetts
granted many commissions until the second
half of 1776. In 1777 she granted 96 com
missions. The best year was 1779 when she
issued 222 commissions; the year 1781 with
216 commissions was not far behind. The
total number of commissions issued by Mas
sachusetts for the years 1777 to 1783 was
998. 2 In 1779 one hundred and eighty-four
prizes captured by privateers were libelled
in the Massachusetts prize courts. 3 The
privateering industry for this year was very
active. The following is an extract from a
letter dated May 16, 1779, written from a
Massachusetts seaport:
"Privateering was never more in vogue
than at present; two or three privateers sail
every week from this port, and men seem
1. Winsor, Narrative and Critical History,
VI, 564; Maclay, History of American Priva
teering, 52-60.
2. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives.
The total numbers of privateering commissions
always exceed the total numbers of vessels,
as the same vessels were often commissioned
two or more times.
3. Boston Gazette for 1779.
Navy of the American Revolution 341
as plenty as grasshoppers in the field; no
vessel being detained an hour for want of
them. We have near 1,000 prisoners on
board the guard-ships in Boston, and a great
balance due us from the enemy. Cruisers
from New York, &c are daily brought in,
and often by vessels of inferior force; our
privateers-men being as confident of victory,
when upon an equal footing with the Eng
lish, as these were of gaining it of the French
in the last war." 1
The rivalry between the state service and
the privateers for seamen was exceedingly ac
tive. The latter service was always the more
popular. In 1779 the Council recommended
that some effectual measures be taken to
prevent the owners of private ships of war
and merchantmen from seducing seamen
away that were engaged in the public service.
It declared that proper encouragement must
be given to state officers and seamen, and
that commanders must have the aid of the
government in manning their vessels, "or
they will lie by the Walls and so be of little
or no service." 2 In 1778 the General Court
found some difficulty in securing com
manders.
The movements of the armed vessels of
the Massachusetts navy are quite similar to
the movements of the naval vessels of Con-
1. Virginia Gazette, June 19, 1779.
2. Journals of House of Representatives,
January 6, 1779.
34 2 -Vary of the American Revolution
gress. 1 The smaller fleet like the larger
cruised in European waters, in the region
of the West Indies, and to the eastward of
the Bermudas in the path of the richly-laden
West Indiamen. The Massachusetts ves
sels, however, cruised more frequently near
er home. About the first of June, 1779, the
"Hazard" and Tyrannicide" were in the
region of Nantucket. After 1779 the vessels
were frequently ordered to protect the
1. The vessels in the Massachusetts navy
with the approximate periods of their service
were as follows: Sloop "Machias Liberty,"
1775-1776; schooner "Diligent," 1775-1776;
brigantine (at first a sloop) "^Tyrannicide,"
1776-1779; brigantine " Rising Empire," 1776-
1777; brigantine "Independence," 1776-1777;
sloop "Reptiblic," 1776-1777; sloop "Free
dom," 1776-1777; brigantine "Massachu
setts," 1776- 1778; brigantine "Hazard," 1777-
1779; brigantine "Active," 1779; frigate
"Protector," 1779-1781; ship "Mars," 1780-
1781; sloop "Defence," 1781; ship "Tartar,"
1782-1783; sloop "Winthrop," 1782-1783;
and galley "Lincoln," 1779-1781. Most of
these vessels mounted from ten to twenty
guns, 4 s and 6 s. The only larger vessel was
the "Protector," 26. Vessels such as the
"Tyrannicide," "Hazard," and "Winthrop"
carried about 125 officers and men. The fol
lowing captains or commanders were the chief
officers in the Massachusetts navy: Jeremiah
O Brian, John Lambert, John Fisk, John Fos
ter Williams, John Clouston, Jonathan Hara-
den, Daniel Souther, Simeon Samson, Richard
Welden, Allen Hallet, James Nevens, John
Cathcart and George Little. Massachusetts
did not establish the rank of commodore.
Nary of the American Revolution 343
Eastern Coast. In the spring of 1777 the
"Tyrannicide, " Captain Jonathan Haraden,
"Massachusetts," Captain John Fisk, and
"Freedom," Captain John Clouston, cruised
eastward as far as the coasts of France and
Spain, capturing some twenty-five prizes,
many of which however, were recaptured by
the British. 1 This was a most fortunate
venture, for all told one can not now count
more than seventy prizes captured by the
Massachusetts navy. In the summer of
1780 the Board of War turned over the
"Mars," Captain Simeon Samson, to the
Massachusetts Committee for Foreign Af
fairs which sent her to France and Holland
for supplies.
1. These three vessels captured the four
prizes mentioned in the following advertise
ment, which appeared in the Continental Jour
nal and Weekly Advertiser for July 3, 1777, a
paper published at Boston. The advertise
ment is introduced here to illustrate the final
disposition of prize vessels:
"To be sold by Public Auction at eleven
o clock on Wednesday the 23rd of July in
stant at Mr. Tileston s wharf in Boston the
following prizes with their appurtenances.
"The Ship Lonsdale, about 250 tons
Brig Britannia, about 140 " .
Brig Penelope, about 130 "
Snow Sally, about 180 "
"The above prizes lay at Tileston s wharf.
They are all good vessels and well found. In
ventories to be seen at the sheriff s office
Cornhill, and at the place of sale.
"W. Greenleaf, Sheriff."
3/|] Navy of the American Revolution
The state vessels were at times joined in
cruises with privateers or with Continental
vessels ; and enterprises were concerted with
all three classes of armed craft. In April,
1777, the state took into its service for a
month nine privateers, mounting 130
guns and carrying 1,030 men, to cruise
with the Continental frigate "Hancock"
and "Boston" after the British frigate "Mil-
ford" which had been especially annoying
and destructive to the trade of the state. 1
In February, 1781, the "Protector" was
cruising with the Continental frigate
"Deane" thirty leagues windward of An
tigua. In March, 1781, the Admiral of the
French fleet at Newport was requested to
send two French ships to cruise with the
"Mars" on the Eastern shore; and a bounty
was offered to privateersmen who would
cruise against the "worthless banditti" in
that region. 2
The capture of a prize often amounted to
little more than the chasing of a merchant
man and the firing of a few shots as a sig
nal for surrender. At times however when
the merchantman was armed, or when the
enemy s vessel happened to be a privateer,
the action was more serious. One of the
most severe single engagements in which a
1. Massachusetts Resolves, April 26, 1777;
Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, XL,
29, 55.
2. Massachusetts Resolves, March 2, 1781.
Nai \ of the American Revolution 345
Massachusetts vessel was concerned was
that between the "Protector," 26, Captain
John Foster Williams, and the privateer
frigate "Admiral Duff, " 32, Captain Stran
ger. It occurred on June 9, 1780, in lati
tude 42 N. and longitude 47 W. The en
gagement was heavy for an hour and a half
when the "Admiral Duff," having caught
fire, blew up; all on board were lost except
fifty-five men who were picked up by the
"Protector." The American vessel lost six
men. 1 The following brief account of one
of these minor engagements, told in the sim
ple and direct language of the Massachu
setts captain who took part in it, is taken
from a letter of Captain Allen Hallet to the
Board of War. It is dated at sea on
board the "Tyrannicide," latitude 28 N.,
longitude 68 W., March 31, 1779. This sim
ple and vivid description shows with clear
ness the character of the minor engagements
of the Revolution.
"I have the pleasure of sending this to
you by Mr. John Blanch who goes prize-
master of my Prize, the Privateer Brig Re
venge, lately commanded by Capt. Robert
Fendall belonging to Grenada, but last from
Jamaica, mounting 14 Carriage Guns, 6 & 4
pounders, 4 swivels & 2 Cohorns, & sixty
ablebodied Men, which I took after a very
smart & Bloody Engagement, in which they
had 8 men killed & fourteen wounded, the
~T Boston Gazette, July 24, 1780.
346 Navy of the American Revolution
Vessell cut very much to pieces by my Shott,
so that they had no command of her at all
amongst the killed was the 1st Lieut. &
one Quarter Mr. amongst the wounded is
the Capt. 2nd. Lieut. & Gunner I cap
tured her as follows: on the 29 Inst. at 4
P M. I made her about 4 leagues to wind
ward coming down upon us, upon which I
cleared the Ship and got all hands to Quar
ter, ready for an Engagement, I stood close
upon the Wind waiting for her, about half
past six PM. she came up with me, and
hailed me;ask d me where I was from, I told
them I was from Boston & asked where they
were from, they said from Jamaica & that
they were a British Cruizer, I immediately
told them I was an American Cruizer, upon
which they ordered me to Strike, & seeing
I did not intend to gratify their desires,
they rang d up under my Lee & gave me
a Broadside, I immediately re turn d the
Compliment & dropping a Stern, I got under
their Lee and then pour d Broadsides into
her from below and out of the Tops, so
fast & so well directed that in one hour &
a Quarter we dismantled two of her Guns
& drove them from their Quarters & com-
pelFd them to Strike their Colors, during
the whole Engagement we were not at any
one time more than half Pistol Shott dis
tant & some part of the Time our Yards
were lock d with theirs I had Eight men
wounded only two of which are Bad
Xai y of the American Revolution 347
amongst the wounded are my first Lieut.
& Master, I intended to man her and keep
her as a Consort during the Cruize, but
having twenty wounded Men on board, of
my own men & prisoners I thought it Best
to send her home, with all the wounded
men on board under the Care of the Sur
geons Mate." 1
By far the largest naval undertaking of
the Revolution made by the Americans was
the Penobscot Expedition. Until 1779 the
general policy of those who managed the
fleet of Massachusetts was to send its ves
sels cruising against the British transports,
merchantmen, and small privateers, and to
leave the coast to be defended by the sea-
coast establishment and by local forces.
In August, 1777, the Council agreed with
this policy for it then spoke of the Conti
nental vessels, the state vessels, and the
privateers as " improper" to be employed
in clearing the coasts of these "vermin." 2
In April, 1779, however, it disapproved this
policy. It now in a message to the House
submitted whether, instead of sending the
armed vessels on long cruises after prizes,
it would not have been vastly more to the
advantage and profit of the state to have
employed them cruising on the coast of
Massachusetts for the protection of trade
1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives.
XLIV, 408.
2, Ibid., 268.
348 Nary of flic American Revolution
and the defence of harbors and seacoast,
"which have been left in such an un
guarded and defenceless Situation that
where we have taken one Vessel of the
Enemy their small privateers out of New
York have taken ten from us." 1 It would
seem that the Board of War was right in
employing its fleet in prize-getting rather
than in defensive warfare. The capturing
of small privateers and of merchantmen
were the only enterprises for which the Rev
olutionary fleets were adapted. Those ves
sels that cruised continually near the Ameri
can coast, sooner or later, fell foul of the
stouter and better armed ships of the enemy.
Moreover, the Board of War, had it not re
sponded to the commercial spirit of the
times, would have been compelled to adopt
the methods of the privateers, did it wish
to succeed in its competition with them for
seamen.
During the first half of 1779 the British
vessels were very destructive to the trade
and shipping of Massachusetts and New
Hampshire. On June 9, eight hun
dred of the enemy, encouraged by certain
Tories in Maine, effected a lodgment on the
Maine coast at a place called Bagaduce, now
Castine, near the mouth of the Penobscot
river. 2 This made a fine vantage-point as
1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep
resentatives, April 7, 1779.
2. Amory s Sullivan, II, 376-78, James Sulli-
Nary of the American Revolution 349
a base for naval operations. The appeal
for naval protection which the inhabitants
of Massachusetts now made upon her was
a strong one. Towards the close of June
the Massachusetts government began con
certing with the Continental Navy Board
at Boston and with the government of New
Hampshire an expedition to capture and
destroy this British station. Samuel Ad
ams, who had recently retired from the
chairmanship of the Marine Committee of
Congress and had returned to Boston, fur
thered the enterprise. To the fleet which
was now formed, New Hampshire contrib
uted the "Hampden," 22; the Navy Board
at Boston, the Continental vessels, "War
ren," 32, " Providence/ 7 12, and "Diligent,"
12; and Massachusetts, the three state brig-
antines, "Tyrannicide," 16, "Hazard," 14,
and "Active," 14, together with thirteen
privateers, which were temporarily taken
into the state service. These twenty armed
vessels mounted in all 324 guns, and were
van to John Sullivan, August 30, 1779. James
Sullivan says that, on the occupation of Baga-
duce by the British, Boston and neighboring
seaports were greatly alarmed at the pros
pect of a scarcity of wood; and that men who
had made their fortunes by war, for once
and for a moment, felt a public spirit, and
freely offered their ships to the government.
They were careful to have them appraised
and insured by the state, which of course
suffered the loss on the failure of the expedi
tion.
350 Xaz y of the American Revolution
manned by more than 2,000 men. Besides
the armed fleet there were twenty trans
ports which carried upwards of 1,000 state
militia. The naval forces were under the
command of Captain Dudley Saltonstall of
the Continental navy; and the troops were
commanded by Brigadier-General Solomon
Lovell of the state military forces of Massa
chusetts. Paul Revere was Chief of Ar
tillery with the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel.
The assembling, manning, provisioning,
and fitting of so many vessels greatly taxed
the resources of Massachusetts. The fleet
left Boston on July 19, and during the last
days of the month appeared off the Penob-
scot, and attacked Bagaduce with only par
tial success, since it failed to take the main
fort. Before a second attempt was made,
a British fleet from New York under the
command of Sir George Collier, who had re
ceived news of the expedition, appeared in
the Penobscot. The British fleet consisted
of the "Raisonnable," 64; "Blonde," and
"Virginia," 32 s; " Greyhound," " Camilla,"
and "Gallatea," 20 s; and "Otter," 14; to
gether with three small vessels at the gar
rison, the "Nautilus," 16, "Albany," 14,
and "North," 14. The British fleet mount
ed 248 guns and carried more than 1,600
men. In number of guns and men the ad
vantage lay with the Americans, but in
weight of metal and tonnage it was probably
with the British. On the morning of Au-
Xat y of the American Revolution 351
gust 14 the British fleet came in sight of the
American. The two fleets were barely in
range of each other s guns when the Ameri
cans were seized with a panic, and fled with
their vessels helter skelter up the river, pur
sued by the British. The Americans offered
almost no resistance whatever, but ran their
ships ashore, set fire to them, and escaped
afoot, when not too closely pursued. With
the exception of two or three vessels which
were captured, the American fleet w r as an
nihilated. The British lost 13 men; the
American loss has been placed at 474 men.
The larger part of the American sailors and
soldiers returned by woods to New Hamp
shire and Massachusetts.
The total cost of this expedition to Massa
chusetts as calculated by the Board of War
was 1,739,175. The larger part of this
sum, 1,390,200, was charged t@ the account
of the navy. It suffered the loss of three
state armed vessels and a victualer, nine
privateers, and twenty transports. Among
the twenty transports, with possibly one ex
ception, was the whole trading fleet of the
state. Soon after the disaster a joint com
mittee of the Massachusetts House of Rep
resentatives and Council with Artemas Ward
as president, held an inquiry and made a
report on the causes of the failure of the
expedition. In answer to the question,
"What appears the principal reason of the
failure," the committee decided unani-
352 A r flT. v of the American Revolution
mously, "want of proper Spirit and Energy
on the part of the Commodore." A court-
martial, which was held on the frigate
"Deane" in Boston harbor about the first
of October, decided against Captain Salton-
stall; and he was dismissed from the navy.
Rarely has a more ignominious military
operation been made by Americans than
the Penobscot expedition. A New Eng-
lander with some justice has likened it to
Hull s surrender at Detroit. Had it been
successful, it would not have been worth
the effort it cost. Its object had no national
significance; it was an eccentric operation.
"Bad in conception, bad in preparation,
bad in execution, it naturally ended in dis
aster and disgrace." 1
Besides the "Tyrannicide," "Hazard/
and "Active" the Massachusetts navy lost
to the enemy at least three other vessels.
Towards the close of 1777 the British cap
tured the "Freedom" and "Independence."
On May 5, 1781, His Majesty s ships "Roe
buck," 44, and "Medea," 28, captured the
1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives,
CXLV, 199-203, 350; Weymouth Historical So
ciety Publications, I, chapters VII-X, gives the
best account of the Penobscot expedition,
also contains the Original Journal of General
Solomon Lovell kept on the expedition ; Massa
chusetts Historical Society Collections, 7th,
II, 430; Proceedings of Massachusetts Histori
cal Society, 2nd, XII, 201-202; Clowes, Royal
Navy, IV, 28-29.
Navy of the American Revolution 353
" Protector/ 26, with more than one Hun
dred and thirty men on board. 1 She was
added to the Royal Navy as the "Hussar."
In the latter half of 1782 Captain George
Little in the "Winthrop" cruised on the
Eastern Coast, and captured and sent into
Boston "nearly the whole of the arm d
force they possessed at Penobscot;" he thus
in part retrieved the naval honor of his
state. 2 Acting under orders of Governor
Hancock, Little in the "Winthrop" made
the last cruise of the Massachusetts navy,
when in the winter of 1782-1783 he visited
Martinique. On his return, he was fitting
for a cruise on the Eastern Coast, when
about April 1 news of permanent peace ar
rived. On June 4, 1783, the Commissary-
General was directed to sell the " Winthrop/ 7
the last vessel in the navy. The "Tartar"
had been sold during the past winter. 3
Captain Little s accounts were being settled
in March, 1785.
1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives,
XXXIX, 45.
2. Ibid., CL VIII, 274, Message of Governor
Hancock to House of Representatives, Feb
ruary 6, 1783.
3. Massachusetts Resolves, June 4, 1783.
Those naval vessels which were not captured,
destroyed, or sold, were either returned to
their owners, or were thrown out of com
mission and employed in other services.
CHAPTER XII
THE NAVY OF CONNECTICUT
An introductory word about the govern
ment of Connecticut during the Revolution
may not be amiss. Speaking generally, the
power of legislation was vested in the Gov
ernor, Council, and House of Representa
tives ; and of administration in the Governor
and Council of Safety. 1 The Legislature or
General Assembly met two or three times a
year. Jonathan Trumbull, the only Pro
vincial governor in the thirteen colonies who
was not displaced by the dominance of the
Patriot party, was governor of Connecticut
throughout the Revolution. On October
10, 1776, Connecticut, by a resolution of the
General Assembly, which made no change
in the frame- work of the government, ceased
to be a colony and became a state. The
Council of Safety, appointed to assist the
Governor in administration, was elected each
year. Its membership varied in numbers;
in 1775 there were five members; in 1779,
twenty. About half of its members attend-
1. One must distinguish between the
Council and Council of Safety. A few mem
bers were common to both bodies.
Nary of the American Revolution 355
ed its meetings, which were principally held
at Hartford, and at Lebanon, the home of
Governor Trumbull. Roger Sherman, Oli
ver Ellsworth, and other leaders of the Revo
lution in Connecticut served in the Council
of Safety.
Connecticut s first step towards obtaining
a naval armament was made early in July,
1775, when her General Assembly resolved to
fit out and arm two vessels of suitable bur
den for the defence of the seacoasts of the
colony, and authorized the Governor and
Council to procure, furnish, and employ the
two vessels. 1 On July 24, 1775, the Gover
nor and Council of Safety thoroughly con
sidered the "affair of the two armed ves
sels;" and letters relating thereto from men
in New Haven, Middletown, Wethersfield,
and other towns were read. Captain John
Deshon and Nathaniel Shaw, jr., both of
New London, and Captain Giles Hall of
Norwich attended the meeting and offered
information and advice. A committee of
four, consisting of two members of the
Council of Safety together with Deshon and
Hall, was appointed to visit the principal
ports of the colony and ascertain the terms
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
99-100. The published Colonial and State
Records of Connecticut to which I refer, con
sist of two parts, the Records of the General
Assembly, and the Jounrals of the Council of
Safety. The reader can easily tell from the
context to which part each reference refers.
356 Navy of the American Revolution
upon which vessels, officers, and men might
be had. 1
On August 2 this committee reported that
sundry vessels could be obtained at reason
able prices, but that none of them were per
fectly adapted for vessels of war. The com
mittee said that the people of the colony
disagreed as to the propriety of arming ves
sels; many thought that it would be impos
sible for America to compare by sea with the
British, and that to attempt it would pro
voke insult and would expose the seacoast
and trade of Connecticut to increased dan
ger; but others thought that a naval arma
ment would be an advantage, and would
afford protection to the colony. The Gov
ernor and Council of Safety expressed a
doubt whether they had a right to suspend
the measure of the General Assembly, even
if they should think it advisable. They now
resolved to fit out an armed vessel, the brig
"Minerva," of about 108 tons burden, be
longing to Captain William Griswold of
Wethersfield; and to obtain a smaller and
faster vessel of some twenty-five tons burden
to be employed as a "spy vessel, to run and
course from place to place, to discover the
enemy, and carry intelligence." Captain
Samuel Niles of Norwich was appointed
captain of the spy-vessel; and Benjamin
Huntington of the Council of Safety and
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
108, 109.
Navy of the American Revolution 357
John Deshon were appointed a committee to
obtain, fit out, and furnish it. 1
On August 3 the Governor and Council of
Safety appointed Captain Giles Hall of Nor
wich captain and commander of the " Min
erva. " A pay-table and a small list of
officers were now established. Captain Hall
was to receive a monthly salary of 7; the
first lieutenant, 5; the second lieutenant,
and master, 4 each; seamen, 2, 5s.; and
marines, 2. Hall was instructed to raise
forty seamen and forty marines. 2
When the committee for obtaining the
spy- vessel reported on August 14, the Gov
ernor and Council of Safety resolved to buy
the schooner "Britannia," belonging at
Stonington, at a price not to exceed 200.
Robert Niles was made captain of the " Spy/
the name now given to the schooner, in
place of Samuel Niles. 3 The "Spy" was
cruising early in October, 1775, when she
recaptured and brought into New London
a large ship containing eight thousand bush
els of wheat/ the first capture of the Con
necticut navy.
By October the "Minerva" was ready for
sea, and on the ninth of this month, in re
sponse to a request of the Continental Con
gress, the Governor and Council of Safety
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
109, 110.
2. Ibid., 111-13.
3. Ibid., 117. .
4. Connecticut Gazette, October 13, 1775.
358 Xavy of the American Revolution
ordered this vessel to intercept two trans
ports bound from England for Quebec. 1
This detail was not carried out by the " Min
erva" for the very sufficient reason "that
all the hands or soldiers and marines on
board, except about 10 or 12, being duly
noticed of said orders, utterly declined and
refused to obey the same and perform said
cruise," which through their disobedience
wholly failed. 2 The Governor and Council
of Safety ordered the mutinous men dis
charged, and others enlisted in their places;
but before the "Minerva" was again ready
for service, the General Assembly in Decem
ber directed Captain Hall to return his ves
sel to its owner and dismiss his crew.
In December, 1775, the General Assembly
deciding to increase the naval forces of the
colony, appointed Colonel David Waterbury
of Stamford and Captain Isaac Sears of New
Haven to examine a certain brigantine at
Greenwich with a view to ascertaining its
fitness for the naval service; and it resolved
to build or otherwise procure an additional
armed ship and four row-galleys "for the
defence of this and the neighboring colonies."
Waterbury and Sears reported that the
Greenwich brigantine was a new vessel which
had made one voyage to the West Indies,
1. See Chapter I, Naval Committee, page
35; Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 176.
2. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV.
176.
Nai \ of the American Revolution 359
and that she would mount sixteen six-
pounders and twenty-four swivels. 1 The
Governor and Council of Safety at once pur
chased the brigantine, which they named
the "Defence," and appointed Captain Seth
Harding of Norwich to command her. By
April, 1776, the Defence " was manned and
ready for sea.
On January 9, 1776, the Governor and
Council of Safety appointed Benjamin Hunt-
ington of the Council of Safety and Captain
Seth Harding a committee to visit Middle-
town and other towns on the Connecticut
river to ascertain the terms upon which the
second vessel could be purchased or built. 2
In the end the Governor and Council of
Safety decided to build a ship of 200 tons
burden at Saybrook, and they employed
Captain Uriah Hayden at six shillings a day
to undertake the task. 8 The ship was built
during the spring and summer of 1776. An
important event in the history of the " Oliver
Cromwell," as the new ship was called, is
thus chronicled in the Connecticut Gazette
of August 23, 1776, published at New Lon
don: "Last Lord s Day, the new Ship of
War belonging to the State of Connecticut,
built at Say-Brook, and commanded by
William Coit, Esq., came out of the River
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
200-02.
2. Ibid., 223-24.
3. Ibid., 229, 232.
360 Nary of the American Revolution
and arrived here Tuesday : she is the largest
Vessel that has ever come over Say Brook
Bar, and was piloted by Capt. James Har
ris." 1
Before building the row-galleys the Gov
ernor and Council of Safety sent one
builder to Philadelphia and another to Prov
idence in order to take advantage of the
experiences of Pennsylvania and Rhode
Island in constructing this sort of craft. Of
the four galleys ordered in December, 1775,
but three were built, the " Whiting" at New
Haven, the "Shark" at Norwich, and the
"Crane" at East Haddam. They were rig
ged as schooners; and by July, 1776, their
construction was completed and they were
officered and manned.
The General Assembly permitted the Gov
ernor and Council of Safety a free hand
in their control of naval affairs. They were
given full power and authority to order, di
rect, furnish, and supply the navy, during
the recess of the General Assembly. It
does not appear, however, that the sessions
of the General Assembly caused much change
in the management of the naval affairs. It
was not in session longer than a few weeks
or a few days at a time. In October, 1776,
the General Assembly directed the Govern
or and Council of Safety to execute and con
tinue all naval business which they had be
gun, the sessions of the Assembly notwith-
1. Connecticut Gazette, August 23, 1776
Nai \ of the American Rcz olution 361
standing. 1 Matters, which in some states
were determined by legislation, such as the
establishing of naval rules and regulations,
the shares of prizes, and the naval pay, were
in Connecticut for the most part left to ad
ministrative orders. In such work the Gov
ernor and Council of Safety often followed
Continental models. In July, 1776, they
ordered Richard Law, a member of the Coun
cil of Safety, to "compile a Code of Laws
for the Naval Service of this Colony, as
much in conformity to the laws of the naval
service of the United Colonies as may con
sist with the service of this colony." 2
The Governor and Council of Safety trans
acted the naval business, as has already been
seen, by means of committees of the Coun
cil of Safety, naval agents, and mixed com
mittees composed of members of the Council
of Safety and men from the outside. The
sending of prizes captured by Connecticut
ships of war into the ports of Massachusetts,
and the refitting of the state s vessels in
Boston, necessitated the employment of a
naval agent in Massachusetts. In April,
1777, Samuel Elliot of Boston was acting
for the Governor and Council of Safety in
this capacity. In October, 1777, the Gen
eral Assembly authorized the appointment
1. Records of the State of Connecticut, I,
2. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV
492
362 Navy of the American Revolution
of a naval agent for Massachusetts, and on
the 22nd of this month the Governor and
Council of Safety appointed Elliot agent in
all marine affairs to be transacted by Con
necticut in Massachusetts. 1
During the Revolution the chief seaport
of Connecticut was New London, then one
of the largest and most important towns in
New England. The most complete naval
news of the time is to be found in the Con
necticut Gazette published at New London,
and not in the Hartford Courant, or in the
New Haven paper, the Connecticut Journal.
Ne\v London w r as the naval station of the
Connecticut fleet, the port where it was re
fitted and repaired. One of the most
wealthy, influential, and public-spirited
merchants of New London was Nathaniel
Shaw, jr. He was an ardent patriot and was
on intimate terms with Washington and
other Revolutionary leaders. 2 The Govern-
1. Records of State of Connecticut, 1.212,
214, 418, 452. This is either Samuel Elliot,
a Boston merchant, or Samuel Eliot, a most
distinguished Boston merchant, a benefactor
of Harvard college, and grandfather of the
present President Eliot. See New England
Historical and Genealogical Register, XXIII
(1869) , 338-39. I find the agent s name spelled
Elliot, Eliott, and Eliot.
2. Better evidence of the social standing
of the Shaw family in New London may not
be needed than that afforded by the statis
tics contained in the following newspaper
clipping: "A great wedding dance took place
Xai y of the American Revolution 363
or and Council of Safety naturally turned
to Shaw when naval duties were to be per
formed in New London. We have already
seen that Shaw was present at a meeting of
the Council of Safety in July, 1775, and was
consulted on the initial naval project of the
colony. From 1775 to 1779 the Governor
and Council of Safety availed themselves of
his services in fitting out their naval ves
sels. In July, 1776, they appointed him
"Agent for the Colony, for the purpose of
naval supplies and for taking care of such
sick seamen as may be sent on shore to his
care. m In October, 1778, the General As
sembly appointed Shaw Marine Agent for
Connecticut and authorized him to equip
the state vessels, to direct their cruises, and
to receive and sell their prizes, in all, taking
the advice of the Governor and Council of
Safety from time to time. 2
The Governor and Council of Safety
showed an enterprising willingness to exper
iment in naval warfare, when in February,
1776, they permitted David Bushnell to
at New London at the house of Nathaniel
Shaw, Esq., June 12, 1769, the day after the
marriage of his son Daniel Shaw and Grace
Coit; 92 gentlemen and ladies attended, and
danced 92 jigs, 52 contra-dances, 45 minuets,
and 17 horn-pipes, and retired 45 minutes
past midnight." F. M. Caulkins, History of
Norwich, Connecticut, 332.
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
474.
2. Records of State of Connecticut, II, 136.
364 Xary of the American Revolution
explain to them his machine for blowing up
ships, and voted him 60 to complete his
invention. 1 Bushnell s l American Turtle,"
as his contrivance was called, anticipated
modern inventions in submarine warfare.
It consisted of a tortoise-shaped diving boat
which could be propelled under water. It
contained a supply of air sufficient to last
the operator a half-hour, and was guided by
means of a compass made visible by phos
phorus. Upon reaching the doomed ves
sel a screw was driven into it by the operator.
A magazine of powder was attached by a
string to the screw. The casting of the mag
azine from the diving-boat set going a cer
tain clock-work which gave the operator
time to get beyond the reach of danger before
it ignited the powder. In 1777 a trial of the
Turtle" against the British ship " Eagle,"
84, in New York Harbor was unsuccessful.
The operator succeeded in getting under
the "Eagle/ but was unable to drive the
gcrew into her bottom.
Connecticut did not establish state priva
teering. In May, 1776, the General Assem
bly authorized the Governor to fill out the
blank privateering commissions which the
President of Congress should send from time
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
233-36. I have followed the familiar ac
counts of this invention. Washington gave
Jefferson an account of Bushnell s invention
in September, 1785. Ford, Writings of Wash
ington, X, 504-06.
Navy of the American Revolution 365
to time, and to deliver them to such persons
as should execute the bond prescribed by
Congress. 1 A list of Connecticut privateers
in which some vessels are counted two or
more times has been made out. The totals
of this list give 202 vessels, 1,609 guns, and
7,754 men. 2 In order to enlist her quota of
troops for the Continental army, Connecti
cut in May, 1780, placed an embargo upon
privateers. 3 In May, 1776, the General As
sembly, in pursuance of the recommenda
tions of the Continental Congress relative to
the establishment of admiralty courts by
each state, vested the county courts of Con
necticut with the power to try, judge, and
determine, by jury or otherwise, as in other
cases, concerning all captures that have or
shall be taken and brought into said respec
tive counties." The courts were to follow the
rules of the civil law, the law of nations, and
the resolutions of Congress. Appeals were
allowed to the Continental Congress agree
able to its directions and resolves. Connect
icut was more liberal in granting appeals to
Congress than Massachusetts, which state,
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
318-19.
2. Records and Papers of New London
County Historical Society, I, pt. 4, p. 32.
3. State Archives, Acts of Connecticut,
May, 1780. The laying of embargoes on pri
vateers for short periods in order to obtain
men for different purposes was common dur
ing the Revolution.
366 Navy of the American Revolution
it will be recalled, permitted such appeals
only in cases of captures made by the ves
sels of the Continental navy. 1
The reader may recollect that on August
26, 1776, the Continental Congress recom
mended that each state should grant certain
pensions to its citizens who should receive
serious disabilities in the Continental naval
service. In May, 1777, the Connecticut
General Assembly granted such pensions;
and in imitation of the resolutions of Con
gress it granted half-pay to all officers, sea
men, and marines in the Connecticut navy,
who were w r ounded in action so as to be dis
abled from earning a livelihood ; and a frac
tion of half-pay for lesser disabilities. 2
In October, 1777, the House of Represen
tatives passed a bill providing an elaborate
list of rules and regulations relating to naval
discipline, naval courts-martial, pay of offi
cers and seamen, and the sharing of prizes.
The bill, however, was rejected by the Coun
cil. 3 In April, 1779, when too late to be of
much service, the General Assembly passed
a statute creating a naval establishment,
which was modelled on that of Congress.
Two scales of wages were established, one for
vessels under twenty guns, and the other
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
280-81.
2. See Chapter IV, page 129; Records of
State of Connecticut, I, 246-49.
3. Connecticut Revolutionary Archives,
VIII, 1777-1778.
A iJT v of tJic American Revolution 367
for vessels of twenty guns or upwards.
Captains of the two classes received a
monthly wage, respectively, of $48 and $60;
lieutenants and masters, $24 and $30; and
boatswains, $13 and $15. The wages for
seamen and marines did not vary, being $8
for seamen, and $6.67 for marines. The
sharing of prizes among officers and seamen
varied for the two classes. In general, the
same offices were established as in the Con
tinental navy; there were, however, not so
many of them. Following the regulations
of Congress, the General Assembly gave the
officers, seamen, and marines the whole of
captured ships of war and privateers, and
one-half of all other vessels. 1
Besides the vessels already mentioned,
there were, in the Connecticut navy, for a
short time in 1777, the schooner "Mifflin"
and the sloop "Schuyler;" and for an equally
brief period in 1779, the sloop "Guilford." 2
1. Records of State of Connecticut, II,
230-33.
2. The vessels of the Connecticut navy
with the approximate periods of their service
were as follows: Brigantine "Minerva," 1775;
schooner "Spy," 1775-1778; ship "Defence,"
1776-1779; ship "Oliver Cromwell," 1776-
1779; galleys "Crane" and "Whiting," 1776;
galley "Shark," 1776-1777; schooner "Mifflin,"
1777; sloop "Schuyler," 1777; and sloop
"Guilford," 1779. The galley "New Defence,"
belonging to Branford, received arms, ammu
nition, and stores from the state. The sloop
"Dolphin," a prize of the "Spy," was pur-
368 Navy of the American Revolution
By far the most important vessels in the
navy were the "Oliver Cromwell", 18, "De
fence", 14, and "Spy", 6. The principal
cruising ground of the Connecticut vessels
was in and near Long Island Sound. This
region was fairly alive with British craft of
all sorts. Long Island was a nest of Tories,
and New York was of course headquarters
for the British in America. Connecticut,
being convenient to both places, found
much service for her navy in piotecting her
coasts and in preventing illicit trade with
the enemy.
The cruises of the "Oliver Cromwell,"
"Defence," and "Spy" were by no means
confined to the waters near home. Several
times they visited the ports of Massachu
setts. In the summer of 1777 the "Oliver
Cromwell" cruised to the northward of the
Azores, in the path of the homeward bound
West Indiamen, where she captured and
sent into Massachusetts the brigantine
"Honor" and the "Weymouth" packet.
In the spring of 1777 the "Defence" and a
privateer met with success to the windward
of the Lesser Antilles in capturing British
chased in the fall of 1777, and sent to Phila
delphia for flour. The following captains were
the chief officers of the navy: Giles Hall,
Robert Niles, William Coit, Seth Harding,
Timothy Parker, and Samuel Smedley. Coit
had commanded the "Harrison" in Washing
ton s fleet, and Harding was given a commis
sion in the Continental navy.
Navy of the American Revolution 369
vessels bound for the West Indies. In the
following spring the "Oliver Cromwell" and
the "Defence" were cruising in the same re
gion, where they captured the letter of
marque "Admiral Keppel," eighteen six-
pounders, the most valuable prize taken
by the Connecticut navy. The "Admiral
Keppel" and her cargo sold in Boston for
22,321. In June and July, 1778, the "Oli
ver Cromwell" and the "Defence" refitted
in Charleston, South Carolina. Towards
the end of July the "Oliver Cromwell"
sailed for Nantes with a load of indigo,
which she expected to exchange for cloth
ing. Encountering a storm, this vessel was
dismasted, and forced to return to Connect
icut. Some thirty prizes, most of which
reached safe ports, were captured dur
ing the Revolution by the Connecticut
navy. 1
Upon the urgent and repeated solicita
tions of Washington, the three Connecticut
galleys were sent by the Governor and Coun
cil of Safety in the summer of 1776 to New
York to assist in the campaign on the Hud
son. The "Crane" and "Whiting," after
giving a good account of themselves in an
attack on tw r o British vessels near Tarry-
town, were lost to the enemy in the fall of
1776. The "Shark" probably met a similar
1. Revolutionary Files of Connecticut Ga
zette, Hartford Courant, and Connecticut
Journal.
3/o A ai v of the American Revolution
fate. 1 The "Spy," Captain Robert Niles,
was one of several vessels which were se
lected to carry to France the news of the rat
ification by Congress of the French treaties
of February, 1778. Captain Niles had the
honor of reaching France first with his im
portant message and packet. On his re
turn voyage Niles and his vessel were cap
tured. In March, 1779, the "Defence"
struck on a reef near Waterford, Connecti
cut, and sank. 2 On June 5, after a severe
fight to the southward of Sandy Hook, the
"Oliver Cromwell" surrendered to a super
ior force. 3 About July 1 the "Guilford," 8,
which had been recently added to the navy,
was taken by the enemy. 4 With the cap
ture of this vessel, the navy of Connecticut
came to an end.
The warfare of "armed boats" partici
pated in by Connecticut deserves notice.
During the Revolution much smuggling
\vas carried on between men in Connect
icut and the British and Tories on Long Isl
and and at New York. The feeding of the
British army at New York, the supplying
1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV,
481, 488; Records of State of Connecticut, I,
85, 201; Hartford Courant, August 12, 1776;
Connecticut in Revolution, 593-94.
2. Records of State of Connecticut, II, 372 ;
Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 642,
650. Hartford Courant, March 16, 1779.
3. Hartford Courant, June 15, 1779.
4. Records of State of Connecticut, II, 360.
Naz y of the American Revolution 371
of the Tories on Long Island, and the de
mand for manufactured articles in Connect
icut, naturally made good markets. Po
litical law was in rivalry with economic law,
and proved, in large part, powerless. In
1778, 1779, and 1780, the Connecticut Gen
eral Assembly passed a number of stringent
acts forbidding illicit commerce with the
enemy. Many patriot refugees had fled to
Connecticut from Long Island. Some of
these men would obtain a license to return
to their former homes for their property,
and under its cover would engage in smug
gling. To prevent this abuse, the General
Assembly in April, 1779, recalled the
power to issue licenses, which it had previ
ously vested in the selectmen of towns. 1
Since the trade had assumed alarming
proportions, the General Assembly, in May,
1780, authorized the Governor and Council
of Safety to commission not more than
twelve armed boats to suppress the trade. 2
In October, Colonel William Ledyard, who
was in command of the forts at New London
and Groton, was ordered to provide three
more whaleboats, besides the two which he
already had obtained, to be used in the Sound
against the smugglers ; and the Commandant
of the French navy at Newport was asked to
send two vessels to aid in the work. 3 These
L Records of State of Connecticut, II, 222.
2. State Archives, Acts of Connecticut,
May, 1780.
3. Ibid., October. 1780-
372 Navy of the American Revolution
efforts of the state were in large part unavail
ing. Some of the boats commissioned to
stop the trade became participants in it.
"On consideration of the Many Evils com
mitted by the armed Boats in this State
commissioned to cruise on their own acct.
for the pretended purpose of making cap
tures on the enemy and preventing illicit
Trade and Traders," the General Assembly
on January 23, 1781, revoked all the com
missions w r hich it had given to the armed
boats.
A more successful attempt to stamp out
the abuse was that made by Norwich, in
January, 1.782. Certain associators agreed
to hold no social or commercial intercourse
with those persons detected in evading the
laws. They provided boats which kept
watch at suspected places; smuggled goods,
wherever found, were seized and sold, and
the proceeds were devoted to charitable
purposes. 1
1. History of Norwich, F. M, Caulkins, 398.
CHAPTER XIII
THE NAVY OF PENNSYLVANIA
The two objects of Pennsylvania s naval
enterprises were the defence of Philadelphia
and the protection in Delaware river and
bay of the outward and inward bound trade
of the state. These two needs determined
the form and size of her armed vessels and
the character of their operations. Pennsyl
vania therefore adapted her fleet to shal
low waters. Only in a few instances did
her armed vessels pass beyond the Capes of
the Delaware into the Atlantic.
On July 5, 1775, the Pennsylvania Com
mittee of Safety, the first Revolutionary
executive of this state, visited "Red Bank/
situated a few miles below Philadelphia,
near the mouth of the Schuylkill, for the pur
pose of deciding on the character of the de
fences which were to be made at this point
on the river. On the 6th, having returned
to Philadelphia, the Committee reported
the results of its inspection; whereupon it
came to its first naval resolution, that
Robert White and Owen Biddle be a
committee for the construction of boats and
3/4 -Vary of the American Revolution
machines for the defence of the River. 1 On
July 8 it ordered John Wharton to immedi
ately build a "Boat or Calevat," 47 or 50
feet keel, 13 feet broad, and 4 1-2 feet deep.
By October, thirteen such galleys or armed
boats had been built, at a cost of about
550 each. They were armed chiefly with
18-pounders. 2 During the late summer and
the fall of 1775 the Committee of Safety at
tended to the numerous details of officering,
manning, arming, and provisioning these
galleys. It chose a captain and lieutenant
for each of them; and on October 23 it ap
pointed Thomas Read commodore of the
fleet. It organized a naval staff consisting
of a muster master, a pay master, a surgeon,
an assistant surgeon, a ship s husband, and
" a victualer. The distinguished scholar,
Dr. Benjamin Rush, was made surgeon.
The Committee of Safety prepared a form
of commission for officers, a list of rules and
regulations, general instructions for the
captains, and general instructions for the
commodore. 3
The rules and regulations of the Pennsyl-
1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X,
Minutes of Committee of Safety, July 4, 6, 8,
1775.
2. Pennsylvania Archives 2nd, I, 246; Wal
lace s William Bradford, 203.
3. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X,
Minutes of Committee of Safety, August 26,
September 1, October 2, 12, 16, 23, Novem
ber 6, 1775. See also the Minutes of the Com
mittee of Safety for each day of this period.
XiK-y of the American Revolution 375
vania navy were concerned with little else
than the establishing of a penal code. All
penal offenses were to be tried by a court-
martial, which, in capital cases, was to con
sist of fifteen naval officers ; and in all other
cases, of five officers, unless so many could
not be assembled, when it might consist of
three. A majority of the court was suffi
cient to convict, except in capital cases,
where two-thirds were necessary. In re
turning a verdict, the officers of lowest rank
voted first. Except in cases of mutiny, or of
cowardice in time of action, all sentences of
death needed the approval of the General </
Assembly, or, in its recess, of the Committee
of Safety. Besides the death penalty, a
court-martial could inflict no punishment
other than "degrading, cashiering, drum
ming out of the fleet, whipping, not exceed
ing thirty-nine lashes, fine, not exceeding
two months pay, and imprisonment, not
exceeding one month." All fines were to
go to the relief of those maimed and dis
abled in the service, or to the widows and
families of such as should be killed. These
rules, apparently, were not influenced by
those of the Continental navy prepared by
John Adams. 1
On November 7, 1775, the Committee of
Safety decided to build a ship for the serv
ice on the Delaware, which would mount
1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X, Min
utes of Committee of Safety, August 29, 1775.
376 Navy of the American Revolution
twenty 18-pounders; and it appointed six
of its members, among whom were Robert
Morris and John Nixon, a committee to
build and arm the vessel. This committee
estimated that 9,000 would be necessary
to construct the ship. Later, owing to the
unfitness of the season for shipbuilding,
it was authorized to purchase a vessel. 1 By
April, 1776, it had obtained and equipped
the ship "Montgomery," and Thomas
Read had been given command of it.
A number of small and unimportant
craft were gradually added to the navy.
On December 28, 1775, Captain John
Hazelwood was appointed commander
of ten fire-rafts. These rafts were thirty-
five feet long and thirteen feet wide, were
loaded with oil barrels, rosin casks, turpen
tine, brimstone, and various other inflam
mables, and were designed to float down
stream and set fire to the enemy s ships
through direct contact. 2 An inventory of
the navy, dated August 1, 1776, shows the
following vessels and men: the ship "Mont
gomery," 138 men; the floating battery
"Arnold," 82 men; thirteen galleys, 35 men
each; six guard boats, 12 men each; six
small vessels, including fire-ships, a total
of 27 men. The total number of officers,
1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X,
Minutes of Committee of Safety, November 7,
November 10, 1775.
2. Ibid., December 28, 1775; Pennsylvania
Archives, 2nd, I, 248, note.
Xary of the American Revolution 377
seamen, and marines was 768; the Pennsyl
vania land forces at this time amounted to
1,365 men. 1 In August, 1776, the schooner
"Delaware" and the brig Convention"
were added; and in the fall the "Putnam"
floating battery.
I have found no mention of the uniform
of the officers of the Pennsylvania navy.
The uniform of the Pennsylvania marines
was "a brown coat faced with green, letters
1. P. B. on the buttons, and a cocked hat."
In October, 1776, the flag for the naval ves
sels had not been provided. The following
memorandum, taken from the minutes of
the Pennsylvania Navy Board of May 29,
1777, shows that flags had then been pro
cured: "An Order on William Webb to
Elizabeth Ross, for fourteen pounds twelve
shillings and two pence, for Making Ships
Colours etc." 2
The Committee of Safety was assisted
and directed in its naval work by committees
of its own members, of which the principal
ones are as follows: "ship committee,"
1. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, V, 3-5. The
names of the thirteen galleys were as follows:
"Bull Dog," "Burke," "Camden," "Chat
ham," "Congress," "Dickinson," "Experi
ment," "Effingham," "Franklin," "Hancock,"
"Ranger," "Warren," and "Washington."
The "Delaware" and "Convention" were at
times referred to as galleys.
2. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, V, 46; 2nd,
I, Minutes of Pennsylvania Navy Board, May
29, 1777; 2nd, I, 251.
3/8 Xary of the American Revolution
"armed boat committee," "committee for
fitting out two of the armed boats/ "com
mittee for building two galleys for the Bay
Service/ and "committee for fitting out
four guard boats to cruise at Cape May."
The Committee of Safety was composed of
twenty-five members, any seven of whom
formed a quorum. Benjamin Franklin was
its first president. Robert Morris was for
a time its vice-president. In the absence
of Franklin, Morris or John Nixon often pre
sided. On July 23, 1776, the Pennsylvania
Convention appointed a Council of Safety
to succeed the Committee of Safety, a suc
cession which involved merely a change of
personnel and of name. From July 24,
1776, until March 4, 1777, when the Supreme
Executive Council, the executive under the
first state constitution, assumed control,
the administration of the Pennsylvania
navy was vested in the Council of Safety.
Much difficulty was experienced by the
several Pennsylvania executives in finding
suitable commodores for the fleet. The
office on October 23, 1775, first fell to Thom
as Read. On January 13, 1776, Thomas
Caldwell was made commodore; and on
March 6, 1776, Read was formally placed
second in command. Failing in health,
Caldwell, on May 25, resigned, and on June
15 the Committee of Safety appointed Sam
uel Davidson. This succession met with
serious and continued opposition on the
A l/i v of the American Revolution 379
part of the officers of the navy. They de
clared that the appointment of Davidson
violated the rule of promotion according to
seniority in service ; and they made vigorous
remonstrances, which received countenance
and support from men of influence in Phila
delphia. So serious was the clamor and in
subordination, that the Committee of Safety
was compelled to yield to the demands of a
resolution of the Provincial Conference of
Committees, and remove Davidson from the
command of all the vessels except the ship
Montgomery" and the "Arnold" floating
battery. The Committee, however, in an
"Address to the Inhabitants of Pennsyl
vania/ upheld the propriety and justice of
their appointment; and it declared that by
the support which the dissatisfied officers
had received "mutiny was justified and
abetted and disobedience triumphed over
Authority." 1
When the Council of Safety assumed con
trol of the navy on July 24, 1776, it found
the spirit of dissatisfaction and insubordi
nation so strong among the naval officers
that it removed Davidson from the navy;
at the same time, however, it declared
that the charges made against him
1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X,
Minutes of Committee of Safety, July 2, 1776;
Proceedings of Provincial Conference of Com
mittees of Pennsylvania, June 23, June 24,
1776.
380 A ai v of the American Revolution
were frivolous. 1 On September 2, 1776,
the Council of Safety gave Samuel Mifflin
an opportunity to decline the office of
commodore. Thomas Seymour was named
for the place on September 26, 1776.
Early in 1777 Captain John Hazelwood,
"Commander-in-Chief of the Fire Vessels,
Boats and Rafts belonging to the State,"
objected to being subject to the orders of
Commodore Seymour, who was an old man,
infirm, and incapacitated for his position.
On September 6, 1777, when Philadelphia
was threatened by the British, Seymour was
discharged, and Hazelwood was appointed
in his place. 2 Hazelwood was the sixth
commodore within less than two years.
The Committee of Safety and the Council
of Safety passed a number of resolutions fix
ing the naval pay. For a time the officers
on board the ship "Montgomery" and the
two floating batteries were generally paid
larger wages than those on board the galleys.
On February 22, 1777, the Council of Safety
adopted a new pay-table, which gave the
same salary to officers of the same rank, on
whatever vessel employed. The monthly
wages of the leading officers were as follows :
commodore, $75; captains, $48; first lieu-
1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X,
Minutes of Council of Safety, August 22, Aug
ust 27, 1776.
2. Ibid. , XI, Minutes of Supreme Executive
Council, September 6, 1777.
A at v of the American Revolution 381
tenants, $30; second lieutenants, $20; and
surgeons, $48. Seamen were paid $12 a
month. A bounty of $12 was now given to
recruits. 1 On June 25, 1777, the salary of
the commodore was raised to $125 a month. 2
On February 4, 1776, the Committee of
Safety gave captors two-thirds of the pro
ceeds of the prizes taken on the Delaware
river, and reserved the remaining one-third
for the maintenance of disabled sailors and
the widows and families of those who should
be killed. 3
Recognizing the navy s need of a perma
nent body of administrators, the Council of
Safety on February 13, 1777, appointed a
Navy Board of six members who were auth
orized to take under their care all the ves
sels of the navy. On February 19 four
additional members were added. 4 On
March 13, 1777, the Supreme Executive
Council, which on March 4 had become the
executive of the state, reconstituted the
naval board. It was now to consist of
eleven members, any three of whom formed
a quorum. It was given "full power and
authority to do and perform all Matters and
1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XI,
Minutes of Council of Safety, February 22, 1777.
2. Ibid., Minutes of Supreme Executive
Council, June 25, 1777.
3. Ibid. , X , Minutes of Committee of Safety
February 4, 1776.
4. Ibid., XI, Minutes of Council of Safety,
February 13, February 19, 1777.
382 A^az y of tlic American Revolution
things Relating to the Navy of this State,
subject nevertheless to the directions and
examinations of the Council, from time to
time, as we may judge expedient, and sav
ing to ourselves always the power of ap
pointing officers." William Bradford and
Joseph Blewer, who each served for a time
as chairman of the Board, were its most use
ful members. On the same day, March 13,
the Supreme Executive Council constituted
a Board of War. 1
The work of the Navy Board consisted of
a great variety of details relating to provis
ioning, arming, equipping, officering, and
manning the numerous craft of the navy.
Soon after entering into office it reported to
the Council that it found the armed boats
needing repairs and alterations, and that
owing to the better wages paid to the seamen
on board privateers there was a shameful
deficiency in the armed boats complement
of men. The Board recommended the lay
ing of an embargo to prevent the sailing of
private ships until the navy should be re-
1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XI,
Minutes of Supreme Executive Council,
March 13, 1777. The members of the Navy
Board as constituted by the Supreme Ex
ecutive Council were as follows: Andrew
Caldwell, Joseph Blewer, Joseph Marsh,
Emanuel Eyre, Robert Ritchie, Paul Cox,
Samuel Massey, William Bradford, Thomas
Fitzsimmons, Samuel Morris, jr., and Thomas
Barclay.
XiU v of the American Revolution 383
cruited. It found that additional officers
were needed. 1 The Council immediately or
dered the Board to appoint the requisite
number of warrant officers and to recom
mend proper commissioned officers.
During 1777 the naval business of Penn
sylvania was large and complicated. A
list of stores issued to the navy for one
month during the year contains the names
of fifty-one vessels. Many of these are minor
and unimportant craft, such as half-gal
leys, fire-ships, and accommodation sloops.
A return of the Naval Department on Feb
ruary 1, 1777, shows 71 commissioned offic
ers, 2 staff officers, 123 non-commissioned
officers, and 513 privates; total officers and
men in the navy, 709. Many men who
enlisted in the navy had little or no experi
ence at sea. The amount of the pay rolls for
May, 1777, was 6,325. 2
The salient event in the history of the
Pennsylvania navy was the campaign on
the Delaware river which followed the occu
pation of Philadelphia by the British in
September, 1777. Before this time the
navy had rendered miscellaneous services
on the Delaware river and bay, which had
been useful though not at all brilliant. Now
1. Captains Nicholas Biddle, Thomas Read
and Charles Alexander, and Lieutenant James
Josiah resigned from the Pennsylvania navy
to enter the Continental navy.
2. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, I, 416-24.
384 Navy of the American Revolution
and then some of the vessels were ordered
down the river to protect incoming and out
going merchantmen, or to drive back the
venturesome craft of the enemy. On May
8, 1776, the galleys had a spirited engage
ment with the " Roebuck, " 44, and the " Liv
erpool/ 28, in the Delaware river near the
mouth of Christiana Creek. Little injury
was done on either side. The British ves
sels returned to the Delaware Capes, and the
Americans returned to their station at Mud
Island, which was generally the headquar
ters for the state fleet.
The reader is familiar with the military
movements of Howe during the summer and
fall of 1777; his irretrievable blunder in sail
ing from New York for Philadelphia, instead
of cooperating with Burgoyne in the cam
paign on the Hudson; his landing with an
army at the head of Elk in Maryland late in
August; his march to Philadelphia; and
after fighting the battle of Brandywine, his
entry into that city late in September. Upon
occupying Philadelphia the British were
forced to open a communication with the
sea. This was for the time being prevented
by the American defences at Mud Island
and Red Bank just below the mouth of the
Schuylkill. Here were situated Forts Mer
cer and Miffh n; and here were stationed the
vessels of the Pennsylvania and Continental
navy under the command of Commodore
Hazelwood. During October and Novem-
Navy of the American Revolution 385
ber, 1777, the Pennsylvania navy did its
best fighting and rendered its most valuable
services. At this time the Pennsylvania
Navy Board made its headquarters near the
fleet on board the sloop " Speedwell."
On October 22 and 23, when the British
fleet below the American defences on the
Delaware attempted to pass them, Commo
dore Hazelwood with two floating batteries
and twelve galleys forced them to retire, and
succeeded in burning two of their vessels,
the "Augusta/ 64, and "Merlin," 18, which
ran aground. Congress voted Hazelwood
an elegant sword in recognition of his merit.
On the fall of Forts Mifflin and Mercer the
American fleet was left without support. At
a council of war held on board the sloop
" Speedwell " on November 19, it was decid
ed to pass Philadelphia with the fleet in the
night and gain a point of safety to the north
ward of the city. Thirteen galleys, twelve
armed boats, the brig "Convention," and a
number of minor craft passed the city with
out receiving a shot. Before the ship
"Montgomery," schooner " Delaware," float
ing batteries "Arnold" and "Putnam,"
and several Continental vessels could get
under sail, the wind died away; and thus
becalmed it was found necessary to set fire to
them in order to prevent their capture. 1
1. Wallace s William Bradford, 252-53,
366-67; Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, VI, 21,
47-50.
386 Navy of the American Revolution
On October 11, 1777, Commodore Hazel-
wood reported a capture of fifty-eight pris
oners. About seventy men were killed or
wounded in the different actions of the navy
in the fall of 1777. Hazelwood wrote in
October, 1777, that he had lost two hundred
and fifty men through desertion owing to
their cowardice and disaffection; and in
February, 1778, that a great many men had
run away since he had been in winter quar
ters. 1
Several cases of the desertion of commis
sioned officers which took place during the
campaign on the Delaware, were tried by
courts-martial during the summer of 1778.
First Lieutenant Samuel Lyon of the " Dick
inson " galley was charged with deserting his
vessel and going over to the enemy with seven
men. Lyon pleaded guilty to the charge,
and a court of fifteen fellow officers sen
tenced him "to suffer Death by being Shott."
On September 1 Lyon, together with Samuel
Ford, a lieutenant lately attached to the
"Effingham" galley who also had been con
victed of desertion, were executed on one
of the guard boats in the Delaware. The
first conviction for a capital crime in the
Pennsylvania navy is said to have been
made in the case of the boatswain of the
"Montgomery/ who was sentenced to death
for desertion on June 25, 1778. On the trial
1. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, V, 063,721;
VI, 235; VII, 165.
Navy of the American Revolution 387
of John Lawrence for desertion, a gunner on
board the " Dickinson" galley, the accused
acknowledged that he "took the Oath of
Allegiance to the King of Great Britain, and
received three and a half Guineas for his
share of the Boat and Arms/ which he as
sisted in carrying to the enemy. The court
sentenced him to "suffer Death by being
hung with a Rope around his Neck till he is
Dead, Dead, Dead." Lawrence together
with the lieutenant of the galley "Ranger"
were reprieved on September 1, 1778. 1 These
desertions from the Pennsylvania navy are
but one instance of many which prove that
it was without esprit de corps, and that its
officers and men were often raw, undisci
plined, and insubordinate. Used to a free
and easy life, they did not take kindly to the
routine and discipline of the naval service.
During the winter of 1777-1 778 when the
British were in Philadelphia, the navy and
Navy Board were some miles up the Dela
ware. A few members of the Board con
tinued to hold its sessions at Bordentown,
Trenton, or other convenient points. The
navy was disorganized at this time, and the
work of the Board was naturally dull and
disheartening. In January, 1778, William
Bradford, its chairman, wrote from Trenton
to President Wharton of the Supreme Ex
ecutive Council: "I am left here alone, none
1. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, I, 425-31.
388 A ary of the American Revolution
of the Board being with me. I am also
tired of being; here, had much rather be in
action with the Militia." 1
In April, 1778, the Navy Board, acting
reluctantly on Washington s advice who
feared that the British would make a raid
and capture the fleet, dismantled and sank
all or nearly all of the state craft in the
Delaware river. 2 On May 8 the British
made their expected foray on the shipping
to the northward of Philadelphia, and de
stroyed some forty-five vessels, among which
were the two Continental frigates, " Effing-
ham" and " Washington," and probably a
few of the minor craft belonging to the Penn
sylvania navy. 3
As soon as the British received intelligence
of the sailing of a French fleet under D Est-
aing for America, they prepared to evacuate
Philadelphia. In anticipation of this event
Hazel wood was in June raising and refitting
his fleet, and wishing that he had it in his
"power to give the enemy a scouring before
they got out of the river." On July 19 he
reported his vessels afloat and ready for use.
Already the Supreme Executive Council had
ordered the navy to be put into commission,
and the brig " Convention" to make a cruise
down the Bay.
The Pennsylvania navy had cost the state
1 Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, VI, 204.
2. Ibid., 332-33.
3. Almon s Remembrancer, 1778, 148-50.
Nary of the American Revolution 389
at the rate of 100,000 a year. 1 It had been
serviceable in defending the Delaware, but
it had in the end failed to hold it. Always
hampered by a lack of seamen, of naval sup
plies, and of an armed force comparable to
that of the enemy, the Navy Board found
the greatest difficulty in enforcing the orders
of the Council. It was naturally blamed
for a part of the inactivity and the misfor
tunes of the fleet. Since the British had
abandoned Philadelphia, and a strong
French fleet was in American waters, the
need for a naval defence of the Delaware
seemed more remote than it did in the first
years of the Revolution. These considera
tions moved the Supreme Executive Coun
cil on August 14, 1778, to recommend to the
General Assembly the dismissal of the Navy
Board, and all the officers and men of the
navy, except those that were necessary to man
two or three galleys, two or three guard boats,
and the brig "Convention." The General
Assembly at once agreed to the recommend
ation. Finally, on Friday, December 11,
the following vessels were sold at the "Cof
fee House" in Philadelphia: "Ten galleys,
Nine armed Boats, the Brig Convention/
the sloops Speedwell/ Sally/ Industry/
and Black Duck; and the schooner
Lvdia. " 2
1. Scharf and Westcott, History of Phila
delphia, I, 300.
2. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XI,
390 lYaz v of the American Revolution
In March, 1779, there remained in the
navy six small craft, namely, the galleys
" Franklin," " Hancock," and "Chatham,"
and the armed boats, "Lion," "Fame" and
"Viper;" and there were still in commission
five captains, six lieutenants, and one hun
dred and eighteen men. 1 This little fleet
was quite insufficient to protect the com
merce of the state. In March, 1779, the
Supreme Executive Council, in response to
a petition from the merchants of Philadelphia
praying for the protection of their trade,
purchased the ship "General Greene," at a
cost of 53,000; and placed it in charge of
two agents, who were to fit it for sea, and re
ceive and dispose of its prizes. Part of the
money which was used in fitting the "Gen
eral Greene," 14, was raised by private sub
scription. During the summer and fall of
1779 the new ship, under the command of
Captain James Montgomery, cruised along
the Atlantic coast between Sandy Hook and
the Virginia Capes either alone, in company
with the Continental frigates, "Boston,"
"Deane," and Confederacy," or in company
with the well-known Philadelphia privateer,
Minutes of Supreme Executive Council, Au
gust 14, August 16, December 9, 1778. The
capture of the sloop "Active" by the "Con
vention" in the fall of 1778, gave rise to the
most celebrated prize case of the Revolution.
Jameson, Essays in Constitutional History
of United States, 17-21.
1. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, I, 255.
Naz v of tlic American Revolution 391
"Holker." The " General Greene" was
quite fortunate, as she sent into Philadel
phia six prizes. In the spring before a full
complement of men could be enlisted, Presi
dent Reed of the Supreme Executive Coun
cil was compelled to lay an embargo on
privateers. Her crew were a mutinous rab
ble. In June Captain Montgomery wrote
that he had arrived at New Castle with a
"Great number of Prisoners on board and a
Great Part of my own Crew Such Villons
that they would be glad of an opportunity
to take the Ship from me. Som of the Ring
leaders I have sent up in Irons." On Oc
tober 27 the Council ordered the "General
Greene" to be sold, as this was more econ
omical than laying her up for the winter.
Her sale, much below her real value, arous
ed suspicions of collusion and corruption. 1
Naval legislation in Pennsylvania was not
extensive. In 1775, 1776, and 1777 almost
all naval rules and provisions were estab
lished by executive decrees. Before the
middle of January, 1776, the Committee of
Safety had established courts for the trying
of prize cases. 2 It permitted appeals from
the state prize courts to Congress. On Sep
tember 9, 1778, however, the General As-
1. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, VII, 320,
47G; Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XI,
724, 750; XII, 150; Scharf and Westcott, His
tory of Philadelphia, I, 403.
2. J. F. Jameson, Essays in Constitutional
History of United States, 9.
39 2 A ary of the American Revolution
sembly established a Court of Admiralty. A
law passed in 1780 provided that a judge of
admiralty should be appointed and com
missioned for seven years by the Supreme
Executive Council. 1 On September 17,
1777, an act was passed for the relief of of
ficers, seamen and marines, who, being in
the service of the United States and resi
dents of Pennsylvania, should be disabled
from earning a livelihood. In all probability
this was passed in accordance with the rec
ommendations of the Continental Congress
of August 26, 1776. On March 1, 1780, the
General Assembly granted officers, seamen,
and marines in the Pennsylvania navy, who
were in actual service on March 13, 1779,
and who should continue therein until the
end of the war, half-pay for life. 2
It is believed that Pennsylvania did not
establish state privateering. Her execu
tives in commissioning privateers in all
probability followed the regulations of Con
gress. The Pennsylvania Archives contain
a list of 448 privateering commissions issued
for the years from 1776 to 1782. Most of the
privateers were small vessels, mounting six
to twelve cannon, and carrying twenty-five
to fifty men. Out of the 448 commissions,
only 14 commissions were for vessels mount
ing twenty or more guns. In 1779 Penn-
1. Laws of Pennsylvania, September 9,
1778, March 8, 1780.
2. Ibid., September 17, 1777; March 1,
1780.
Nary of the American Revolution 393
sylvania issued commissions for one hun
dred different vessels. 1
The spring of 1782 was marked by a re
newal in naval enterprise similar to that in
the spring of 1779. Armed ships, refugee
boats, and picaropli privateers fitted out at> / ? "
New York, had been greatly distressing the
shipping and trade of Philadelphia. Within
eight months the British frigate "Medea"
had taken nine Philadelphia privateers; the
whale-boat "Trimmer" from New York had
been very destructive to the shipping on the
Delaware; and the British naval ship "Gen
eral Monk," formerly the American priva
teer "Washington," was inflicting serious
losses on Pennsylvania s commerce. 2 The
merchants and traders of Philadelphia now
appealed by petition to the General Assem
bly for protection. Accordingly, on April
9, that body appointed three commissioners
to procure and equip a naval armament for
the defence of Delaware river and bay. The
commissioners were authorized to borrow
50,000, which was to be repaid from certain
old tonnage and impost duties, and from a
new impost on certain specified articles.
The act also provided for a distribution of
the proceeds of prizes. Thie act is signifi
cant in its being the first instance where the
General Assembly authorized a naval in
crease and appointed a committee to take
1. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, I, 388-402.
2. Scharf and Westcott, History of Phila
delphia, I, 421-22.
394 A r a y of the American Revolution
charge of naval vessels. It met with con
siderable disfavor. The Supreme Executive
Council informed the General Assembly that
it considered the appointment of commis
sioners and the conferring upon them of full
administrative powers unconstitutional and
an encroachment of the legislative on the
administrative body. 1
Anticipating the act of the legislature, the
merchants of Philadelphia had fitted out
the ship "Hyder Ally," 18, and had ap
pointed Lieutenant Joshua Barney of the
Continental navy to command her. Pro
ceeding down the Bay, Barney on April 8
made his memorable capture of the " Gen
eral Monk/ 18, Captain Josias Rogers. Both
the " Hyder Ally" and the "General Monk"
were now taken into the service of the state.
The "General Monk/ which was renamed
the "Washington/ was in May,* 1782,
loaned to Robert Morris, the Continental
Agent of Marine, who sent her on a commer
cial errand to the Westlndies. On the return
of the "Washington." Morris purchased
hrr for the service of Congress. The " Hyder
All} 7 " under different commanders cruised
for the rest of the year with little suc
cess. In December the commissioners ob-
1. Laws of Pennsylvania, April 9, April 15,
1782; Mary Barney, Memoirs of Commodore
Barney, 303-04. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st,
IX, 531-32. The three Commissioners were
John Patton, Francis Gurney, and William
Allibone,.
Nary of the American Revolution 395
tained permission from the Supreme Exec
utive Council to sell her, and build a vessel
of more suitable construction for the defence
of the Delaware, for which purpose they
were already equipping an armed schooner.
When the " Hyder Ally " was offered for sale,
the commissioners bid her in for the state,
as the bidders refused to give her full value. 1
The establishment of officers and seamen
on board the "Hyder Ally" and the "Wash
ington" was a new one. On February 13,
17811 the officers and seamen of the first
^establishment were all discharged, except
Captain Boys and certain disabled seamen;
and on December 20 Boys was dismissed,
since the service in which he was engaged was
at an end. 2 When peace was declared in
the spring of 1783, a few men were prob
ably in naval employ under the new estab
lishment. That the state still owned a few
small vessels is certain. On April 10, 1783,
the Supreme Executive Council endorsed a
letter from the commissioners saying "that
as no doubt appears to remain that Hostili
ties are ceased, we conceive it our Duty to
request your permission to dispose of the
Armed vessels under our direction belonging
to the State, in order to enable us to close
our accounts with the Public." 3
1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XIII,
Minutes of Supreme Executive Council, De
cember 6, 1782.
2. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, I, 256.
3. Ibid., 1st, X. 26.
CHAPTER XIV
THE NAVY OF VIRGINIA
In July, 1775, Virginia began to raise and
officer an army of more than one thousand
men. By fall Lord Dunmore, the Provin
cial Governor of Virginia, who in June had
retreated to His Majesty s ship "Fowey" at
Yorktown, had collected a small flotilla,
and had begun a series of desultory attacks
upon the river banks of Virginia. On Octo
ber 25 he was repulsed at Hampton ; on De
cember 9 he was beaten by the Virginia pa
triots at Great Ridge; and on January 1 he
burned Norfolk. His movements excited
so much alarm that the leading patriot fam
ilies on the James, York, Rappahannock,
and Potomac rivers retreated inland for
safety. In order to prevent the depreda
tions of Lord Dunmore, and to provide ef
fectually for the general defence of the state,
the Virginia Provincial Convention in De
cember authorized the Committee of Safety
of the state "to provide from time to time
such and so many armed vessels as they
may judge necessary for the protection of
the several rivers in this colony, in the best
A tfi y of the American Revolution 397
manner the circumstances of the country
will admit/ The Committee of Safety was
further directed to raise a sufficient number
of officers, sailors, and marines; and settle
their pay, which was not to exceed certain
specified rates. The maximum wage
of "the chief commander of the W 7 hole as
commodore" was fixed at fifteen shillings a
day. 1
Between December, 1775, and July, 1776,
the Committee of Safety procured and es
tablished a small navy. On April 1 it fixed
the naval pay, generally at the maximum
rates permitted. Captains in the navy
were to receive a daily wage of 8s. ; captains
of marines, 6s.; midshipmen, 3s.; marines,
Is., 6d. The Committee resolved that two
years ought to be a maximum period of serv
ice. It appointed a number of the most
prominent officers in the Virginia navy,
among whom were Captains James Barron,
Richard Barron, Richard Taylor, Thomas
Lilly, and Edward Travis. It fixed the rel
ative rank between army and navy officers.
It purchased the boats "Liberty" and "Pa
triot," the brigs "Liberty" and "Adven
ture," and the schooner "Adventure." It
contracted for the construction of a num
ber of galleys on the different rivers of the
state. 2
1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 83.
2. Calendar of Virginia State Papers, VIII,
75-240, Journal of Committee of Safety of
398 Navy of the American Revolution
George Mason and John Dalton were ap
pointed a committee to build two row-gal
leys, and buy three cutters for the defence of
the Potomac. In April, 1776, Mason wrote
that the galleys were well under way, and
that three small vessels had been purchased,
of which the largest was a fine stout craft of
about 110 tons burden, mounting fourteen
8 s and 4 s, carrying ninety-six men, and
named the "American Congress. " A com
pany of marines for this vessel, he said,
were being exercised in the use of the great
guns. 1 The Committee of Safety chose a
"Lieutenant of Marines in the Potomac river
Department."
The Provincial Convention of Virginia,
which met at Williamsburg on May 6, 1776,
being convinced that the naval prepara
tions would be conducted more expedi-
tiously and successfully if proper persons
were appointed to superintend and di
rect the same, chose a Board of Naval Com
missioners, consisting of five persons. 2 The
Virginia, February 7 to July 5, 1776. Vir
ginia had a class of vessels which she referred
to as "armed boats." They were smart craft,
and appear to have been schooner-rigged.
1. Miss Rowland s George Mason, I, 214,
218.
2. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 149-51.
The Provincial Convention which met May
0, 1776, adopted a Constitution which provided
for a Legislature of two houses, and an Execu
tive consisting of a Governor and a Privy
Council of eight members.
Navy of the American Revolution 399
Board was authorized to appoint .a clerk
and assistants, and to elect from their mem
bership a First Commissioner of the Navy
the title of a well-known officer in the Eng
lish naval service. No member of the
Board could sit in the legislature or hold a
military office. Each Commissioner was to
receive twenty shillings a day, when em
ployed. On the depreciation of the cur
rency this was doubled. 1 A majority of the
Board constituted a quorum. Thomas
Whiting served as First Commissioner of
the Board throughout its existence.
In general, the business of the Navy
Board was "to superintend and direct all
matters and things to the navy relating."
It had charge of the building, purchase, fit
ting, arming, provisioning, and repairing of
all armed vessels and transports. It had
charge of the shipyards and the public rope-
walk. In case of vacancies in the navy or
marines it recommended officers to the Gov
ernor and Council. It could suspend an of
ficer for neglect of duty or for misbehavior.
It was to keep itself informed on the state
of the navy through reports from the na
val officers. It was authorized to draw
warrants on the treasury for money ex
pended in the naval department, and to
audit the naval accounts.
The Navy Board had charge of naval af-
1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 521-22
Octobe: session of General Assembly in 1778
400 A az v of the American Revolution
fairs in Virginia for three years, from the
summer of 1776 until the summer of 1779.
During 1776 and 1777 vessels were built on
the Eastern Shore of Virginia, on the Po
tomac, Rappahannock, Mattapony, Chick-
ahominy, and James rivers, and at Ports
mouth, Gosport, and South Quay. After
1777 vessels were chiefly built at the Chick-
ahominy and Gosport shipyards. No other
state owned so much land, property, and
manufactories, devoted to naval purposes,
as Virginia. In April, 1777, the Navy
Board purchased 115 acres of land, for 595,
on the Chickahominy, twelve miles from its
confluence with the James. 1 On this site
was located the Chickahominy shipyard.
Virginia s ships found here a safer retreat
than at Gosport, which lay convenient for
the enemy s ships. It is said that before
the Revolution the British had established
a marine yard at Gosport, and named it for
Gosport, England, where many supplies for
the Royal Navy were manufactured. In
some way Virginia came into possession of
the shipyard at this place. 2 Two ships were
built for the defence of Ocracoke Inlet, the
chief entrance to Albemarle Sound, at
South Quay, on the Blackwater, a few miles
north of the North Carolina line.
1. Southern Literary Messenger, 1857, 14.
The references to this magazine refer to a series
of valuable articles entitled "The Virginia
Navy of the Revolution."
2. E. P. Lull, History of U. S. Navy Yard,
Navy of the American Revolution 401
At Warwick, on the James, a few miles
below Richmond, the state built and op
erated a rope-walk. The state owned a
manufactory of sail-duck and a foundry.
In July, 1776, four naval magazines \vere
established, one each for the James, York,
Rappahannock, and Potomac rivers. For
each magazine one or two agents were ap
pointed to collect and issue provisions,
ships supplies, and naval stores. 1 For the
location of the magazine on the Potomac
the General Assembly authorized the Navy
Board to purchase an acre of land at the
head of "Potomack Creek/ 2 In January,
1777, the Navy Board appointed James
Maxwell, Naval Agent, to superintend the
shipyards, and the building, rigging, equip
ping, and repairing of the naval vessels. Ke
was to follow the instructions of the Board,
and keep it informed on the state of the
navy. 3 Maxwell s annual salary was 300,
payable quarterly. He lived at the Chick-
ahominy shipyard.
Virginia had a naval staff consisting of
pay masters, muster masters, surgeons, and
chaplains. The captains and recruiting of-
at Gosport, Virginia, 8-11; Hening,
of Virginia, XI, 407.
1. Journals of Virginia Navy Board, Vir
ginia State Archives, June 25, June 26, 1776.
2. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 235-
36.
3. Journals of Virginia Navy Board, Janu
ary 7, 1777.
Statutes
402 Nai v of the American Revolution
ficers enlisted seamen. Their task was ren
dered difficult, not so much because of
the superior attractions of privateering, as
in New England, as because of the small
number of seamen resident in the state.
The first commodore of the Virginia navy
was John Henry Boucher. He was serving
as lieutenant in the Maryland navy, when,
in March, 1776, Virginia called him to the
command of her Potomac fleet, and soon
promoted him to the head of her navy. 1 He
served as commodore for only a few months,
resigning in November, 1776. Walter
Brooke was commodore from April, 1777,
until September, 1778. Brooke s successor,
James Barron, was not appointed until
July, 1780; he served until the end of the
war. The commodore of the navy made
his headquarters regularly at or about
Hampton, and superintended the armed
vessels in that part of the state. 2
In Virginia, as in the other states and in
the Continental Congress, naval enthusiasm
and interest was at its height in 1776. In
the fall the Navy Board contracted for the
building of twenty-four small transports. 3
The General Assembly in its October ses
sion authorized the Navy Board to con-
T Maryland Archives, XI, 293-94.
2. Journals of Virginia Navy Board; State
Navy Papers, I ; Southern Literary Messenger,
1857, 3.
3. Journal of Virginia Navy Board, Sep
tember, October, 1776.
Nai y of the American Revolution 403
struct two frigates of thirty- two guns each,
and four large galleys, adapted "for river
or sea service." For manning these galleys
and those already building, the Navy Board
was empowered to raise thirteen hundred
men, exclusive of officers, to serve three
years from March 3, 1777. It was to rec
ommend proper officers to the Governor and
Council. Having been commissioned by
the Governor, the officers were to enlist the
crews for their respective galleys. Since to
secure a sufficient number of experienced
seamen would be impossible, it was provided
that each crew should consist of three classes
of men: able seamen, at a daily wage of 3s. ;
ordinary seamen, at 2s. ; and common lands
men, at Is., 6d. As the men in the second
and third classes became proficient, they
were to be promoted. Every recruit was
given a bounty of $20. *
The Provincial Convention, in its Decem
ber session in 1775, erected a Court of Ad
miralty, consisting of three judges, to en
force the Continental Association against
trading with England. In its May session
in 1776, it gave this court jurisdiction over
all captures of the enemy s vessels. The
General Assembly, at its October session in
1776, superseded all previous admiralty legis-
1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 196-97.
In August, 1776, the Navy Board drew up a
list of naval rules which were endorsed by the
Governor and Council. Journals of Virginia
Navy Board, August 2, 1776.
404 A az 3 f of the American Revolution
lation by an "Act for Establishing a Court
of Admiralty." Such court was to consist
of three judges, elected by joint ballot of
the two houses of the General Assembly.
The judges were to hold their offices "for so
long time as they shall demean themselves
well therein." The court, which was to be
held at some place to be fixed by the Gen
eral Assembly, was to have cognizance of
"all causes heretofore of admiralty juris
diction in this country." Its proceedings
and decisions were to be governed by the
regulations of the Continental Congress, the
acts of the General Assembly of Virginia, the
English statutes prior to the fourth year of
the reign of James, and by the laws of Oleron
and the Rhodian and Imperial laws, so far
as they have been heretofore observed in
the English courts of admiralty. In cases
which related to captures from a public
enemy with whom the United States should
be at war, and in which a conflict should
arise between the regulations of Congress
and the acts of the General Assembly, the
regulations of Congress should take prece
dence; in all other cases of conflict, the acts
of Virginia were to prevail. This provision
is of particular interest. It is one of the
first instances in which a state recognized
the superiority of federal law when in con
flict with state law. Virginia was liberal
in granting appeals to Congress, as she per-
Naz v of the American Revolution 405
mitted them in all cases of the capture of
the enemy s vessels. 1
The Admiralty Court of Virginia tried few
prize cases. Governor Thomas Jefferson
in writing to the President of Congress in
June, 1779, no doubt understates the truth
when he says that "a British prize would
be a more rare phenomenon here than a
comet, because one has been seen, but the
other never was/ His state, he said, had
long suffered from a lack of blank letters of
marque, and he wished fifty to be sent to
him. 2 Virginia did not establish state pri
vateering, but followed the regulations of
Congress on the subject. Because of the
lack of seamen and the continual presence
of the enemy s vessels at the mouths of the
Virginia rivers, the privateering interest
was not important in this state.
The Navy Board superintended both the
trading and armed vessels of the state un
til April, 1777, when the trading vessels
were placed in charge of William Aylett. 3
Writers on the Virginia navy have not, as a
rule, distinguished one class of vessels from
the other, nor is it always easy to do so.
During 1776 seven vessels were employed
1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 103,
131-32, 202-06.
2. Ford, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, II,
241-43.
3. Journals of Virginia Navy Board, April
8, 1777.
406 Navy of the American Revolution
chiefly in commerce. 1 In the fall, most of
them were ordered to the West Indies with
cargoes of flour and tobacco; one, the brig
"Adventure," was directed to proceed to
Dunkirk, France. The armed fleet for 1776
consisted of sixteen small craft adapted
chiefly for service in the rivers of Virginia
and in Chesapeake Bay. 2 In 1777 the gal
leys "Accomac" and "Diligence" were built
and stationed on the Eastern Shore; and the
ships "Caswell" and "Washington" were
built at South Quay on the Blackwater, for
the defence of Ocracoke Inlet, which Vir
ginia was undertaking jointly with North
Carolina. Besides these four vessels, two
brigs, one armed boat, and the ships "Glou
cester," "Protector," "Dragon," and "Tar
tar," were this year added to the navy. In
1778 an armed boat and the ships "Tem-
1. These vessels were the brig "Adven
ture:" the schooners "Hornet," "Peace and
Plenty," "Revenge," and "Speedwell;" the
sloop "Agatha;" and the armed boat "Molly."
The lists of vessels here given were compiled
from the Virginia naval archives.
2. These vessels were the galleys "Henry,"
"Hero," "Lewis," "Manly," "Norfolk Re
venge," "Page," and "Safeguard;" the brigs
"Liberty," "Mosquito," "Northampton," and
"Raleigh;" the schooners "Liberty" and "Ad
venture;" the sloop "Scorpion;" and the armed
boats Liberty and " Patriot. The schooner
"Liberty" was taken into the trading fleet as
the Hornet. " It is believed that this list does
not contain the vessels in Mason s Potomac
fleet.
Nai v of the American Revolution 407
pest" and "Thetis" were built; and in 1779
two armed boats, the brig "Jefferson" and
the ship "Virginia," were added. 1
This fleet is formidable only in its enumer
ation. It was poorly armed, incompletely
manned, and in almost every respect ill
fitted for service. But few of its vessels
went beyond the Chesapeake Bay. It
showed most activity during 1776 and the
spring of 1777. From 1775 until 1779 fif
teen small prizes were captured. In May,
1776, Captain Taylor seized four small mer
chantmen; in June, one of the Barrens
brought up to Jamestown the transport
"Oxford," with 220 Highlanders on board;
in the spring of 1777 the "Mosquito," Cap
tain Harris, carried into St. Pierre the ship
"Noble," valued at 75,000 livres; and a few
months earlier the brig "Liberty" captured
the ship "Jane," whose cargo of West India
goods was valued at 6,000. These were
the most fortunate captures made by the
Virginia navy. 2
1 The names of the vessels not mentioned
in the text, which were added during 1777,
1778, and 1779 were the brigs "Greyhound 5
and "Hampton" and the armed boats ""Nichol
son," "Experiment," "Fly," and "Dolphin."
The names of several other vessels which were
probably used in trade, occur during this peri
od. Some of the ships are at times referred
to as galleys.
2. Files of Virginia Gazette; Journals of
Virginia Convention, May 8, 1776; Virginia
408 A a-rv of the American Revolution
Virginia s naval craft met with the usual
misfortunes. During the first half of 1777
His Majesty s ship " Ariadne" captured the
"Mosquito." About the same time the
frigate "Phoenix" took the "Raleigh." The
British made two raids into Virginia which
were destructive both to the shipping of the
state and to private individuals. The first
was ordered by Clinton in the spring of
1779; the troops were under the command
of Matthews and Collier. At the Gosport
shipyard they destroyed five uncompleted
vessels, three of which were frigates, besides
a large quantity of masts, yards, timber,
plank, iron, and other ships stores. The
shipyards on the Nansemond were looted;
and twenty-two vessels with a considerable
quantity of powder were taken or destroyed
on the "South Branch of the navy." Suf
folk was burned, and upwards of two thou
sand barrels of Continental pork and fifteen
hundred barrels of flour were destroyed. In
all one hundred and thirty vessels were
burned. 1 The raid of Arnold and Phillips
will be considered later.
The General Assembly at its May session
in 1779 discontinued the Navy Board, and
Historical Register I, 77; Calendar of Virginia
State Papers, III, 365.
1. Almon s Remembrancer, 1779, 289-95,
account given by British officers; Records of
State of North Carolina, XIV, 85-86, 94-95.
Some of the vessels destroyed at Gosport prob
ably belonged to Congress.
Nai v of t/ic American Revolution 409
vested its strictly naval duties with the
newly created Board of War, consisting of
five members. The Board of War was em
powered to appoint a Naval Commissioner.
A Board of Trade was now given charge of
the trading vessels of the state, and of the
state manufactories of military supplies. 1
The General Assembly in its May session,
1780, "for the purpose of introducing oecon-
omy into all the various departments of
government, and for conducting the publick
business with the greatest expedition/ abol
ished the Boards of War and Trade, and
authorized the Governor to appoint a Com
missioner of War, a Commercial Agent, and
coordinate with these two, a Commissioner
of the Navy. This act is the outgrowth of
the same movement for economy and effi
ciency in administration, which resulted in
the establishment in January and Febru
ary, 1781, of the single-headed executive
departments of the Continental Congress.
The salary of the Commissioner of the Navy
was fixed at thirty thousand pounds of to
bacco a year, and that of his clerk at ten
thousand pounds. 2 The Commissioner was
to be under the "controul and direction of
the governour and council." Governor
Jefferson appointed James Maxwell, the
naval agent under the Navy Board, Com
missioner of the Navy.
1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, X, 15-
18, 123.
2. Ibid., 278, 291-92.
4io Navy of the American Revolution
The General Assembly in the May session
of 1779, as an inducement to enlistment,
granted seamen and marines additional
bounties and pensions. Recruits entering
for the rest of the war were now to receive
$750 and one hundred acres of land. They
were to be furnished upon enlistment, and
once a year thereafterwards, with a com
plete suit of clothes. Naval officers were en
titled to a "grant of the like quantity of
lands as is allowed to officers of the same
rank in the Virginia regiments on continen
tal establishment." Disabled sailors and
the widows of the slain were entitled to im
mediate relief, and an annual pension. At
the October session of this year, moved by
the need for money and the impossibility
of fitting out the whole fleet, the General
Assembly ordered the governor to sell nine
of the armed vessels, and to equip and man
the remaining six with all diligence. For
some reason the governor did not carry out
the order. There was probably little mar
ket for the vessels. 1
The years 1780 and 1781 were marked by
a renewed naval activity in Virginia. It
is recalled that the theater of war had now
shifted to the Southern states. Savannah
was in the hands of the enemy. Charleston
surrendered in May, 1780. By the fall of that
year the lowlands of the states to the south
of Virginia were generally in the possession
~T Hening, IX, 537; X, 23-24, 217.
Xavy of the American Revolution 411
of the British. Apparently Virginia would
be the next to feel the rough hand of the
conquering enemy. British privateers and
naval craft lay off the mouths of the Vir
ginia rivers, and captured all her vessels that
ventured towards the Bay or the sea. Early
in 1780 it was apprehended that the enemy
meditated an invasion of the coasts of the
state.
When the General Assembly came to
gether in May, 1780, it at once took meas
ures for the protection of the coasts. It
passed "an act for putting the eastern fron
tier of this commonwealth into a posture
of defence." This act, after providing for
calling out the militia in the seaport coun
ties, ordered the Governor and Council to di
rect the Commissioner of the Navy to imme
diately make ready for service in the Bay
and on the seacoast the ships "Thetis,"
"Tempest/ 7 and "Dragon," the brig "Jeffer
son," and the galleys "Henry," "Accomac,"
and "Diligence." Three hundred marines,
to be commanded by five captains and fif
teen lieutenants, were to be recruited. Ma
rines and sailors who enlisted for three years
were to receive a bounty of $1,000. Naval
officers were put upon the same footing in
regard to pay, rations, and privileges as of
ficers of the same rank in the land service. 1
When the Legislature came together in
October, since the situation was still more
1. Hening, X, 296-99.
412 Naz y of the American Revolution
critical, it was moved to pass an additional
act for the defence of the seacoast. This
act shows that the navy was in sore need for
seamen and money. It provided drastic
measures to obtain both. Naval officers
were now authorized, under certain restric
tions and limitations, to impress seamen.
The eastern counties of the state were direct
ed to bind to the sea, "under the most pru
dent captains that can be procured to take
them/ one-half of all orphans of certain de
scriptions living below the falls of the Vir
ginia rivers. A hospital for seamen was
established at Hampton, to be maintained
by a tax of nine pence a month on the salar
ies of all mariners and seamen in either the
navy or the merchant service of the state.
Officers and seamen were given the whole of
their captures; and still other inducements
to enlistment by way of pay and clothing
were held out.
Two new galleys, of the same construc
tion as those built by Congress in 1776, car
rying two 32 s at the bow and at the stern,
and 6 s at the sides, were ordered for the de
fence of the Chesapeake. Five vessels of
the state fleet were to be immediately made
ready for service; and all the other naval
vessels were to be sold and the proceeds de
voted to naval purposes. For the use of the
navy import duties were laid upon rum, gin,
brandy, and other spirits; on wine, molasses
and sugar; and on all imported dry goods,
A az 3 1 of the American Revolution 413
except salt, munitions of war, and iron from
Maryland. Tonnage was laid upon mer
chant vessels. Despite these efforts few
seamen and little money were raised, and the
fleet during 1780 accomplished almost
nothing. 1
The salient event in the history of the
Virginia navy in 1781 was the invasion of
Arnold and Phillips during the first half of
the year. Arnold was first reported on the
coast of Virginia on December 29, 1780,
when his fleet consisting of twenty-seven sail
was seen at Willoughby Point. 2 Governor
Jefferson began at once to make strenuous
efforts to get the Virginia fleet in condition to
oppose Arnold. The role of admiral was an
odd one for Jefferson. In February he sent
Benjamin Harrison, speaker of the Virginia
House of Delegates, to Philadelphia to re
quest of the French minister the aid of the
French fleet. 3 A half-dozen or more priva
teers were taken into the service of the state.
Twelve vessels of the state fleet of 1776-1779
still remained. Most if not all of these ves
sels were either at the Chickahominy ship
yard and near by on the James, or else at
the mouth of the James. Few of them were
sufficiently manned to render much service.
On April 26 Maxwell reported 78 men on
board seven vessels, whose complement was
1. Hening, X, 379-86.
2. Ford, Writings of Jefferson, II, 392.
3. Ibid., 443-44.
414 A flZ 3 1 of the American Revolution
520 men. Other ships had neither arms nor
men. 1
In April, 1781, Arnold and Phillips made
their raid up the James, penetrating as far
as Richmond. On April 21 and 22, a detach
ment under Lieutenant-Colonel Abercrombie
destroyed the shipyard on the Chickahom-
iny, including a number of naval craft and
the warehouses. On April 27, at Osbornes
on the James a few miles below Richmond,
the Virginia fleet, supported by two or three
hundred militia upon the shore opposite the
British army, drew up to oppose the enemy.
It consisted of six ships, eight brigs, five
sloops, two schooners, and several smaller
craft. Its chief vessels were the "Tempest,"
16, "Renown/ 7 16, and "Jefferson," 14. The
British sent a flag of truce to the Commo
dore of the Virginia fleet, proposing to treat
with him for its surrender. He sent back
the spirited reply that "he was determined
to defend it to the last extremity." A few
cannon planted on the shore soon gave the
enemy a command of the situation. After
a short engagement, the Virginians scuttled
or set fire to several of their vessels and fled
to the opposite shore. None of the fleet
escaped. The British captured twelve ves
sels, which the Virginians were unable to
destroy. On this expedition the British
burnt the state rope-walk at Warwick. After
1. Virginia Calendar of State Papers, I
588; II, 74.
Navy of the American Revolution 415
the raid of Arnold and Phillips, but one ves
sel remained in the Virginia navy, the
armed boat "Liberty." 1
The officers and seamen of the Virginia
navy, thrown out of employment by the
destruction of the fleet, aided the allied
forces at the siege of Yorktown in collecting
supplies and transporting troops. The boat
"Liberty" was used as a transport; and also
the ships "Cormorant," "Loyalist," and
"Oliver Cromwell," which three vessels, it
is believed, Virginia purchased for this pur
pose. Soon after the surrender of Corn-
wallis the Virginia General Assembly, recog
nizing that "during the continuance of the
present expensive war it is necessary to hus
band the resources of the state with the
utmost oeconomy," dismissed almost all the
officers and seamen, the Commissioner of
the Navy, the chaplains, surgeons, pay
masters, and all others on the naval staff. 2
A number of times during the Revolu
tion, and now for the last time in 1782, Vir
ginia and Maryland undertook to concert
a naval defence of their trade on the Chesa
peake. The General Assembly of Virginia
which met in May, 1782, appointed three
commissioners to superintend the work of
1. Almon s Remembrancer, 1781, II, 62-
63, Arnold to Clinton, Petersburg, May 12
1781.
2. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, X, 450;
Virginia Navy Papers, I, and II.
416 Navy of flic American Revolution
protecting the Bay. The " Cormorant" and
Liberty" were to be immediately prepared
for this service. Two galleys and two
barges or whale boats were to be built. For
this work the state appropriated 1,000, the
proceeds arising from the sale of the "Loyal
ist," and certain tonnage and import duties.
The commissioners were to fix the pay and
subsistence of the seamen ; .the fleet was not
to be sent outside of the Capes. 1
The commissioners managed a small naval
force during 1782 and 1783 until the war came
to an end. Commodore Barren, stationed at
Hampton, was chiefly occupied at this time
with the exchanging of prisoners. Beyond
the building of a few naval craft, it does not
appear that this final naval enterprise of
Virginia w r as attended with fruitful results.
When peace was declared in the spring of
1783, the commissioners had in different
stages of construction the schooners " Har
rison," "Fly," and "Patriot," and the
barges "York" and "Richmond." Virginia
now disposed of all her fleet except the
"Liberty" and "Patriot," which she re
tained as revenue cutters. 2 In order to
keep these two armed vessels in time of
peace, Virginia, in accordance with a pro-
1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, XI, 42-44.
In March, 1783, the three commissioners were
Paul Loyall, Thomas Brown, and Thomas
Newton, jr. Virginia Calendar of State Pa
pers, III, 456.
2. Virginia Navy Papers, II.
Naz y of the American Revolution 417
vision in the Articles of Confederation, ob
tained the permission of Congress. 1 These
two boats were still in the. employ of the
state in 1787. The " Liberty" saw more
service than any other state or Continental
vessel of the Revolution. She was in the
employ of Virginia from 1775 until 1787.
1. Journals of Continental Congress, Oc
tober 3, 1783.
CHAPTER XV
THE NAVY OF SOUTH CAROLINA 1
South Carolina employed her first armed
vessels in obtaining a supply of gunpowder,
the need of which article was so keenly felt
throughout the colonies during the first
years of the Revolution. In July, 1775, the
South Carolina Council of Safety sent
Captains John Barnwell and John Joy-
ner of Beaufort with forty men in two large
and well-armed barges to assist the Geor
gians in taking an English supply-ship, which
was daily expected at Savannah. The en
terprise was wholly successful. The ship
with its cargo of sixteen thousand pounds
of gunpowder was captured by the combined
forces of the two colonies. South Carolina
sent four thousand pounds of her share of
the powder to the Continental Congress at
Philadelphia. 2
1. In writing this chapter I have been
much assisted by Mr. A. S. Salley, Jr., Secre
tary of the Historical Commission of South
Carolina.
2. Drayton, Memoirs of American Revo
lution, I, 209-71. Collections of South Caro
lina Historical Societv, II, 50.
A flt v of the American Revolution 419
In the same month of July the Council of
Safety planned to seize certain gunpowder
stored at Nassau, New Providence, and for
this purpose the "Commerce," a sloop be
longing to citizens of New York, was tempo
rarily taken into the service of the state. It
will be recalled that Commodore Esek Hop
kins in the initial essay of the Continental
fleet in February and March, 1776, attempt
ed to capture this gunpowder. Before the
"Commerce" was ready to set sail, word came
that the brigantine "Betsey" from London
with a cargo of ammunition was soon to
arrive at St. Augustine. Captain Clement
Lempriere, the commander of the "Com
merce," was therefore ordered to cruise off
St. Augustine in watch for the expected ves
sel. On August 8 he captured the " Betsey"
with her load of gunpowder amounting to
almost twelve thousand pounds. 1
Neither of these two episodes led to a per
manent naval armament. This, as was to be
expected, was brought about by the neces
sity of protecting Charles Town, the capital
and chief port of the Province. The critical
month in South Carolina in 1775 was Sep
tember. During this month two of His
Majesty s vessels, the "Tamar," 16, and
"Cherokee," 6, lay in Charles Town harbor.
It was in September that Lord William
1. Collections of South Carolina Historical
Society, II, 43, 44, 57, 59, 62, 63. Drayton,
Memoirs of American Revolution, I, 304-06.
420 Xai y of the American Revolution
Campbell, the Royal Governor of the Prov
ince, fled from Charles Town on board the
"Tamar." In September the South Caro
lina Council of Safety began to seize the
forts commanding the channel leading to
Charles Town from the sea. The executive
of the Revolutionary government at this
time consisted of the Council of Safety of
thirteen members. About the first of Oc
tober the Council of Safety obtained the
schooner " Defence" and placed it under
the command of Captain Simon Tufts, a
native of Massachusetts, but now a resident
of Charles Town. The Council of Safety
fixed the pay of officers and men on board
the schooner.
During November, naval affairs were
chiefly in the hands of the Second Provin
cial Congress, the Revolutionary legislature,
which body on November 10 appointed
Edward Blake Commissary of Stores for
the Naval Department. On November 11
the " Defence/ 10, manned by her regular
complement of seamen, and thirty-five ma
rines taken from the land forces, was detail
ed to cover a party sent to obstruct certain
channels near Charles Town by sinking old
schooners. While engaged in this service
she exchanged shots with the "Tamar" and
" Cherokee" without causing much damage
on either side. On November 12, stirred
by this encounter, the Provincial Congress
voted, though by a narrow majority, to im-
Navy of the American Revolution 421
press, fit out, and arm the ship "Prosper"
for the purpose of capturing the British
ships in Charles Town harbor; and appoint
ed commissioners to superintend the work. 1
The Provincial Congress having adjourned
on the 29th of November, the Second Coun
cil of Safety continued the naval prepar
ations. On December 16 it appointed Wil
liam Henry Drayton, the well-known Revo
lutionary agitator and leader, to command
the "Prosper" in place of Captain Tufts
who had some time before been transferred
from the "Defence" to the "Prosper." 2 A
third vessel was now obtained, the schooner
"Comet," and was placed in charge of Cap
tain Joseph Turpin. Owing to the paucity
of seamen in South Carolina, the Council of
Safety in December directed Captain Rob
ert Cochran to proceed to Massachussetts
and obtain recruits for the navy. When in
January, 1776, Cochran was in Philadelphia,
the delegates of South Carolina to the Conti
nental Congress called that body s atten
tion to Cochran s mission. In order that
no friction should arise between Cochran
and the military authorities in Massachus
etts over the enlistment of men, Congress
recommended to him that he offer to sea-
1. Journals of South Carolina Provincial
Congress, November 9, 10, 12, 1775.
2. Collections of South Carolina Historical
Society, III, Journals of South Carolina Coun
cil of Safety, December 16, 1775.
422 Navy of the American Revolution
men moderate wages and bounties; that he
immediately repair to the camp at Cam
bridge and take Washington s advice; and
that he enlist the seamen in those parts of
the country where he would least interfere
with the Continental service. The Massa
chusetts Council agreed to permit Cochran
to raise three hundred men. 1 South Caro
lina also enlisted seamen in Georgia.^
On February 15 the Second Provincial
Congress, which had met on the 1st, appoint
ed a committee to report on the best means
and the expense of building two frigates of
thirty-two guns each. It authorized the
enlisting, if necessary, of two hundred ma
rines. On March 5 a committee was ap
pointed to prepare "proper Rules and Arti
cles for the better regulation and govern
ment of the Navy of this Colony." On the
25th, the report of this committee after
amendment was adopted, and on the next
day the respective rank of army and navy
officers was fixed. On March 14th the Pro
vincial Congress authorized the committee
at Georgetown, a port to the north of
Charles Town, to purchase and fit out proper
armed vessels for the defence of the trade of
Georgetown, and on the same day gave
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, IV,
1307-08. Journals of Continental Congress,
January 16, January 19, 1776.
2. Gibbes, Documentary History of the
erican Revolution, 1764-1776, 258.
American
Xavy of the American Revolution 423
similar orders to a committee of Beaufort, a
port to the south of Charles Town. Provis
ion was now made for a Muster-Master Gen
eral of the Army and Navy. 1 In March the
armed schooner "Peggy" was in the service
of the state.
On March 26, 1776, a new government
under a Constitution went into effect in
South Carolina. This provided for a legis
lature consisting of two houses, a General
Assembly and a Legislative Council. The
executive of the state was a President, or
" President and Commander-in-chief/ the
title ran, and a Privy Council of seven mem
bers. According to the constitution the
captains of the navy were to be chosen by
a joint ballot of the two houses of the Legis
lature, and were to be commissioned by the
President. 2 Early in April Colonel Pinck-
ney presented in the General Assembly an
ordinance to appoint a Commander of the
Navy to be subject to the President. 3 On
April 9 the Legislature passed an act to
prevent the desertion of soldiers and sailors.
A hospital for sick and wounded soldiers and
sailors was established at Charles Town. On
April 11 the Legislature established a Court
of Admiralty which was given jurisdiction
1. Journals of South Carolina Provincial
Congress, February 15, February 22, March
5, 14, 25, 26, 1776.
2. Constitution of South Carolina of 1776.
3. Journals of South Carolina General As
sembly, April 10, April 11, 1776.
424 A az 3 1 of the American Revolution
over all captured ships belonging to "Great
Britain, Ireland, the British West Indies,
Nova Scotia, East and West Florida." The
facts in cases of capture were to be tried by
a jury. 1
On September 21, 1776, President John
Rutledge, in a message to the Legislature,
recommended the appointment of commis
sioners to superintend the naval affairs of
the state, believing that thereby the navy
would be placed upon a better footing. On
the same day, in accordance with the Presi
dent s recommendation, the General As
sembly appointed a committee to draft a
bill. On October 8 an act was passed which
established a Board of Naval Commission
ers, consisting of seven men, and empowered
"to superintend and direct all matters and
things whatsoever to the navy of this state
in any wise relating." 2 This act was model
led on the act of Virginia on the same sub
ject. It varies from the Virginia act in a
few particulars, and is a little more detailed.
The Navy Board was charged with the build
ing, hiring or buying of all naval vessels,
and the arming, outfitting and provisioning
of the same, and with the construction of
1. Journals of South Carolina General As
sembly, April 11, 1776; Cooper, Statutes of
South Carolina, IV, April 9, April 11, 1776.
2. Journals of South Carolina General As
sembly, September 21, 1776; Cooper, Stat
utes of South Carolina, IV, Octobers, 1776.
Navy of the American Revolution 425
rope-walks and shipyards. It was author
ized to audit the naval accounts, draw war
rants on the treasury for necessary expen
ditures, recommend officers, fill vacancies
temporarily with the approval of the Presi
dent, keep itself informed as to the state of
the navy, and report thereon to the Legis
lature. With the concurrence of the Presi
dent and the Privy Council the Board could
remove or suspend officers for neglect of
duty or misbehavior. Soon after the organ
ization of the Board, the question was
raised whether it had the power to order
the vessels on cruises; the President and
Privy Council decided that the Board had
no such power, and that the detailing of
vessels was a function of their own. 1 In
addition to its strictly naval duties the Board
directed the procuring and fitting out of
trading vessels and transports.
The Navy Board held its first meeting on
October 9, 1776, at Charles Town, and organ
ized by electing Edward Blake First Com
missioner. On the 12th it chose its clerk. 2
The duty of this officer was to keep a regu
lar journal of the transactions of the Board;
and once in three months, or oftener if nec
essary, to go aboard the vessels and take an
1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II,
Journals of South Carolina Navy Board, Oc
tober 25, 1776.
2. Ibid., Journals of South Carolina Navy
Board, October 9, 12, 1776.
426 Navy of the American Revolution
account of the officers and seamen and pay
them their wages. His salary was 1,400
currency, a year. At first a majority of the
Board constituted a quorum. When it be
came difficult to assemble four out of its
seven members, two more members were
added to the Board, and a quorum was re
duced to three men. 1 The act which estab
lished the Board was to continue in effect
two years. On October 9, 1778, the Board
was continued until October 8, 1779, and
from thence until the end of the Legislature
then in session. The introduction of a
bill into the House of Representatives on
February 8, 1780, to repeal all previous
acts establishing a Board of Naval Com
missioners makes it highly probable that
the Navy Board was discontinued about
this time. 2
On taking charge of naval affairs the
Navy Board found one of its most engrossing
duties to be the purchasing of supplies of
all sorts salted beef and pork, bread,
pitch, tar, turpentine, tallow, duck, cord
age, and spars. On October 17, 1776, it ap
pointed a naval agent at Georgetown to
procure and issue supplies to the schooner
"Rattlesnake," Captain Stephen Seymour,
now in the employ of the state for the pro-
1. Cooper, Statutes of South Carolina,
IV, August 23, 1777.
2. Journals of South Carolina House of
Representatives, February 8, 1780.
Navy of the American Revolution 427
tection of this port. 1 The Board continued
the building of four galleys, which had been
begun by President Rutledge. In April,
1777, it leased Captain Cochran s shipyard
at Charles Town, together with five negroes,
for the term of five years. 2 In October,
1778, it bought of Paul Pritchard, ship
wright, eighty-five acres on Hobcaw creek,
near Charles Town, for a shipyard. 3
During 1777 and 1778 the" Legislature
passed a few ordinances relating to the navy.
On January 16, 1777, it fixed the shares of
prizes. Officers and seamen were to receive
one-half the net proceeds of all captures.
This half was then to be divided into six
teen parts and allotted to officers and sea
men according to a fixed scale. Captains
were given two-sixteenths ; seamen and ma
rines, three-sixteenths. 4 In February the
captors share of vessels of war and priva
teers was increased to the whole of the prize.
In January, 1778, a law of obvious purpose
was passed, which freed all seamen who en
tered into the Continental or state naval
service from the obligations of previous con-
1. Force, American Archives, oth, II, Jour
nals of South Carolina Navy Board, October
17, 1776.
2. Journals of South Carolina House of
Representatives, September 10, 1779. The
contract with Cochran was being dissolved.
3. Notes of Mr. A. S. Salley, Jr. , Secretary of
the Historical Commission of South Carolina.
4. Cooper, Statutes of South Carolina, IV,
January 16, 1777.
428 Navy of the American Revolution
tracts made with the owners of private ships.
In March, 1778, the appointment of a com
modore to command the navy of the state
necessitated a new distribution of the pro
ceeds of captures among officers and seamen.
The commodore s share was fixed at two-
sixteenths. 1 In October, 1778, the Legis
lature authorized the Navy Board to pur
chase any " negroes or other slaves for the
use of the publick shipyard or rope work/
which property was to be vested in the pub
lic forever. 2
During 1776, 1777, and 1778 the Navy
Board added a few vessels to the navy.
Several galleys were built during this period.
In the fall of 1776 the brigantine " Notre
Dame 7 was procured, armed, and sent to
France under the command of Captain Rob
ert Cochran on a trading voyage. 3 In 1777
one finds the sloop " Beaufort" in the serv
ice of the state, being probably stationed
at Beaufort for the defence of the trade of
that port. Early in 1779 the Navy Board
completed the construction of the brig "Hor
net." Now and then the state obtained the
1. Cooper, Statutes of South Carolina, IV,
February 13, 1777, January 26, March 28,
1778. On February 13, 1777, a new act re
lating to the Court of Admiralty was passed.
2. Ibid., October 9, 1778.
3. In 1776 the following vessels were em
ployed as merchantmen: schooners, "Polly,"
"Peggy" and "Little Thomas;" the brigantine
"Notre Dame," and the sloop "Margaret."
Navy of the American Revolution 429
loan of privateers for short periods. Infor
mation concerning South Carolina s priva
teers is scant. We know, however, that
she had a considerable fleet. Between
August 17, 1776, and April 16, 1777, Presi
dent Rutledge granted thirty-seven letters
of marque. 1
Few states exceeded South Carolina
in naval expenditures. With the excep
tion of Massachusetts, the vessels of no
other state went to sea so often as did those
of South Carolina. The navy of South Car
olina was smaller than that of Virginia,
but much more active. From 1776 to
1779 it captured some thirty-five small
prizes, only about half of which, however,
reached safe ports. 2 Its principal cruising
grounds were off the South Carolina and
Florida coasts and in the West Indies. The
South Carolina vessels frequently cruised
off St. Augustine. This was an important
British port during the Revolution, and
many privateers and smaller British vessels
visited it. The noting of a few captures
will show the character of the work of the
South Carolina navy. In July, 1777, the
"Notre Dame" carried into a South Car
olina port the brig "Judith," 12, laden with
1. South Carolina Archives, Miscellaneous
Records, A, 18, 19.
2. Files of South Carolina and American
General Gazette, and Gazette of State of South
Carolina.
430 Navy of the American Revolution
dry goods for St. Augustine; and in October
the same vessel captured the brig "John,"
and the schooner "Jemmy and Sally" with
cargoes of staves and shingles outward
bound from the Mississippi. 1 In the spring
of 1779 the "Notre Dame," "Hornet," and
"Eagle" made prizes of the sloop "Prince of
Wales," 12, and the brig "Royal Charlotte,"
both bound for Georgia, with West India
products. 2
In December, 1777, President Rutledge
and the Privy Council, in opposition to the
best military judgment in South Carolina,
concerted with Captain Nicholas Biddle, of
the Continental frigate "Randolph," 32, an
expedition to clear the coasts of the enemy s
vessels. South Carolina furnished the "No
tre Dame," 16, Captain Hall, and three pri
vateers, which were temporarily taken into
the public service. These were the ships
"General Moultrie," 18, Captain Sullivan,
"Polly," 16, Captain Anthony, and "Fair
American," 14, Captain Morgan. One hun
dred and fifty South Carolina troops were
taken on board to serve as marines. Sailing
about February 1, 1779, the fleet soon cleared
the coast of the enemy, and then proceeded
to the West Indies on the lookout for rich
West India merchantmen an object which
1. Gazette of State of South Carolina. July
21, November 4, 1777.
2. Ibid., April 7, 1779.
Navy of the American Revolution 431
was probably in view from the first. On
March 7, when the fleet was to the wind
ward of Barbacloes, the "Randolph" fell in
with the British ship of the line "Yar
mouth/ 64. During a running fight an ex
plosion of tremendous force occurred on
board the "Randolph." Burning spars and
timbers six feet long, together with an un
damaged ensign, fell upon the decks of the
"Yarmouth." The "Randolph," with al
most her entire crew of 315 men, including
Captain Joseph loor and fifty South Caro
lina marines, sank soon after the accident.
Five days after the fight the "Yarmouth"
picked up four men clinging to the wreck
age, the only men rescued. Two of the four
South Carolina vessels, the "General Moul-
trie" and the "Fair American," now re
turned home, taking on the way a valuable
Guineaman. The "Notre Dame" and the
"Polly" continued their cruise within the
West Indies, the "Notre Dame" reaching
as far westward as the Isle of Pines. The
two vessels captured eleven small prizes,
a number of which, however, were recap
tured before reaching safe ports. 1
The transference of the seat of war from
the Northern to the Southern states, in
1. Moultrie, Memoirs of American Revolu
tion, I, 193-99; South Carolina and American
General Gazette, April 23, May 28, June 4,
1778; Ramsay, Revolution in South Carolina]
I, 71; Clowes s Royal Navy, IV, 10.
432 Navy of the American Revolution
1779, and the British naval expedition
against Charles Town, early in 1780, caused
increased naval activity in South Carolina.
In August, 1779, the House of Representa
tives sent to the Senate a bill offering boun
ties and fixing a new rate of wages for officers
and seamen. 1 In September the House
passed a bill for building two floating bat
teries and four galleys. 2 Acting on the
recommendations of the Governor, the
House in February, 1780, voted that it
would be of public utility to employ a num
ber of negroes not to exceed one thousand
to act as pioneers and fatigue men in the
army and as oarsmen and mariners in the
navy. 3 Additional armed vessels were now
obtained in different ways. During 1779
the Governor issued commissions to four
teen vessels. A number of small craft,
used chiefly as transports, were impressed. 4
1. Journals of South Carolina House of
Representatives, August 31, 1779.
2. Ibid., September 6, 1779. The Senate
was not willing to make so large a naval in
crease.
3. Ibid., February 14, 1780.
4. South Carolina Archives, Miscellaneous
Records, A. Among the vessels to which
the Governor gave commissions were the fol
lowing: galleys "Congress," "South Edisto,"
"Revenge," "Beaufort," "Lee," "Marquis de
Bretigny," and "Carolina;" sloop "Count
de Kersaint," brigantines "General Lin
coln" and "Beaufort," schooner "Eshe," and
the vessel "Lovely Julia." The following ves
sels, a number of which were impressed, were
Xai v of the American Revolution 433
The "Notre Dame," 16, and the " General
Moultrie," 20, were assigned to the defence
of Charles Town. The state purchased
from France the "Bricole," 44, and the
"Truite," 26. The "Bricole" was pierced
for sixty guns, and mounted forty-four
24 s and 18 s. She was the largest vessel
owned by any of the states. For the
defence of Charles Town France sent
" L Aventure," 26, and "Polacre," 16; and
Congress the "Providence/ 28, "Boston/
24, "Queen of France/ 28, and "Ranger,"
18. 1
The naval defence of Charles Town was in
trusted to Captain Abraham Whipple, the
senior officer of the four Continental vessels.
Whipple advised that a naval defence at the
bar on the seacoast, which lay to the east
ward of the forts that commanded the en
trance to Charles Town harbor, should not
be undertaken; and later he gave it as his
opinion that it was impracticable for the
armed vessels to cooperate with the forts.
Such timid counsels prevailed, and no naval
defence of Charles Town was made. With
the exception of the "Ranger" all the ves
sels were dismantled and their guns and
crews removed to reinforce the land
in the service of the state in 1779 or 1780: gal
ley "Rutledge," schooners "Polly," "Rattle
snake," "Sally," "Anthony," "General Moul
trie," "Nancy," "Three Friends," brig "Wasp"
and brigantine "Ballony."
1. Almon s Remembrancer, 1780, 11,44-47.
434 Naz \ of tJie American Revolution
ies and troops in Charles Town. With the
fall of the city on May 12, 1780, South Caro
lina lost her entire navy, with the exception
of the frigate "South Carolina," whose for
tunes we are about ready to consider. The
"Bricole," "Truite," "General Moultrie,"
and "Notre Dame" were sunk. 1 The "Bos
ton" and "Ranger" were added to the Royal
Navy.
In 1781, with the returning tide of the
patriot forces a few small vessels were
armed at Georgetown. 2 In February, 1783,
Governor Guerard recommended the pur
chase of a ship, which had lately been car
ried into Wilmington, North Carolina, for the
defence of Charles Town harbor. The House
was unfavorable to the transaction, be
cause of the lack of means, the difficulty
of manning the ship, and the risk of bringing
it around. 3 In March, 1783, a committee
of the House was appointed to consider
what arrangements should be made with re
spect to the naval officers of the state; and
it reported that, by the Articles of Confed
eration, South Carolina was precluded from
1. Previous to the siege of Charles Town,
His Majesty s navy had captured the following
vessels: February, 1777, "Defence" taken by
the "Roebuck" and "Perseus;" December,
1777, "Comet," taken by the "Daphne;"
April, 1779, "Hornet," taken by the same.
2. Gibbes, Documentary History of Amer
ican Revolution, 1776-1782, 181, 183.
3. Journals of South Carolina House of
Representatives, February 12, 1780.
Navy of the American Revolution 435
having a navy, and that it was therefore of
the opinion that the state could not retain
in its service its naval officers. 1
A most interesting episode in the history
of the South Carolina navy remains to be
told. It properly begins with the commis
sioning on March 11, 1778, of Alexander Gil-
Ion, a prosperous and influential merchant
of South Carolina, to be a commodore in the
navy with "full and ample power and au
thority to take the Command, Direction,
and Ordering of the said Navy/ agreeable
to its rules and articles. On the same day
John Joyner, William Robertson, and John
McQueen received commissions as captains.
On March 26 the state decided to raise
abroad 500,000 currency, or 71,429 ster
ling, for the purpose of building or purchas
ing three frigates. On July 17 Gillon was
commissioned to go abroad and undertake
the task of securing the loan and procuring
the vessels. The exact sum which Gillon
was now directed to borrow was less than
500,000 by the sum of the proceeds which
he would derive from the sale of certain prod
uce, to be exported from South Carolina
to Europe, and consisting chiefly of indigo
and rice. Early in the fall of 1778 the
" Notre Dame" carried Gillon, his three cap
tains, and other naval officers to Havana,
whence they took passage to Europe.
1. Journals of South Carolina House of
Representatives, March f>, 1783.
436 Navy of the American Revolution
On January 31, 1779, Gillon was empow
ered to borrow, in addition to previous au
thorizations, 15,000 sterling, which was
to be invested in arms, ammunition, and
" Indian goods. " Of the total sum, 86,429,
which he was authorized to obtain, "he act
ually borrowed in Amsterdam, Ghent, Bor
deaux and Paris 46,725, and received as
the proceeds arising from the sale of ex
ported produce 10,000. It is thus seen
that Gillon, in his financial mission, was
moderately successful. He was less for
tunate in making the proposed naval in
crease. He succeeded, however, in renting
the frigate " Indian" from the Chevalier
Luxembourg for one-fourth of her prizes,
for a period of three years. The reader
recollects that this ship was built at Amster
dam in 1777 by the American Commission
ers at Paris, and that owing to lack of money
and to complications growing out of the
laws of neutrality, they had sold the "In
dian" to the French king. Louis XVI. had,
in turn, ceded the "Indian" to the Chevalier
Luxembourg. 1
Gillon renamed his frigate the "South
Carolina," and mounted her with twenty-
eight 32 s and twelve 12 s. Numerous de-
1. South Carolina Archives, Miscellaneous
Records, A, 66, 67; Journals of South Carolina
House of Representatives, March 10, 1783,
report of a committee on certain papers of
Commodore Gillon.
Navy of the American Revolution 437
lays ensued in getting to sea. Owing to
shallow water and the heavy draught of the
" South Carolina/ she was from July to No
vember, 1780, moving from Amsterdam to
the Texel. She spent the winter of 1780-
1781 in a small creek near the Texel. These
delays caused much expense, and in order
to pay off some of his bills, Gillon, in the
spring of 1781, sold to Colonel John Laurens
for Congress military supplies, which he had
recently purchased for South Carolina, to
the amount of 10,000. Laurens now en
gaged Gillon to take these supplies together
with others to Philadelphia. Gillon had
been given full power to man and officer his
vessel, having carried over with him fifteen
commissions and thirty warrants in blank.
In March, 1781, he wrote that he had about
two hundred men on board, and that he
expected two hundred and eighty from Dun
kirk which the Chevalier Luxembourg had
raised for the state. 1
The "South Carolina" finally got to sea
about the first of August, 1781, leaving be
hind the convoy which had expected to ac
company her. Gillon s movements and
dealings abroad are not at all points clear.
He aroused suspicions as to his honesty,
and made a number of enemies. Exactly
why he did not at once proceed to Phila-
1 . South Carolina Historical and Genealogi
cal Magazine, I, 28-32, 136-47, two letters of
Gillon.
438 Navy o/ the American Revolution
delphia with the supplies for Congress
which he had on board is not certain. On
sailing he cruised for a month in the North
Sea, and for a time near the English Chan
nel, and then, about the first of October,
he put into Coruna, Spain. Gillon said
that he had been detained by contrary
winds, and had returned for fresh provisions
before sailing for America. 1
On January 12, 1782, Gillon arrived at
Havana with five valuable Jamaicamen,
loaded with rum and sugar, and said to be
worth $150,000. Here he found the Span
iards planning a descent on the Bahama Isl
ands, and he now agreed to take command
of the sea-forces consisting of fifty-nine
Spanish and American vessels probably
chiefly Spanish. General Cadrigal com
manded the troops. The expedition left
Havana on April 22, and on May 8 the Ba
hamas surrendered without firing a shot.
Gillon not very modestly attributed the suc
cess of the enterprise to the " great atten
tion which the captains and officers of the
American vessels of war paid in conveying
such a fleet through so difficult and so un
frequented a passage, with a beating wind
all the way, whereby we disappointed any
plans the enemy might have formed of at-
1. New York Historical Society Collec
tions, Deane Papers, IV, 450, 468, 478, 519;
Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, IV, 546-
47, note.
.Vary of the American Revolution 439
tacking us in our way through the gulph of
Florida." The island surrendered, not to
the joint American and Spanish forces, but
to the Spaniards alone. 1 It was reported
that the Spaniards and Gillon captured
three hundred troops and ninety sail of ves
sels. 2
On May 28th the " South Carolina" ar
rived in Philadelphia, where she was refit
ting during the summer and fall of 1782.
An agent of* the Chevalier Luxembourg
now removed Gillon from the command
of his vessel, which was given to Captain
Joyner. The "South Carolina" did not get
to sea until December, 1782. Soon after
leaving the Capes of the Delaware she was
chased by a British squadron, which, after a
race of eighteen hours, overhauled her, and
at the end of a two hours fight, forced her to
surrender. 3 For the loss of this vessel the
Chevalier Luxembourg, in accordance with
the terms of his contract, demanded from
South Carolina the payment of 300,000
livres. Gillon asserted that Luxembourg
had forfeited all right to the money by dis-
1. Pennsylvania Packet, March 5, May 31,
and June 4, 1782. The issue of June 4 con
tains a letter of Gillon to Governor Mathewes
of South Carolina, dated May 15, 1782, con
taining an account of the expedition; Gibbes,
Documentary History of American Revolu
tion, 1776-1782, 170.
2. Connecticut Gazette, June 14, 1782.
3. Clowes s Royal Navy, IV, 91.
44-O Navy of the American Revolution
placing him at Philadelphia from his com
mand of the vessel. Further, Gillon de
clared that the Chevalier had subjected
the state to serious losses by sending its
marines, in the winter of 1780-1781, on
an expedition to the Island of Jersey. 1
One estimate makes the total cost of the
frigate to the state more than $200,000, and
another puts it at $500,000. 2 The Luxem
bourg claims remained unsettled until De
cember 21, 1814, when the state made a
final payment of $28,894 to the heirs of the
Chevalier. 3 South Carolina is still pros
ecuting her claims against the United States
for a reimbursement of the expenses con
tracted in behalf of the "South Carolina." 4
1. Journals of South Carolina House of
Representatives, March 10, 1783.
2. McCrady, South Carolina in Revolu
tion, 1775-1780, 219.
3. Cooper, Statutes of South Carolina, V,
December 21, 1814.
4. Conversations with Hon. J. T. Gantt,
Secretary of State of South Carolina.
CHAPTER XVI
THE MINOR NAVIES OF THE SOUTHERN
STATES
Naval administration in Maryland was
vested in the Committee of Safety until
March 22, 1777, when it passed to the Gov
ernor and Council, the executive under the
first state constitution of Maryland. The
Committee was given a free hand in its con
trol of the navy. The Provincial Conven
tion empowered it to fix the pay of officers
and seamen, and to appoint the command
ers of the smaller naval vessels. The Con
vention, however, established the pay of
marines, which was the same as that of the
state troops; and it decided that the uni
form of the marines should be a blue hunt
ing shirt. 1 The first naval work of the
Committee of Safety was the fitting and
arming, in February and March, 1776, of
the ship "Defence," twenty-two 6-pound-
ers, Captain James Nicholson, the chief ves
sel in the Maryland navy. In March the
schooner "Resolution" was purchased as a
1. Force, American Archives, 4th IV 744-
45; 5th, III, 94.
442 A az/v of the American Revolution
tender for the "Defence." The Committee
of Safety, which held its meetings in Annap
olis was early in 1776 assisted in its work at
Baltimore, the chief port of the state, by
the Baltimore Committee of Observation;
and, later in the year, by Jesse Hollings-
worth, who was appointed naval agent for
Baltimore.
In June and July, 1776, the Provincial
Convention ordered the Committee of Safety
to build seven row-galleys, and to fit out
three small vessels, mounting not more
than ten guns each, and a number of armed
boats not to exceed six. 1 By the spring
of 1777 the Committee of Safety had built,
fitted, and officered the galleys "Baltimore,"
"Conqueror," "Independence," and "Ches
ter," and the armed boat "Plater;" it had
in process of construction, ready to launch,
the galleys "Johnson" and "Annapolis,"
and it had purchased the tender "Amelia"
and the schooner "Dolphin." During the
first years of the war the Committee of
Safety hired or purchased several small ves
sels, which were used chiefly as merchant
men. 2 It is not always easy to distinguish
these craft from the naval vessels, which
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, VI,
1487, 1496.
2. The following vessels were employed as
trading craft: Sloop "Molly;" schooners
"Ninety-Six," "General Smallwood," and
"Friendship;" brigs "Sam" and "Friend
ship," and ship "Lydia."
Xai \ of the American Revolution 443
were now and then sent on trading voyages.
Maryland s most common commercial ven
ture was to ship flour and tobacco to the
firm of Harrison and Van Bibber at Martin
ique, and there laden her vessels for the
homeward voyage with munitions of war. 1
As an inducement to recruits , the Pro
vincial Convention, in October, 1776, offered
a bounty of $20 to able seamen, and $10 to
landsmen. Officers and seamen who re
ceived bounties and wages w^ere given one-
third of their prizes, the share granted by
the Continental Congress; those who did not
receive bounties and wages were given the
whole of their prizes. 2 Maryland was un
able to meet the competition with privateers
for seamen, and her vessels were often forced
to remain in port for lack of crews. In De
cember, 1776, the naval agent at Baltimore
wrote that he could "load twenty vessels
rather than man and sail two. The money
paid to captains and sailors is wonderful,
and no way to shun it." 3
Maryland established in her navy the
rank of commodore. On June 8, 1778, her
Governor commissioned Thomas Grason,
who had been appointed commodore on
April 21 by the General Assembly. 4 In
1782 a "Commodore Whaley" was in the
1. Maryland Archives, XI, XII, XVI, XXI.
2. Force, American Archives, 5th, III, 128.
3. Ibid., 1025.
4. Maryland Archives, XXI, 125.
444 A arv of the American Revolution
naval service. Her most prominent cap
tains were James Nicholson, who in 1776
became the senior captain in the Continental
navy; and George Cook, who had served
seven years in the British navy. Lieuten
ant John Henry Boucher resigned early in
1776 to enter the Virginia naval service,
where he soon rose to the highest rank.
In May, 1776, the Provincial Convention,
pursuant to the resolves of the Continental
Congress, established a Court of Admiralty,
consisting of a judge, marshal, and register.
The procedure was to~be that usual in such
courts; trial by jury was made optional;
and the judge was permitted to determine
the places of sitting. 1 The privateers of
Maryland were generally small craft, mount
ing on the average eight 4-pounders. They
plied their trade chiefly in Chesapeake Bay.
From April 1, 1777, to March 14, 1783, a
period of almost six years, Maryland issued
letters of marque and reprisal to 248 pri
vateers, carrying a total of 1810 guns. 2
Since a number of her vessels had been for
some time idle for lack of crews, Mary
land in the first half of 1779 sold all
of her naval craft, except the galleys
"Conqueror" and "Chester," and the
schooner "Dolphin." 3 From 1780 to the
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 1596,
1597-98.
2 Scharf, History of Maryland, II, 205.
3 Maryland Archives, XXI, 399.
Xavy of the American Revolution 445
end of the Revolution the trade in the Ches
apeake, and the property of the inhabitants
of the Maryland coasts, on both sides of the
Bay, suffered severely from the ravages of
the British refugee barges, privateers, and
small naval craft. These conditions led
Maryland to make frequent attempts, during
the last years of the war, to provide a naval
armament for the defence of the Bay. In
1780 she was moved to renew her naval ac
tivities by still other considerations. The
success of the British this year in South and
North Carolina and on the coasts of Vir
ginia made the outlook for Maryland very
threatening. It was also known that Clin
ton wished to carry the war into Maryland
and Virginia.
In October, 1780, Maryland passed her
first act for the defence of the Bay. The
Governor and Council were ordered to pro
vide, officer, and man four large barges or
row-boats, each to carry at least twenty-
five men, one galley to be armed with two
18 s and two 9 ; s, and one sloop or schooner
to carry ten 4 s. They were to enlist one
hundred marines for three years. The ma
rines were to be paid 2, 5s. a month and a
bounty of $40, and the seamen 3 a month
and a bounty of S20. 1 During the May ses
sion of the legislature in 1781, just after Ar
nold s invasion into Virginia, this act was
1. Statutes of Maryland, October session
1780, chapter XXXIV.
446 Navy of the American Revolution
amended. The Governor and Council were
now directed to procure two galleys and a
number of barges not to exceed eight. 1
In passing, mention should be made of
the service which Maryland rendered the
Continental army in 1781, in transporting
troops. When, in the spring of that year,
Lafayette and his army were on their way
to Virginia to attempt the capture of Ar
nold, Maryland impressed upwards of one
hundred transports, together with three
small armed vessels, which she placed under
the command of Captain James Nicholson.
This fleet carried a large part of Lafayette s
troops, stores, guns, and baggage from the
head of Elk to Annapolis. In August and
September the state rendered similar aid to
Washington s army, which was then on its
way to Yorktown. Every vessel in the
state was pressed into service. 2
During the last year of the war the Brit
ish were especially annoying to the trade
and coasts of Maryland and Virginia. Fif
teen or twenty small craft which made their
headquarters on the islands in the Chesa
peake were very destructive, and their dep
redations called forth protective measures
not only in Maryland, but in Virginia, as
we have seen. In each state private initi-
1. Statutes of Maryland, May session,
1781, chapter XXXIV.
2. Scharf, History of Maryland, II, 439-40,
456, 461.
A dry of the American Revolution 447
ative did what it could to stop the pillaging,
but it was not able to cope with the en
emy.
On June 13, 1782, the Maryland legisla
ture appointed William Paca, Walter Tilgh-
man and Robert Goldsborough commis
sioners to provide for the defence of the Bay.
They were ordered to procure four barges
and a galley or other vessel of force, to fit
them for immediate service against the en
emy, and to turn them over to the Govern
or and Council when ready to be employed.
The legislature also appointed William Han
son Harrison, a commissioner to go to Rich
mond and concert with the Virginia execu
tive or legislature a joint defence of the Bay.
A new naval establishment was now effected.
The Governor and Council were to raise and
officer two hundred and fifty able seamen,
watermen, landsmen, and marines, who were
to serve until January 1, 1783, or longer.
They were to fix the pay and rations of the
officers. Officers and seamen who should
lose a limb, or be otherwise maimed or hurt,
were to receive the same benefits which the
state should hereafter give to her soldiers
in the Continental army. The naval forces
were to be subject to the naval rules and
regulations provided by Congress for the
Continental navy. A penalty of 50 was
prescribed for enticing seamen away from
the state service. The expense incurred
in providing this naval increase was to be
448 Xavy of the American Revolution
met chiefly from an appropriation of 10,000
and from the sale of the confiscated property
of Tories. 1
Owing to the continuance of the depreda
tions of the British, the legislature in its
November session of 1782 passed another
act for the defence of the Bay. The Govern
or and Council were directed to fit out a
certain galley or ship, now building for the
state, and the barges "Somerset," "Terri
ble," "Fearnaught," and "Defence," and en
list three hundred and fifty men to serve until
January 1, 1784. Two-thirds of the proceeds
of captures were now to be given to the cap
tors. The .expense of this establishment
was to be met by import duties on rum,
brandy, and other distilled spirits; on wine,
loaf sugar, and coffee; and on all goods
and merchandise, with certain exceptions. 2
The navy of Maryland rendered miscel
laneous services. It convoyed merchant
men, imported and distributed arms and
provisions, transported troops, watched the
fleet of the enemy to report its movements,
and defended the trade and coasts of the
state. Except when used for commer
cial purposes, Maryland s vessels rarely
passed outside the Capes at the mouth of
the Chesapeake. Attempts which were
1. Statutes of Maryland, April session,
1782, Chapter III.
_ 2.
sion,
^j VxlAd- L/ Lt-1 J_ J. J_ .
Statutes of Maryland, November ses-
L, 1782, Chapter XXVI.
A az v of the American Revolution 449
made to bring; about the cooperation of the
Maryland and Virginia fleets did not often
succeed. A few small prizes were taken,
but none of them were of much value. In
the fall of 1776 the "Defence/ Captain Cook,
cruised as far southward as the West Indies,
and captured five small prizes, laden with
logwood, mahogany, indigo, rum, and sugar. 1
Several sharp encounters between the ves
sels of Maryland and the enemy took place
in the Bay. As early as March, 1776, the
"Defence," 22, Captain James Nicholson,
checked the advance up the Chesapeake of
the British sloop-of-war "Otter/ 7 10, and
recaptured several prizes. 2 Now and then
attempts were made to dislodge the British
from some of the islands in the Bay. So
late as the latter part of March, 1783, the
state sent a small schooner and two barges
against a rendezvous of the British on
Devil s Island, one of the Tangiers. 3
On November 30, 1782, the Battle of the
Barges occurred near the Tangier islands.
The mortality of the Americans in this en
gagement was relatively greater than in
any other sea fight of the Revolution. In
its carnage and in the bravery displayed
by the Americans, this fight does not suffer
from a comparison with that of Jones off
Flamborough Head. The Maryland fleet,
1. Maryland Archives. XII, 500.
2. Ridgely, Annals of Annapolis, 175-77.
3. Scharf, History of Maryland, II, 481-82.
450 Navy of the American Revolution
which had been joined by a volunteer Vir
ginia barge, was commanded by Commodore
Whaley of the barge "Protector." The Brit
ish fleet of barges was under the command
of Captain Kidd of the "Kidnapper/ mount
ing 18-pounders. For one cause or another
the "Protector" was the only American barge
which engaged the British fleet. While the
"Protector" inflicted much damage on the
vessels of her adversary, she naturally was
unable to fight long against such tremendous
odds. An extract from the simple and
pathetic narrative of the fight written by Col
onel John Cropper, a volunteer Virginia of
ficer on board the "Protector," possesses in
terest: "Commodore Whaley was shot down
a little before the enemy boarded, acting the
part of a cool, intrepid, gallant officer. Cap
tain Joseph Handy fell nigh the same time,
nobly fighting with one arm, after the loss
of the other. Captain Levin Handy was
badly wounded. There went into action
in the Protector sixty-five men, twenty-five
of them were killed and drowned, twenty-
nine were wounded, some of whom are since
dead, and eleven only escaped being wound
ed, most of whom leaped into the water to
save themselves from the explosion." Colo
nel Cropper, to whom, on the death of Wha
ley, the command of the "Protector" fell,
was wounded three times, "and after the
A r ai y of the American Revolution 451
surrender knocked down by a four-pound
rammer." 1
During the last years of the war Maryland
in her attempts to defend the Chesapeake,
obtained as many as ten barges. 2 She had
also in the naval service at this time a
schooner, the " Flying Fish." The end of
her navy may be dated with the statute
passed by her legislature in May, 1783,
which authorized the Intendant to sell "the
galley and the barges." 3
North Carolina s initial step in procuring
a naval armament was taken on December
21, 1775, when her Council of Safety re
solved to fit out three armed vessels for the
defence of the trade of the state. It ap-
1. Southern Literary Messenger, XXIV,
(1857), 218, Colonel John Cropper to Colonel
Williams Davies, his superior in command in
the Continental line.
2. Scharf enumerates the following barges:
"Revenge," "Terrible," "Intrepid," "Pro
tector," "Experiment," "Venus," "Defence,"
"Reformation," "Dolphin," and "Fear-
naught." These barges were about forty-two
feet long, eight feet wide, and three deep.
Each carried about twenty-four oars, from six
teen to thirteen feet long, and mounted two
large guns. Scharf, History of Maryland, II,
204.
3. Statutes of Maryland, April session,
1783, chapter XVI, Votes and Proceedings of
Maryland Senate, April session, 1783, 63.
For the pay-rolls of the "Flying Fish," "De
fence," and several Maryland barges, see
Maryland Archives, XVIII, 606-15.
452 Navy of the American Revolution
pointed three Boards of Commissioners,
each of which was to immediately purchase.
arm, man, and victual a vessel,. The board
for Cape Fear was composed of five men ; for
Newbern, of eight; and for Edenton, of six. 1
Since it proved difficult to assemble a quor
um of the Newbern Board, the Council of
Safety in June, 1776, vested its powers in
three of its members. 2 In May, 1776, the
Provincial Congress fixed the monthly
wages of officers, seamen, and marines. Cap
tains were to be paid 10; lieutenants, mas
ters, captains of marines, and doctors, 8
each; marines, 2, 13s., 4d.; "seamen com
plete/ 4; "seamen not complete/ 3. 3
By October, 1776, the Cape Fear Board
had fitted out the brigantine " Washing
ton;" the Newbern Board, the brigantine
"Pennsylvania Farmer;" and the Edenton
Board, the brigantine "King Tammany."
The Council of Safety now ordered these
three vessels to protect the trade of the state
at Ocracoke Bar, and to proceed against the
enemy s Jamaicamen homeward bound from
the West Indies. "It may be necessary to
inform you," it wrote on October 1 to Cap
tain Joshua Hampstead of the " Pennsyl
vania Farmer/ "that the Jamaica fleet will
sail for Europe about the middle of this
month under the convoy of a twenty-gun
1. North Carolina Colonial Records, X, 352.
2. Ibid., 637.
3. Ibid., 584.
Navy of the American Revolution 453
ship only, from the best intelligence we can
obtain." 1
For one reason or another these three
vessels accomplished very little. For a long
time the "Washington," Captain Edward
Ingraham, could not obtain a crew. The
"Pennsylvania Farmer," Captain Joshua
Hampstead, was idle during the summer of
1776, for lack of shot. James Davis, one
of the Commissioners for fitting out this ves
sel, made serious accusations against his fel
low Commissioners and the officers and crew
of the vessel. As Davis had suffered real or
supposed injuries at their hands, his words
no doubt must be heavily discounted. In
October, 1776, he wrote that the "Pennsyl
vania Farmer" lay in Newbern "with 110
men on board at the Expence of near Forty
Pounds per day, upwards of six months ; in
the most inglorious, inactive, and dissolute
state that perhaps was ever suffered in any
Country." The crew of the vessel consisted
of "men of all nations and conditions, Eng
lish, Irish, Scotch, Indians, Men of Wars
Men,and the most abandoned sett of wretches
ever collected together. Two of the officers
broke open the Gun Room, and with a num
ber of the men went off witK the Boat, with
Intent to join Lord Dunmore s fleet, and
actually reached Currituck County. They
1. North Carolina Colonial Records, X,
831-32, 848-49, 875-77; North Carolina State
Records, XI, 356.
454 Navy of the American Revolution
were apprehended, and are still at large on
board. They have wasted near 100 pounds
of powder in wantonly firing at and bring
ing to all Boats, Canoes, and Vessels of every
sort, even Passengers in the Ferry Boat
have been insulted. Capt. Thos. Shine of
the Militia, with his Company on board com
ing up to the General Muster, was fired on
and a ball passed within a few inches of his
Arm." 1 These are but few of the derelictions
contained in Davis s remarkable list. His
overstatement of his case causes one to sus
pect that he was not entirely free from
malice.
By December, 1777, the "Washington"
was ordered to be sold; and commissioners
had been appointed to load the other two
vessels and send them on voyages to foreign
ports. In April, 1778, the legislature de
cided to sell the "Pennsylvania Farmer."
On May 30 this vessel at a public sale in
Edenton "was cried out by John Blackburn
on Mr. Joseph Hewes, after w r hich Mr. Hewes
denied having bid the sum which she was
cried out at." 2
No other subject of naval interest en
gaged the attention of North Carolina so
much as the defence of Ocracoke Inlet. It
is recalled that the waters of Pamlico and
1. North Carolina Colonial Records, X,
834-36.
2. North Carolina State Records, XII, 173,
244, 623, 796.
Navy of the American Revolution 455
Albemarle Sounds are separated from the
Atlantic by a long sandbar, which is only at
a few points broken by inlets. These con
nect the waters of the Atlantic with the
waters of the Sound. The most important
inlet at the time of the Revolution was that
of Ocracoke. The protecting and the keep
ing open of this entrance was a matter of im
portance not only to North Carolina, but to
Virginia and the Continental Congress, as
well. Most of the foreign trade of Newbern
and Edenton, the two main ports of the
state, passed through this inlet. In a simi
lar way, the trade of Southern Virginia, out
ward or inward bound, found it convenient
to use this channel. In the first years of the
Revolution, especially in 1778, not a few
goods coming from foreign marts, and des
tined for the Continental Army, rather than
risk capture off the entrance to the Chesa
peake or the Delaware Bay, entered Ocra
coke, passed on through Pamlico and Albe
marle Sounds into Chowan River, and
thence by the branches of this river to the
town of South Quay, in southern Virginia,
near the confluence of the Nottaway and
Blackwater rivers. From South Quay the
goods were carried by wagons to Suffolk on
the Nansemond, and thence by boat up the
Nansemond into the James. This route
constituted the southern division of the so-
called "Inland Navigation." It was along
this road that North Carolina salt pork and
456 Navy of the American Revolution
beef, and shoes made by North Carolina
Quakers, passed northward on their way to
the "Grand Army." In 1778 and 1779
South Quay and Suffolk were important en
trepots for Continental goods.
Since the keeping open of communication
through Ocracoke Inlet was of importance
to both North Carolina and Virginia, the
two states concerted a joint naval arma
ment for this purpose. On May 9, 1776,
the North Carolina Provincial Congress ap
pointed Allen and Thomas Jones to attend
the Provincial Congress of Virginia, "for
the purpose of recommending to them the
expediency of fitting out two Armed Vessels
at the expense of that Colony, to act in con
junction with the armed vessels already
fitted out by this Colony for the protection
of the trade at Ocracoke." 1 As her part of
the joint undertaking, Virginia agreed to
construct at South Quay two galleys, to be
employed in the defence of the Inlet.
Virginia carried out her promise, and built
at the "South Quay ship yard" two ships,
the "Caswell" and "Washington." 2 North
Carolina ordered her brigantines to defend
Ocracoke; and she voted 2,000 towards
the equipping of Virginia s ships, and ap
pointed commissioners to invest this money
in anchors, guns, rigging, and canvas. 3
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 1357.
2. These vessels were at first called galleys.
3. North Carolina Colonial Records, X, 981.
Navy of the American Revolution 457
Finally, as we shall see, she maintained at
her expense one of the Virginia ships on the
station at Ocracoke for a considerable
period. She did not, however, meet Vir
ginia s expectations, which state several
times expressed the belief that North Caro
lina had not done her share in keeping up
the joint establishment. 1
Until 1778 the trade which passed through
Ocracoke was rather free from annoyance.
It was in January of that year that Joshua
Martin, the late Royal Governor of North
Carolina, wrote from New York to Lord
George Germaine in London: "That the
contemptible port of Ocracock has become
a great channel of supply to the rebels, while
the more considerable ports have been
watched by the King s ships. They have
received through it considerable importa
tions." 2 On January 1, 1778, there arrived
at Newbern a sloop from Martinique, a
schooner from St. Eustatius, a schooner
with salt from Bermuda, a French schooner
from Hispaniola, and two schooners from
the Northern states; a French scow was at
the same time reported at Ocracoke. 3 A
a letter from Edenton, dated June 9, informs
us that several foreign vessels were at the
Inlet, and that a sloop had recently arrived
1. North Carolina State Records, XIV, 19
126.
2. Ibid., XIII, iii-iv.
3. Ibid., 354.
458 Xai y of the American Revolution
at Edcnton from France, which had on
board for the Continental Congress thir
teen thousand pairs of shoes, a large quan
tity of clothing, and a " marble Monument
for Genl. Montgomery." 1
In the spring of 1778 the North Carolina
legislature voted to purchase from Virginia
the ship "Caswell," stating that it had not
been able to keep its agreement with Vir
ginia in providing a joint defence of Ocra-
coke. The legislature fixed the pay of the
officers and seamen on board the "Caswell." 2
In May this ship, under the command of
Captain Willis Wilson, with one hundred
and seventy men on board, lay off Ocracoke
bar. Captain Wilson reported to Governor
Caswell on May 20 that the place was not in
fested with British cruisers, and that a French
ship and brig lay outside the Inlet, waiting
to come in. In June, however, Wilson
wrote that " the enemy (one ship, two sloops,
and a brig) take a peep at us every now and
then, but are not disposed to venture in." 3
A sloop was now purchased at Beaufort, to
act as a tender for the "Caswell," and Rich-
1. North Carolina State Records, XIV,
154-55.
2. Ibid., XII, 574-75, 742, 746; XIII, 138-
39, 171-72. In June, 1779, Governor Jefferson
of Virginia wrote to Governor Caswell offering
to sell both the "Caswell" and "Washington."
Virginia had found the trade through Ocra
coke inconvenient. North Carolina State
Records, XIV, 120, 136.
3. Ibid., XIII, 132, 171.
A T avy of the American Revolution 459
arcl Ellis was appointed agent at Newbern
to purchase provisions and naval supplies. 1
In December, 1778, the "Caswell" was
still afloat, but by June, 1779, she had sunk
at her station at Ocracoke. 2 With the loss
of this vessel North Carolina s naval enter
prises came to an end. Her attention was
now engrossed by threatening invasions of
the enemy from South Carolina.
North Carolina maintained admiralty
courts at several ports on the coast. There
were such courts at Beaufort, Bath, Roa-
noke and Currituck. As early as April 25,
1776, a special court of admiralty was ap
pointed to try a prize case. 3 A few of the
privateers of this state rendered valuable
services. The brig "Bellona," 16, Captain
Pendleton, fitted out at Newbern, cruised
very successfully.
Georgia s naval armament w^as small and
unimportant. Her Provincial Congress,
however, commissioned one of the first
armed vessels of the Revolution. In June,
1775, it gave Captains Oliver Bowen and
Joseph Habersham command of a 10-gun
schooner, and directed them to assist Cap
tains Joyner and Barnwell of South Caro
lina in capturing a certain British ship, laden
with powder, and expected to arrive at Sa-
1. North Carolina State Records, XIII,
138-39, 174-75.
2. Ibid., XIV, 136.
3. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 1339.
460 Nary of the American Revolution
vannah. On July 10 the joint forces of the
two states captured the ship and obtained
thirteen thousand pounds of the highly
prized article. Georgia sent five thousand
of her share of nine thousand pounds to the
Continental Congress at Philadelphia. 1
On July 5, 1776, the Continental Congress
resolved to build four galleys under the direc
tion of the Georgia Provincial Congress. 2 In
August the Committee of Safety was build
ing some row-galleys, and also fitting out an
armed vessel for which purpose 2,000
were voted. On August 28 the Committee
of Safety ordered Captain Bowen to go to
Hispaniola to purchase armed vessels to the
amount of 3,000, materials for fitting out
vessels, and various warlike stores. In Oc
tober it ordered Captain Pray to go to Cape
Francois on a similar errand. Pray was
authorized to mount on his vessel carrying
his purchases to Georgia as many guns as it
would conveniently bear. 3 Whether these
two men actually carried out their com
missions is not known.
In the spring of 1777 Georgia had
three galleys in service, and later she had a
fourth. These were named the "Washing-
1. Jones, History of Georgia, II, 181.
2. Journals of Continental Congress, July
5, 1776.
3. Collections of Georgia Historical So
ciety, V, part I ; Proceedings of Georgia Coun
cil of Safety, 96, 101-02, 113.
Navy of the American Revolution 461
ton," "Lee," "Bulloch," and "Congress."
This little fleet was placed under the com
mand of Commodore Oliver Bowen, and it
was employed on the Georgia seacoast chiefly
in conjunction with the army. Under or
ders of President Gwinnett three of the gal
leys commanded by Commodore Bowen as
sisted the army in its unsuccessful expedi
tion against East Florida in April and May,
1777. l In April, 1778, off Frederica, Geor
gia, the "Washington," Captain Hardy,
"Lee," Captain Braddock, and "Bulloch,"
Captain Hatcher, with three hundred troops
on board, captured His Majesty s brigan-
tine "Hinchinbrooke," 12, the sloop "Re
becca," and a brig. 2
In the campaign around Savannah early
in 1779 all four galleys were lost. In Janu
ary the "Washington" and "Bulloch" were
stranded near Ossabaw Island on the Geor
gia coast, and were burned by their crews,
to prevent their capture. In March, 1779,
the "Congress," Captain Campbell, and the
"Lee," Captain Milligan, engaged near Ya-
masee Bluff the British galleys "Comet" and
"Hornet." The Americans, after losing
three killed, among whom was Captain
Campbell, and six wounded, were forced to
abandon their galleys. Out of 104 men on
1. Jones, History of Georgia, II, 269.
2. McCall, History of Georgia, II, 137-38;
Moultrie, Memoirs of American Revolution
II, 375.
462 Navy of the American Revolution
board the American galleys the British cap
tured but ten. 1 The occupation of South
ern Georgia by the enemy from this time un
til the end of the Revolution stopped fur
ther naval endeavors on the part of the Pa
triot party of the state.
Georgia had a prize court in operation as
early as November, 1776. Her constitution
of February, 1777, provided for the hearing
of prize cases by special county courts, much
as in Connecticut. 2
1. McCall, History of Georgia, II, 179, 224-
25.
2. Jameson, Essays in Constitutional His
tory of United States, 10.
CHAPTER XVII
THE MINOR NAVIES OF THE NORTHERN
STATES
Rhode Island was the first colony to un
dertake a defence by means of armed vessels.
Her initial legislation preceded that of the
Continental Congress by almost four months.
During 1775 her coasts and trade were an
noyed by the vessels of the enemy. In the
early summer the conduct of Captain James
Wallace, the commander of His Majesty s
frigate "Rose/ was especially vexatious
and insulting. On June 13 Nicholas Cooke,
Deputy-Governor of Rhode Island, in ac
cordance with a resolution of the General
Assembly, wrote to Wallace demanding the
immediate restoration of certain captured
vessels, and especially of two packets be
longing to citizens of Providence. The acts
of Wallace were obviously in the minds of
the members of the General Assembly,
when, on June 15, it ordered the Committee
of Safety to charter and fit out two suitable
vessels for the defence of the trade of Rhode
Island.
464 Navy of the American Revolution
The General Assembly also appointed a
committee of three to appraise and hire the
two vessels. It ordered the larger vessel to
be equipped with eighty men and ten 4-
pounders; the smaller vessel was to be
manned with not more than thirty men. It
appointed Abraham Whipple commander
of the larger vessel with the rank and power
of commodore over both vessels, and named
his lieutenants, master, and quarter-master.
Officers w r ere also chosen for the smaller ves
sel. The establishment of the little fleet
was assimilated to that of the land forces of
the state. Its cruises were to be determined
by the Lieutenant-General, Brigadier-Gen
eral, and the Committee of Safety. 1
Two sloops, the "Katy" and "Washing
ton," were at once chartered. Commodore
Whipple tells us that on the same day he re
ceived his commission, June 15, he captured
a tender of the frigate "Rose." 2 This was
the first authorized capture of a naval ves
sel of the enemy. During the summer of
1775 the "Katy" and "Washington" cruised
chiefly in Narragansett Bay for the defence
of Rhode Island. In August the "Wash
ington" was sent outside of the Bay to warn
incoming vessels laden with powder and
warlike stores of their danger from British
craft. It was at this time that Washington
1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island,
June, 1775.
2. Staples, Annals of Providence, 265.
Navy of the American Revolution 465
proposed that one of the sloops should be
sent to the Bermudas for powder, which
military necessity was much needed by his
army. 1 Commodore Whipple, in the "Katy,"
was dispatched on this errand in September.
Arriving at the Bermudas, Whipple found
that he had come too late as the powder had
already been sent to Philadelphia.
It was while the "Katy" was on this er
rand that Governor Cooke, on October 10,
received orders from the Continental Con
gress to send his little fleet to the northward
to intercept two British transports. The
" Washington" was unfit for so large an un
dertaking. The "Katy," having arrived
from the Bermudas, was ordered on No
vember 12, 1775, to cruise between Nan-
tucket Shoals and Halifax. Later her desti
nation was changed, and she was directed
to carry to Philadelphia the seamen which
Commodore Esek Hopkins had enlisted for
the Continental service. 2 On the arrival of
the "Katy" in Philadelphia she was taken
into the Continental service under the name
of the "Providence." About the same time
the "Washington" was in all probability
returned to her owner, as she had become
more or less unseaworthy.
Meantime the General Assembly had or-
1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 69
2. Ibid., 36-37, 461, 653; Collections 01
Rhode Island Historical Society, VI, 134-35;
see Chapter I, page 55.
466 Navy of the American Revolution
dcrcd the construction of two galleys, to carry
sixty men, to have fifteen oars on a side,
and to mount one 18-pounder in the bow. 1
The work was placed under the direction of
a superintendent. In January, 1776, the
General Assembly appointed John Grimes
commodore of the galleys at a salary of 9
a month. The galleys were named the
"Washington" and "Spitfire." They ren
dered a variety of services in the Bay,
cruising in defence of trade, acting as trans
ports, and covering landing parties sent
after forage and supplies. 2 In July, 1776,
they were ordered to proceed to New York
and to assist in the defence of the Hudson. 3
It is probable, that this detail was not car
ried out. By the summer of 1778 they had
been captured or destroyed by the enemy.
From June, 1775, until December, 1776,
naval administration in Rhode Island dur
ing the recess of the General Assembly, was
vested in the Committee of Safety, or Re
cess Committee, as it was sometimes called.
This Committee, as constituted by the ses
sion of the General Assembly beginning on
October 31, 1775, consisted of the Governor
1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island,
August, 1775.
2. Providence Gazette, April 20, April 27,
1776; Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, No
vember, December, 1776; Arnold, History of
Rhode Island, II, 397.
3. Rhode Island Colonial Records, VII,
582.
Navy of the American Revolution 467
and eighteen members, together with such
members of the General Assembly as hap
pened to be present at the meetings of the
Committee. Any seven members consti
tuted a quorum. The composition of the
Committee varied slightly at different times.
On Deceniber 13, 1776, a Council of War was
appointed, with whom naval administra
tion was now vested. The Council of War,
which included the Governor and Lieuten-
ant-Governor, consisted of nine members,
any five of whom formed a quorum. In
May, 1778, a Council of War comprising
twenty-one members, and representative
of the whole state was chosen. The Coun
cil of War was virtually the Committee of
Safety under a change of name. 1
In January, 1776, the General Assembly
appointed a committee of three to draw up
a bill establishing a prize court. On March
18 a bill became a law which established a
court of justice for the trying of prize cases.
It was to be presided over by a judge, ap
pointed annually. The same act estab
lished state privateering. Privateersmen
were to enter into bond for 2,000 to ob
serve the provisions of the act and the in
structions of the Governor. They were to
be commissioned by the Governor. In
May, 1776, this act was brought into con
formity with the resolutions of Congress on
1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, De
cember, 1776. May. 1778.
THE
| UNIVERSITY }
.to, !_.
468 Navy of the American Revolution
the same subject. Captors were given one-
half of all armed vessels and one-third of all
other prizes. 1 A list containing the names
of 193 privateers from Rhode Island has
been compiled. 2
In June, 1777, the General Assembly un
dertook to add two armed vessels to the
naval force of the state, but for some reason
its order was not carried out. 3 The same
resolution directed the Council of War to
procure three merchantmen to be used in
importing supplies. The ship "Aurora"
and sloop "Diamond" w r ere two of the vessels
purchased for commercial purposes.
For a time Rhode Island relied in part for
her naval defence upon the two Continental
frigates, "Providence" and "Warren," which
were built at Providence in 1776, and offi
cered and manned largely with Rhode Isl
and men. The General Assembly and the
Council of War furthered the work of the
local naval committee which had charge of
the construction of the frigates. These two
ships left Providence early in 1778. During
1778 and 1779 the state continued to depend
upon Continental assistance.
It is recalled that during the summer of
1778 Washington concerted with the French
1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island,
March, May, 1776.
2. W. P. Sheffield, Rhode Island Priva
teers and Privateersmen.
3. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island,
June, 1777.
Navy of the American Revolution 469
fleet a campaign to drive the British from
Newport. General Sullivan commanded the
land forces of the Americans. On June 25,
1778, Congress directed the Navy Board at
Boston to build three galleys, or procure
three suitable vessels, for the defence of the
Providence, Warren, and Taunton rivers in
Rhode Island, if upon advising with the
Rhode Island Council of War and General
Sullivan, the Navy Board should find such
measure expedient. At a conference of
the Navy Board, the Council of War, and
Sullivan it was decided to procure one large
ship. Such a vessel was obtained by Sulli
van, but he was compelled soon to return
it to its owners. 1 With the consent and
recommendation of the Rhode Island
authorities, Sullivan, in November, pro
cured the "Pigot" galley, and in the
spring of 1779 the sloop "Argo." 2 First the
"Pigot," and later the "Argo," was placed
under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel
Silas Talbot, of the Continental army.
Already Talbot had been twice recom
mended by Congress for promotion on ac
count of gallant conduct in naval exploits.
The Rhode Island General Assembly had
1. Publications of Rhode Island Historical
Society, VIII, papers of William Vernon and
Navy Board, 249, 250.
2." Journals of Rhode Island Council of
War, July 17, August 24, November 11, 1781;
Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, Febru
ary, 1779.
4/o Xary of the American Revolution
recognized his bravery in capturing the
"Pigot" galley off the coast of Rhode Island
in October, 1778, by voting him a "genteel
silver-hilted sword. " As commander of the
"Pigot" and later of the "Argo," Talbot
was under the orders of Sullivan, and of
Gates, Sullivan s successor. During the
summer of 1779 Talbot in the "Argo," as
sisted at times by privateers and the state
vessels of Massachusetts, captured fifteen
small prizes. 1 As a reward for the conspic
uous ability which he showed in this work,
Congress made him a captain in the Conti
nental navy. Early in 1780 the "Pigot"
and "Argo" closed their services under Con
tinental and state auspices.
Rhode Island s last naval enterprise was
made in 1781. In May of that year the
General Assembly appointed a committee
to "charter a suitable fast sailing Vessel, in
order to be fitted out as a Cruiser to clear
the Coast of the piratical Boats that infest
the same." The committee was voted
$5,000, and was ordered to man the vessel,
appoint its officers, and send it to sea. It
was directed to procure a small vessel of
thirty to fifty tons burden, mounting four
3-pounders or 4-pounders. It at once ob
tained the sloop "Rover," which it placed
1. Providence Gazette, August 14, Sep
tember 25, 1779; Connecticut Gazette, June
24, 1779; Pennsj r lvania Packet, September
9, 1779.
Navy of the American Revolution 471
under the command of Captain Richard 01-
ney. The "Rover" served the state but a
short time, and accomplished little. 1
New York was led to purchase her first
armed vessel in order to prevent persons in
imical to the liberties of the American Colo
nies from supplying the Ministerial army and
navy with provisions. It was for this pur
pose that her Provincial Congress on De
cember 20, 1775, appointed a committee of
two to buy, arm, and fit out a proper vessel
at a cost not to exceed 600. The com
mittee purchased the sloop "General Schuy-
ler," and by March, 1776, had the vessel
ready for service. James Smith, who in
the summer of 1775 had served as "Commo
dore on the Lakes," that is, Lakes Cham-
plain and George, was appointed commander
of the "General Schuyler." In March the
Provincial Congress ordered the sloop "Bish
op Landaff" to be fitted out. 2
On March 11, 1776, the Provincial Con
gress appointed five of its members, all
from New York, a Marine Committee. It
empowered this Committee "to take such
measures, and give such directions, and em
ploy such persons for the protection or ad
vantage of trade as they may think proper,
useful, or necessary." The Marine Com-
1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island,
May and October, 1781.
2. Journals of New York Provincial Con
gress, December 20, 1775, March 9, 1776.
472 Navy of the American Revolution
mittce was a permanent navy board vested
with the management and direction of the
naval affairs of the state. Three of its
members formed a quorum. Thomas Ran
dall was its chairman. It was authorized to
keep secret such matters as it saw fit. It
reported to the Provincial Congress, when
the Congress was in session, and at other
times to the Committee of Safety. It was
directed to apply to the Provincial Congress
when in need of advice. 1 In March and
April it purchased the sloop "Montgomery,"
and the schooner "General Putnam/ and
sold the "Bishop LandaftV 2
On April 17 the New York Committee of
Safety issued commissions to Captain Wil
liam Rodgers of the "Montgomery," Cap
tain James Smith of the "General Schuy-
ler," and Captain Thomas Cregier of the
"General Putnam." Rather singularly,
these captains executed bonds in favor of
John Hancock, President of the Continental
Congress, and were given the commissions
of Continental privateers. The naval es
tablishment of New York was a mixed one.
Her fleet was governed by the Continental
naval rules and regulations. The enlisting
contract of the "Montgomery" reads at
points as if the vessel belonged to the Con-
1. Journals of New York Provincial Con
gress, March 11, 1776.
2. Journals of New York Committee of
Safety, April 25, 1776.
Navy of the American Revolution 473
tinental Congress: "The said William Rog
ers, for and in behalf of himself and the said
Thirteen Colonies of North America, doth
hereby covenant and agree to and with said
officers, seamen, and marines" to advance
a month s wages. In sharing prizes, in
granting bounties to wounded soldiers, and
in rewarding exceptional merit, the contract
followed the naval regulations of the Conti
nental Congress. 1 On the other hand, the
three vessels were owned, fitted out, offi
cered, and manned by New York, which
state directed their cruises, and paid their
officers and seamen. This mixed estab
lishment may in part be explained by the
fact that at first New York s intention was
to have Congress take her vessels into the
Continental service. 2
On the evacuation of Boston by the Brit
ish on March 17, 1776, Washington at once
proceeded to New York, whither, it is recol
lected, the scene of war soon shifted. In
April Washington asked for the loan of the
New York vessels to assist in the defence
of New York city. After some disagree
ment as to the terms upon which he
should receive them, the "General Put
nam" and the "General Schuvler" were
1. Journals of New York Committee of
Safety, April 19, 1776; Fernow, New York
in Revolution, 530-33.
2. Journals of New York Provincial Con
gress, January 22, 1776.
474 Navy of the American Revolution
turned over to him. 1 Hereafter the state
seems not to have had the direction of the
"General Schuyler." In October, 1776, a
mutiny having occurred on board the "Gen
eral Putnam/ the New York Committee of
Safety ordered this vessel to be sold. 2
New York s fleet captured some eight or
ten prizes. It cruised chiefly in the waters
surrounding Long Island. The "Montgom
ery" had best success. On April 19, 1776, the
Marine Committee reported to the Committee
of Safety a draft of instructions for Captain
Rodgers. He was ordered to cruise between
Sandy Hook and Cape May, or from Sandy
Hook to the east end of Long Island, and
he was cautioned to always keep "some in
let under your lee, so that you may secure
a retreat from a superior force." 3 Prizes
were to be sent to some place of safety in
the United Colonies. The "Montgomery"
cruised in this general region until June,
1777; in July she was sold for 3,550. She
captured several merchantmen, which were
libeled in the admiralty courts of Rhode Isl
and, Connecticut, and Maryland. In the
condemning and selling of these prizes,
New York s interests were attended to by
agents appointed for the purpose. The
1. Journals of New York Committee of
Safety, April 24, May 10, 1776.
2. Ibid., September 21, September 24,
October 7, 1776.
3. Ibid., April 19, 1776.
Xavy of the American Revolution 475
"Montgomery s" most valuable prize was the
schooner "Hannah," libeled in Baltimore,
which, with her cargo of clothing, cloths,
and provisions, sold for 11,281. Another
prize, the "Minerva," with a cargo of salt,
was tried by the court at the same time with
the "Hannah," and was freed; whereupon,
Francis Lewis, a delegate of New York to
the Continental Congress, which was then
in session in Baltimore, appealed the case of
the "Minerva" to Congress. 1
In August, 1776, the Secret Committee,
which was assisting in the defence of the
Hudson, was fitting out two small armed
sloops, the "Camden" and "Hudson." 2 As
late as January, 1777, the Committee of
Safety was planning for a naval armament;
orders were then given for cutting the tim
bers for a 74-gun ship. 3 The permanent oc
cupation of New York city by the British
stopped New York s naval enterprises on
state account. She continued, however, to
grant a few privateering commissions, until
the end of the war. In passing, one should
mention that in 1776 New York contributed
officers, seamen, and naval supplies to Ar
nold s campaign on lakes Champlain and
1. Journals of New York Committee of
Safety, February 13, 1777; Journals of New
York Provincial Congress, April 1, 1777.
2. Journals of New York Provincial Con
gress, August 16, 1776.
3. Journals of New York Committee of
Safety, January 15, 1777.
476 Navy of the American Revolution
George. By the terms of New York s Con
stitution of 1777 the Governor was "com-
mander-in-chief of all the militia and ad
miral of the navy of this state." The Con
stitution implied that there was to be a
Court of Admiralty, although it did not
make definite provision for such court. 1
New Hampshire s only naval undertaking
was her participation, at the suggestion of
Massachusetts, in the Penobscot expedition
of July, 1779. She contributed to the ill-
starred fleet the "Hampden," 22, Captain
Titus Salter, which vessel was captured by
the British. 2 On July 3, 1776, New
Hampshire passed an act "to encourage the
fixing out of Armed Vessels to defend the
seacoast of America, and to cruise on the en
emies of the United Colonies, as also for
erecting a court to try and condemn all
Ships and other Vessels." This act was mod
eled on similar acts of Massachusetts. It
established state privateering. A "Court
Maritime," consisting of one judge, was
erected at Portsmouth to try cases of cap
ture. Salvage was prescribed in accordance
1. New York Constitution of 1777. See
Carson, Supreme Court of United States, p. 45,
for further references to the admiralty legisla
tion of New York.
2. New Hampshire Archives, VIII, 106,
186, 195. In March, 1776, the New Hamp
shire House of Representatives appointed a
committee of three to look out for an armed
vessel to guard the coast. It is believed that
no vessel was procured.
Navy of the American Revolution 477
with the proportions fixed by the Conti
nental Congress. In cases of prizes cap
tured by a Continental vessel, appeals lay
from the Court Maritime to the Continental
Congress. 1
In July, 1776, a Committee of Newark,
New Jersey, requested the New Jersey Pro
vincial Congress to build four "gondolas/
or row-galleys, to be mounted with can
non, and to ply between the mouths of the
Passaic and Hackensack rivers and the
town of Perth Amboy. The Provincial
Congress referred the proposition to a com
mittee of four. It finally ended the busi
ness by referring the report of this commit
tee to the Continental Congress. 2
Until October 5, 1776, when New Jersey
passed an act establishing an admiralty
court, her Provincial Congress decided prize
cases. So early as February 15, 1776, a
committee of the Provincial Congress, which
had been appointed to draft an ordinance
for erecting a Court of Admiralty, reported
that it had consulted William Livingston,
one of the New Jersey delegates to the Con
tinental Congress, on the subject, and had
proposed to him, whether it would not be of
manifest advantage to the Colonies if "Con-
1. Force, American Archives, 5th, I,
90-96.
2. Minutes of Provincial Congress and
Council of Safety of New Jersey, 1775-1776,
510, 520, 525, 528.
478 Navy of the American Revolution
gress should, by one general ordinance, in
stitute the powers and mode of erecting a
Court of Admiralty to be adopted by all the
Colonies." Livingston agreed to take the
first opportunity for proposing the matter
to Congress. 1 Nothing came of the recom
mendation.
1. Minutes of Provincial Congress and
Council of Safety of New Jersey, 1775-1776
370-71, 396, 479.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
A BIBLIOGRAPHY
THE CONTINENTAL NAVY
MANUSCRIPT SOURCES
Adams, John. Letters for 1775 and 1776, de
posited for the present by Charles Francis
Adams with the Massachusetts Historical
Society, Boston.
A few letters are valuable for the early
history of the Continental Navy.
Continental Congress. Manuscript Journals.
Supplements and corrects the printed
journals.
Continental Congress. Records and Papers,
formerly found in the Bureau of Rolls and
Library, Department of State, Washington;
but now in most part in the Library of Con
gress, Division of Manuscripts. There are
many volumes o* these documents. Most of
the material relating to the navy is found in
the following volumes:
No. 28, 1 vol., Reports of committees of
Congress on naval affairs, 1776-1786.
No. 37, 1 vol., Reports of Marine Commit
tee and Board of Admiralty, 1776-1780.
482 Bibliography
No. 50, 1 vol., Letters of Oliver Pollock;
Commercial Agent at New Orleans, to
President and to committees of Congress,
1776-1782.
No. 58, 1 vol., Letters and Papers of John
Hancock.
No. 78, 24 vols., Letters to President of Con
gress.
No. 90, 1 vol., Letters of the commercial
agents at Martinique to President of
Congress.
No. 137, 3 vols., Letters and Reports of
Robert Morris, Agent of Marine.
No. 138, 3 vols., Reports of the Board 01
Treasury, 1784-1789.
Nos. 82-96, 132, 168, and 193.
The Records and Papers of the Conti
nental Congress are especially valuable
for the years from 1780 to 1783. They
contain many important letters of John
Paul Jones. The letters of Pollock give a
full account of his services at New Orleans.
Deane, Silas. Papers in the library of the
Connecticut Historical Society, Hartford.
A few of these papers relate to the navy.
Force Transcripts. These are copies of many
of the Records and Papers of the Continent
al Congress, made by Peter Force, and now
in the possession of the Library of Congress,
Division of Manuscripts.
The copying is accurately done. The
pagination often differs from that of the
originals.
Hopkins, Esek. Letters and papers, in the li
brary of the Rhode Island Historical Society,
Providence.
Quite valuable for 1775, 1776, and 1777.
The best of them have been printed in
Edward Field s Esek Hopkins.
Jones, John Paul. Manuscripts, in the Divi-
Bibliography 483
sion of Manuscripts, Library of Congress.
Have be en excellently catalogued by C. H.
Lincoln in Calendar" of John Paul Jones
Manuscripts.
An important original source for the naval
history of the Revolution. A number of
the most important manuscripts, how
ever, have been published, notably in
Sands s Life and Correspondence of John
Paul Jones.
Marine Committee Letter Book. Letters of
the Marine Committee and the Board of Ad
miralty, in the Division of Manuscripts, Li
brary of Congress.
Quite the most important manuscript
source for the history of the Continental
navy from 1776 to 1780. Contains 217
pages, folio, and 505 letters. They are
copies of the originals. Of these letters,
371 were written by the Marine Committee
between August 22, 1776, and November
20, 1779; and 134 by the Board of Ad
miralty between December 10, 1779, and
September 19, 1780. Eighty-six letters
are addressed to the Navy Board at Bos
ton. Hitherto the Marine Committee Let
ter Book has been little used.
Tucker, Samuel. Papers, in the Harvard Li
brary, Cambridge. Valuable for the career
of Samuel Tucker, a captain in the Continent
al navy. The best of the papers have been
published by J. H. Sheppard in his Life of
Samuel Tucker, 1868. (See entry under
Sheppard.)
Miscellaneous Manuscripts, Division of Manu
scripts, Library of Congress
Of noteworthy importance is a list of
commissioned officers in the Continental
navy, far more complete than any yet
published.
484 Bibliography
PRINTED SOURCES .
Adams, John. Works, 10 vols. Boston,
1856.
Almost the only source for the debates in
Congress on naval affairs in the fall of
1775. His Notes on Debates are more
reliable than his Autobiography.
Appleton. Cyclopedia of American Biog
raphy. 7 vols. New York, 1898-1900.
Contains a little information of interest
to students of naval history.
Annual Register for 1775-1783. London.
Of slight value for naval history.
Bancroft, George. History of the United
States. 6 vols New York, 1884-85.
A few references to naval history.
Barney, Mary. Memoirs of Commodore Josh
ua Barney. Boston, 1832.
Not satisfactory.
Beatson, Robert. Naval and Military Mem
oirs of Great Britain, 1727-1783. London,
1804.
Contains accounts of some of the import
ant naval engagements of the Revolu
tion.
Bigelow, John. Works of Benjamin Frank
lin. 10 vols. New York, 1887-88.
Contains valuable original material for
Franklin s naval services in Paris.
Bolton, C. K. Private Soldier under Wash
ington, New York, 1902.
A few references to the navy.
Boston Gazette for 1775-1783. Boston.
Of great value for a history of the move
ments of the Continental vessels. In its
advertisements of libeled prizes, one of
the very best sources for the work of the
Massachusetts privateers.
British Marine Encyclopedia, in Hogg s Naval
Magazine for 1801. London.
Bibliography 485
Excellent for definitions of naval terms
used in the British navy.
Buell, A. C. Paul Jones, Founder of the
American Navy. 2 vols. New York, 1900.
Very interesting; attractive style. Con
tains many inaccuracies. Chapter II,
Volume I, entitled, Founding of the Ameri
can Navy, is in no small part fiction.
Canadian Archives, report on, for 1895. Ot
tawa.
Under the subject Prince Edward Island,
will be found references to Broughton and
Selman s expedition in 1775.
Carson, H. L. Supreme Court of the United
States. Philadelphia, 1902.
Contains a brief account of the prize
courts of the Revolution.
Caulkins, Frances M. History of New Lond
on, Connecticut. New London, 1852.
A few valuable references to the Continen
tal navy.
Clark, Thomas. Naval History of the United
States. Philadelphia, 1814.
The earliest history of the United States
navy. Has considerable merit. Gives
sources of his information. His inter
views with naval officers constitute origi
nal material.
Clowes, W. L. Royal Navy. 7 vols. Bos
ton and London, 1897-1903.
Chapter XXXI, Volume III, and Chapter I,
Volume IV, are important sources for the
engagements of Continental vessels with
vessels of the Royal Navy. Scientific
treatment. Some sources have been used
which are not accessible in America. The
most important contribution to the his
tory of the Continental navy since Coop
er s naval history, written in 1839.
Connecticut Colonial Records for 17751776;
Connecticut State Records for 1776-1780.
Hartford, 1890, 1894-95.
486 Bibliography
Contain references to the Continental
vessels built in Connecticut.
Connecticut Gazette for 1775-1783. New
London.
Contains important bits of information
relating to the movements of the Conti
nental vessels.
Connecticut Historical Society Collections,
vol. VIII. Hartford, 1901.
Contains rolls of the Connecticut compa
nies who served in the navy on Lake
Champlain.
Continental Congress, Journals of, for 1775-
1788. 13 vols. Philadelphia, 1777-88.
The most valuable and extensive source
for the history of naval legislation and ad
ministration "during the Revolution. The
edition of W. C. Ford, now being pub
lished by the Library of Congress, super
sedes previous editions.
Continental Congress, Secret Journals, for
1775-1788. 4 vols. Boston, 1821.
Contributes some information on the work
of naval agents abroad.
Continental Journal and Weekly Advertiser
for 1776-1783. Boston.
Supplements the information found in the
Boston Gazette.
Cooper, James Fenimore. History of the Navy
of the United States of America. London,
1839.
Several editions of this work have been
issued. The first part treats of the Con
tinental navy. This varies little in the dif
ferent editions. Clear and interesting
style. The most satisfactory account of
the engagements of the Continental navy.
Treats of its fights with merchantmen and
privateers, as well as with the vessels of
the Royal Navy. More complete than
Clowes, but not "so scientific.
Bibliography 487
Deane Papers. Collections of the New York
Historical Society. 5 vols. New York,
1886-90.
Valuable for the naval services of Silas
Deane in France.
Emmons, Lieutenant G. F. Navy of the
United States. Washington, 1853.
Names of the Continental vessels and
their prizes arranged in tables. Treat
ment statistical. Valuable, but far from
complete. Privateers of the Revolution
similarly treated.
Field, Edward. Esek Hopkins. Providence,
1898.
Valuable. Prints many important Hop
kins papers.
Field, Edward. State of Rhode Island and
Providence Plantations. 3 vols. Boston
and Syracuse.
Contains some additional information re
lating to the early life of Esek Hopkins.
Force, Peter. American Archives. * vols.
Folio. Washington, 1837-53.
A source of very great vajia^ioj>naval
tory during 1775 and \lp&? Printa-~tfie
chief public records iofthese yea^js, to
gether with important letters and mis
cellaneous papers.
Ford, W. C. Writings of George Washington.
14 vols. New York and London, 1889-93.
One of the chief sources for the history of
Washington s fleets.
Ford, W. C. Letters of William Lee. 3 vols.
Brooklyn, 1891.
Valuable for the work of the commercial
agents in France.
Goldsborough s Naval Chronicle. Washing
ton, 1824.
Griffin, M. I. J. Commodore John Barry.
Philadelphia, 1903.
Especially valuable for the numerous doc
uments which are printed.
488 Bibliography
Hale, Edward Everett and Edward Everett, jr.
Franklin in France. 2 vols. Boston, 1887.
Prints many documents. Chapter XI,
American Prisoners, Chapter XVI, Priva
teers form Dunkirk, and Chapter XVII,
Captain Landais, Volume I, are of special
interest to students of naval history.
Hamersly, L. R. Naval Encyclopedia. Phila
delphia, 1881.
Suggestive.
Hamilton, J. C. Works of Alexander Hamil
ton. 7 vols. New York, 1850-51.
Contains Hamilton s views on single-
headed executives.
Hatch, L. C. Administration of the Ameri
can Revolutionary Army, Harvard Histori
cal Studies, X. New York and London,
1904.
Suggestive for the Continental navy.
Independent Chronicle and Universal Adver
tiser for 1775-1783, Boston.
Supplements the Boston Gazette.
Ingraham, E. D. Papers relating to Silas
Deane. Philadelphia, 1855-57.
Relate to his controversy with Congress.
Jameson, J. F. Essays in the Constitutional
History of the United States. Baltimore,
1886.
Chapter I gives a good account of the Con
tinental prize courts. Chapter II treats of
the administrative organs of the Conti
nental Congress. Scientific.
Johnston s Correspondence and Public Papers
of John Jay. 4 vols. New York, 1890-93.
Volume I contains a valuable letter of
Jay s relating to naval administration.
Jones, C. H. Gustavus Conyngham. Phila
delphia, 1903.
A brief, but good account.
King s Regulations and Admiralty Instruc
tions for 1772. London.
Bibliography 489
Gives the rules and regulations of the
Royal Navy at the opening of the Revolu
tion.
Lincoln, C. H. Calendar, John Paul Jones
Manuscripts Washington, 1903.
Excellent catalogue and digest of the
Jones manuscripts in the Library of Con
gress. Dr. Lincoln s purpose is to enlarge
his calendar so as to include the additional
Jones material which is found in the Rec
ords and Papers of the Continental Con
gress.
Lossing, B. J. Field-Book of the American
Revolution. 2 vols. New York, 1851-52.
Slight naval information.
Maclay, E. S. History of the United States
Navy. 2 vols. New York, 1894.
Narrative of the Continental navy some
what popular.
Massachusetts Historical Society Collections.
Boston, 1806- .
Brief references to the Continental navy.
New England Historical and Genealogical Reg
ister for 1865. Boston.
Contains a list of prisoners confined at
Mill prison, Plymouth, during the Revo
lution.
New Hampshire Gazette for 1775-1783. Ports
mouth.
Contains information concerning the Con
tinental vessels which were built in New
Hampshire, or which arrived at Ports
mouth.
New London County Historical Society, Rec
ords and Papers. Volume I. New London,
1890-94.
Gives a most excellent account of the
fight between the Continental frigate
"Trumbull" and the Liverpool privateer
"Watt."
Outlook, January 3, 1903. Tragedy of the
Lost Commission by James Barnes.
490 B ibliograph v
A brief, but excellent, account of the ex
ploits of Captain Gustavus Conyngham.
Pennsylvania Archives, 1st Ser. 12 vols.
Philadelphia, 1852-56.
Of special value for the movements of the
Continental vessels in the Delaware river
and bay.
Pennsylvania Packet for 1775-1783. Phila
delphia.
Valuable for the movements of the Conti
nental vessels and the Pennsylvania
privateers. The prizes which were sent
into Philadelphia are advertised in its col
umns.
Providence Gazette for 1775-1783. Provi
dence.
Valuable for Continental vessels in 1775
and 1776. Contains names of prizes.
Rhode Island Historical Society Publications,
VIII. Providence, 1900. Papers of William
Vernon and the Navy Board.
A valuable source of information for the
work of the Navy Board at Boston. A
number of important letters and docu
ments are printed.
Root, M. P. Chapter Sketches of Connecti
cut Daughters of the American Revolution.
New Haven, 1901.
Contains the best account of the life of
Nathaniel Shaw, jr., naval agent at New
London.
Royal Navy, List of. New York, 1782.
Sands, R. Life and Correspondence of John
Paul Jones. New York, 1830.
Valuable reprints.
Scribner s Magazine for 1898. New York.
John Paul Jones in the American Revolution,
by Captain A. T. Mahan.
Contains a technical account of the fight
between the "Bon Homme Richard" and
the "Serapis."
Bibliography 491
Sheppard, J. H. Commodore Samuel Tucker.
Boston, 1868.
A good account of Tucker s life. Re
prints the best of the Tucker papers
found in the Harvard Library.
Sherburne, J. H. Life of John Paul Jones.
New York, 1825, 1851.
A fair account.
Sparks, Jared. American Biography, 2nd Ser.
Vol. IX. Gammell s Life of Samuel Ward.
Boston, 1846.
Contains a bit of important information
with reference to the founding of the navy.
Sparks, Jared. Gouverneur Morris. 3 vols.
Boston, 1832.
Volume I contains Morris s description of
an ideal secretary of the navy.
Spears, J. R. History of Our Navy. 5 vols.
New York, 1897-99.
The account of the Continental navy is
somewhat popular.
Staples, W. R. Annals of Providence. Prov
idence, 1843.
Of some value for 1775 and 1776.
Stevens s Facsimiles. 24 portfolios. London,
1889-95.
Valuable for the diplomatic relations be
tween England and France for 1776 and
1777, and for the movements of American
vessels in European waters during these
years.
Sumner, W. G. Financier and Finances of the
American Revolution. 2 vols. New York,
1891.
Gives a few facts about Morris s career as
Agent of Marine.
Town, Ithiel. Some Details of the American
Revolution. New York, 1835.
Of slight value for naval history.
Waite, H. E. Origin of the American Navy.
Boston, 1890.
49 2 Bibliography
Contains letters written by John Adams,
Elbridge Gerry, and John Langton in
1813. These relate chiefly to the services
of Washington s fleet at Boston.
Wells, W. V. Life and Public Services of
Samuel Adams. 3 vols. Boston, 1865.
Adds to our knowledge of Samuel Adams
as member of the Marine Committee.
Wharton, Francis. Revolutionary Diplomatic
Correspondence, 1775-1783. 6 vols. Wash
ington, 1889.
Of primary importance for the history of
the naval services of American represent
atives in foreign countries.
Williams, Gomer. Liverpool Privateers. Liv
erpool, 1897.
Valuable for the sea fights of the Liver
pool privateers.
Winsor, Justin. Narrative and Critical His
tory of the United States. 8 vols. Boston
and New York, 1884-89 .
Volume VI contains a history of the Revo
lutionary navy by E. E. Hale.
Brief and suggestive.
THE STATE NAVIES
THE NAVY OF MASSACHUSETTS
Amory s James Sullivan. 2 vols. Boston
Io59.
Throws some light upon Massachusetts^
prize courts.
Au , S oSl S on Elbridge Gerr y- 2 vols - Boston,
.
Contains information in respect to prize
courts.
Boston Gazette for 1775-1783. Boston
the highest value for the cruises en
gagements, and prizes of the Massachus
etts navy.
Clowes. W. L. Royal Navy. 7 vols. Bos
ton and London, 1897-1903.
Volume IV contains an account of the na-
yal battle at the mouth of the Penobscot
Continental Journal and Weekly Advertiser
for 1775-1783. Boston.
Supplements the Boston Gazette
5 vols and Resolves of Massachusetts.
Volume V contains the legislation of Mas
sachusetts with reference to prize courts
1 he notes to the laws are a valuable guide
to the sources of the events which led to
the passage of the laws.
Maclay, E S. History of American Privateer
ing. New York, 1899.
Of value for the Revolutionary privat< ers
ot Massachusetts.
494 Bibliography
Massachusetts Historical Society Collections.
67 vols. Boston, 1792-1894.
Contains references to the Penobscot ex
pedition.
Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings.
30 vols. Boston, 1859-94.
Contains information upon the Penobscot
expedition.
Massachusetts, Journals of the House of Rep
resentatives for 1775-1783.
Contemporaneous print. Incomplete.
The journals found in the state library
may be supplemented by those found in
the library of the Boston Athenaeum.
Massachusetts, Records of the Council for
1775-1776.
Are printed in part in Force s American
Archives.
Massachusetts, Journals of the Third Provin
cial Convention, 1775.
Are printed in Force s American Arch
ives. The chief sources for the early civil
history of the Massachusetts navy are
the Journals of the Third Provincial Con
vention, Journals of the House, Records
of the Council, and the Resolves of the
General Court.
Massachusetts, Records of the General Court
for 1775-1783. MSS.
Supplements the Journals and the Re
solves.
Massachusetts Resolves, for 1775-1783.
Contemporaneous print. A most valu
able source. Most of the naval legisla
tion of Massachusetts was passed in the
form of Resolves, and not Laws.
Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, MSS.
A very extensive and valuable source-
Many volumes contain material relating
to the navy. Volumes XXXIX, XL, and
XLI V have the greatest value. They con
tain the rolls of naval vessels, letters of of-
B iblio graph \ 495
ficers, and miscellaneous papers. Vol
ume CXLV has many documents relating
to the Penobscot expedition. The Arch
ives are rich in material relating to pri
vateers. The Board of War Letters,
Board of War Minutes, and Board of War
Orders contain much naval material. An
Index compiled by Justin Winsor affords
a valuable key to the Archives.
Pickering and Upham s Timothy Pickering.
4 vols. Boston, 1867, 1874.
Of value for the work of the Massachu
setts prize courts.
Virginia Gazette for 1779. Williamsburg.
Prints a valuable letter about Massachu
setts privateers.
Weymouth Historical Society Publications.
2 vols. Boston, 1881-85.
Volume I gives the best account of the
Penobscot expedition, and prints the
original Journal of General Solomon Lovell
kept on the expedition.
Winsor, Justin. Narrative and Critical His
tory of the United States. 8 vols. Boston
and New York, 1884-89.
Article on the Revolutionary navy by
E. E. Hale, in Volume VI, contains infor
mation on the Massachusetts navy. Val
uable bibliography.
Works of John Adams. 10 vols. Boston,
1856.
Gives John Adams s opinion of the Massa
chusetts statute establishing privateer
ing.
THE NAVY OF CONNECTICUT
Caulkins, Frances M. History of Norwich.
Norwich, 1845.
Contains information relative to the naval
part which Norwich and Norwich men
played in the Revolution.
496 Bibliography
Connecticut Revolutionary Archives. MSS.
Contains much miscellaneous informa
tion relating to the Connecticut navy.
Volumes VIII and IX contain valuable ma
terial concerning the prizes captured by
Connecticut vessels.
Connecticut Colonial Records for 1775-1776.
Hartford, 1890.
Valuable for the beginnings of the Con
necticut navy.
Connecticut Gazette for 1775-1779. New Lon
don.
The best newspaper for naval news in the
state. Captured prizes are advertised
in its columns.
Connecticut Historical Society Collections.
8 vols. Hartford, 1860-1901.
Volume II contains a description of
Bushnell s submarine boat.
Connecticut in the Revolution. Hartford,
1889.
Of slight naval value.
Connecticut Journal for 1775-1779. New
Haven.
Supplements the Connecticut Gazette in a
few particulars, but contains much less
news.
Connecticut State Records, 1776-1779. 2
vols. Hartford, 1894-95.
Of great value for the years covered.
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols.
Folio. Washington, 1837-53.
Contains miscellaneous information relat
ing to the Connecticut navy.
Ford, W. C. Writings of George Washington.
14 vols. New York and London, 1889-93.
Volume X contains Washington s account
of Bushnell s submarine boat.
Hartford Courant for 1775-1779. Hartford.
For naval news, the new r spaper in the state
next in importance to the Connecticut
Gazette.
Bibliography 497
New London County Historical Society. Rec
ords and Papers. Volume I. New Lon
don, 1890-94.
Valuable. Contains a fair account of the
Connecticut navy, and a list of Connecti
cut privateers.
Wharton, Francis. Revolutionarv Diplomat
ic Correspondence. G vols. Washington,
1889.
Volume II has a reference to the voyage
of the "Spy" to France in 1778.
THE NAVY OF PENNSYLVANIA
Almon s Remembrancer for 1778. London.
Valuable for an account of the British raid
to the north of Philadelphia in May, 1778.
Bioren, Laws of Pennsvlvania. 4 vols. Phil
adelphia, 1810.
Contains statutes relating to the estab
lishment of prize courts.
Barney, Mary. Memoirs of Commodore Bar
ney. Boston, 1832.
Of value for a history of the "Hvder
Ally."
Jameson, J. F. Essays in the Constitutional
History of the United States. Baltimore,
1886.
Chapter I, Predecessor of the Supreme
Court, gives an excellent account of the
capture of the sloop "Active" by the brig
"Convention."
Pennsylvania Archives. 1st and 2nd Ser. 31
vols. Philadelphia and Harrisburg, 1852-
90.
The most important source after the Co
lonial records. Volume I of the second
series contains the minutes of the Penn
sylvania Navy Board, a brief historical
account of the* navy, and a list of Pennsyl
vania privateers.
498 Bibliography
Pennsylvania Colonial Records. 16 vols.
Philadelphia, 1852-53.
A source of great value for the history of
the Pennsylvania navy.
Pennsylvania Journal and Weekly Advertiser
for 1775-1783. Philadelphia.
Supplements the Pennsylvania Packet.
Pennsylvania Packet for 1775-1783. Phila
delphia.
Valuable for the prizes captured by Penn
sylvania naval vessels and by privateers.
Not printed while the British occupied
Philadelphia.
Scharf and Westcott. History of Pennsyl
vania. 3 vols. Philadelphia, 1884.
Contains bits of naval information.
Wallace, J. W. Colonel William Bradford.
Philadelphia, 1884.
Valuable for the naval campaigns around
Philadelphia.
THE NAVY OF VIRGINIA
Almon s Remembrancer for 1779 and 1781.
London.
Contains original material for the raids into
Virginia of Matthews and Collier, and of
Arnold and Phillips.
Calendar of Virginia State Papers. 10 vols.
Richmond, 1875-92.
Volumes I-III throw light upon the years
1780-1783. Volume VIII, pages 75-240,
prints the Journals of the Committee of
Safety of Virginia, February 7 to July 5,
1776.
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols
Folio. Washington, 1837-53.
Prints important state records.
Ford, W. C. Writings of Jefferson. 10 vols.
New York and London, 1892-99.
Of value for Jefferson s naval services
while governor of Virginia.
Bibliography 499
Hening s Statutes of Virginia. 13 vols. Phil
adelphia and New York, 1823.
A most important source for naval legis
lation and administration in Virginia.
Lull, E. P. History of the United States Navy
yard at Gosport, Virginia. Washington,
1874.
Gives the early history of the navy yard
at Norfolk.
Maryland Archives, 21 vols. Baltimore,
1883-1901.
Contains information about Commodore
Boucher of the Virginia navy.
North Carolina Records. 18 vols. Raleigh,
1886-1900.
Contains information upon the raid of
Matthews and Collier.
Rowland, K. M. George Mason. 2 vols. New
York, 1892.
Volume I is valuable for Virginia s "Po
tomac river fleet."
Southern Literary Messenger for 1857. Rich
mond.
Contains a series of valuable articles en
titled the "Virginia Navy of the Revolu
tion." A good account of the Virginia
navy. Somewhat extravagant in tone.
Popular rather than scientific.
Virginia Archives, Richmond. Letter Book
of Governor Thomas Jefferson; Letter Book
of Governor Benjamin Harrison. MSS.
Contain bits of naval information.
Virginia Archives, Richmond. Journals of
the Virginia Navy Board. MSS.
A valuable source for both the civil and
military history of the navy.
Virginia Archives, Richmond. Virginia State
Navy Papers. 2 vols. MSS.
An important original source. Contains
much information relative to the differ
ent vessels of the navy.
500 Bibliography
Virginia Gazette for 1775-1779. Williams-
burg.
Not complete files. Those in the Library
of the Virginia Historical Society may be
supplemented by those in the Virginia
State Library. Of some value for the
cruises of the Virginia fleet.
Virginia Historical Register. 6 vols. Rich
mond, 1848-53.
Contains some important bits of naval in
formation.
THE NAVY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Almon s Remembrancer for 1780. London.
Valuable for the naval defence of Charles
ton, 1779-1780.
Clowes, W. L. Royal Navy. 7 vols. Bos
ton and London, 1897-1903.
Gives good accounts of the cruise of the
"Randolph" in 1778, and the capture of
the "South Carolina" in 1782.
Connecticut Gazette for 1782, New London.
Reports the capture of the Bahamas by
the Spaniards and Commodore Gillon.
Cooper s Statutes of South Carolina. 10 vols.
Columbia, 1836-41.
Valuable for naval legislation.
Deane Papers. Collections of the New York
Historical Societv. 5 vols. New York,
1886-90.
Serviceable for Gillon s movements in
Europe.
Drayton, W. H. Memoirs of the American
Revolution. 2 vols. Charleston, 1821.
Throws light on the naval history of 1775.
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols.
Folio. Washington, 1837-53.
Prints important South Carolina official
records, notably the early journals of the
South Carolina Navy Board. The manu-
Bibliography 501
script journals of the South Carolina Navy
Board" are in the New York State Library
at Albany.
Gazette of State of South Carolina for 1776-
1779. Charleston.
Files for part of the period at Charleston.
Valuable for the cruises of the naval ves
sels.
Gibbes, R. W. Documentary History of the
American Revolution. 3 vols. New York,
1853-57.
Contains some naval information.
McCrady, Edward, History of South Carolina
in the Revolution. 2 vols. New York and
London, 1901-02.
Of value for 1775 and for a history of the
"South Carolina."
Moultrie, William. Memoirs of the American
Revolution. 2 vols. New York, 1802.
Of little value for naval history.
Poore s Constitutions. Washington, 1877.
Contains the constitution of South Caro
lina of 1776.
Pennsylvania Packet for 1782. Philadelphia.
Contains valuable material for the move
ments of the "South Carolina" during
1782.
Ramsay, David. Revolution of South Caro
lina, Trenton, 1785.
Of slight value for naval history.
South Carolina and American General Gazette
for 1776-1779. Charleston.
Files for part of the period at Charleston.
Valuable for the cruises of the naval ves
sels.
South Carolina Archives, Columbia. Journals
of General Assembly for 1776. MSS.
Of value for the civil history of the navy.
South Carolina Archives, Columbia. Journals
of the House of Representatives for 1779-
1780. MSS.
502 Bibliography
Throws light upon the naval history for
1779-1780.
South Carolina Archives, Columbia. Journals
of the House of Representatives for 1783.
MSS.
Valuable for the naval services of Commo
dore Gillon.
South Carolina Archives, Columbia. Miscel
laneous Records A. MSS.
Contains some important naval records.
South Carolina Historical Society Collections.
3 vols. Charleston, 1857-59.
Reprints a part of the J ournals of the South
Carolina Committee of Safety.
South Carolina Historical and Genealogical
Magazine. 2 vols. Charleston, 1900-01.
Prints two important letters of Commo
dore Gillon.
Wharton, Francis. Revolutionary Diplomatic
Correspondence. 6 vols. Washington, 1889.
Contains a note upon Commodore Gillon.
THE MINOR NAVIES OF THE SOUTHERN
STATES
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols.
Folio. Washington, 1837-53.
Prints official records. Of considerable
value for the navies of Maryland, North
Carolina, and Georgia.
Georgia Historical Society Collections. 5 vols.
Savannah, 1840-1902.
Prints a part of the proceedings of the
Georgia Council of Safety. Contains a
few naval items of importance.
Jones, C. C., jr. History of Georgia. 2 vols.
Boston, 1883.
Contains a few references to the work of
the Georgia galleys.
Maryland Archives. 21 vols. Baltimore,
1883-1901.
Bibliography 503
Contains much information concerning the
Maryland navy. This may be found by
consulting the index for the names of the
vessels.
Maryland Statutes. Kilty, 2 vols. Annapo
lis, 1799-1800.
Kilty is best. Hanson supplements Kilty.
McCall, Hugh. History of Georgia. 2 vols.
Savannah, 1811-16.
Volume II gives some information in re
spect to the Georgia galleys.
North Carolina Records. 18 vols. Raleigh,
1886-1900.
The most valuable source for the history
of the North Carolina navy.
Ridgely, David. Annals of Annapolis. Balti
more, 1841.
Narrates an important event or two in the
history of the Marvland navy.
Scharf, J. "T. History "of Maryland. 3 vols.
Baltimore, 1879.
Volume II contains naval information of
considerable value.
Southern Literary Messenger for 1857. Rich
mond.
Contains an excellent account of the Bat
tle of the Barges.
THE MINOR NAVIES OF THE NORTHERN
STATES
Arnold, Samuel G. History of Rhode Island,
2 vols. New York, 1859.
Volume II contains a few items of naval
information.
Carson, H. L. Supreme Court of the United
States. Philadelphia, 1902.
Contains references to the admiralty legis
lation of New York.
Connecticut Gazette for 1779. New London.
Gives a good account of the achievements
of Captain Talbot.
504 Bibliography
Fernow s New York in the Revolution. Al
bany, 1887.
Contains the rolls of several New York
vessels.
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols.
Folio. Washington, 1837-53.
Prints important records for Rhode Is
land, New Hampshire, and New York.
New Hampshire Archives. MSS. Concord.
References to the "Hampden."
New Jersey, Minutes of the Provincial Con
gress and Council of Safety, 1775-1776.
Trenton, 1879.
Of some value for the prize legislation in
New Jersey.
New York, Journals of New York Provincial
Convention, etc. 2 vols. Albany, 1842.
Valuable for the history of the New York
navy.
Providence Gazette for 1775-1779. Provi
dence.
Valuable for the movements and prizes
of Rhode Island vessels.
Pennsylvania Packet for 1779. Philadelphia.
Contains original material for the cruises
of Captain Talbot.
Poore s Constitutions. Washington, 1877.
Contains the constitution of New York for
1777.
Rhode Island, Acts and Resolves for 1775-
1783.
Contemporaneous prints. A valuable
source for the history of the Rhode Island
navy.
Rhode Island Colonial Records. 10 vols.
Providence, 1856-65.
Supplements the information contained in
the Acts and Resolves.
Rhode Island Historical Collections. 8 vols.
Providence, 1827-92. _
Contains letters which are valuable for the
naval historv of 1775.
Bib, io graph v 505
Rhode Island Historical Society Publications
VIII. Providence, 1900.
Important for the naval history of Rhode
Island for 1778.
Rhode Island. Journals of the Council of
War. MSS. Providence.
Of some value for the years 17791781.
Staples, W. *R. Annals of Providence. Prov
idence, 1843.
Contains a brief account of the Rhode
Island navy.
Sheffield, W. P.* Rhode Island Privateers and
Privateersmen. Newport, 1883.
A fairly good account.
APPENDIX B
A LIST OF COMMISSIONED OFFICERS WHO
SERVED IN THE NAVY AND MARINE
CORPS OF THE UNITED STATES DUR
ING THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION 1
NAVY
COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF
1. Esek Hopkins.
CAPTAINS
1. Joseph Nicholson.
2. John Manly.
3. Hector McNeil.
4. Dudley Saltonstall.
5. Nicholas Biddle.
1. This list is compiled from two lists of naval officers
which are now found in the Division of Manuscripts of
the Library of Congress. One of these was prepared by
the Naval Department in 1781, the other by the Auditor s
Office of the Treasury Department in 1794. A complete
roster of the naval officers of the Revolution does not
exist. The list now printed is almost complete. It may
contain a few inaccuracies. The names are arranged
alphabetically, with the exception of those of the first
twenty-four naval captains, which are arranged according
to rank.
List of Officers 507
6.
Thomas Thompson.
7.
John Barry.
8.
Thomas Read.
9.
Thomas Grennel.
10.
Charles Alexander.
11.
Lambert Wickes.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Abraham Whipple.
John B. Hopkins.
John Hodge.
William Hallock.
16.
Hoysted Hacker.
17.
Isaiah Robinson.
18.
John Paul Jones.
19.
James Josiah.
20.
Elisha Hinman.
21.
Joseph Olney.
22.
James Robinson.
23.
John Young.
24.
Elisha Warner.
25.
John Ayres.
26.
Peter Brewster.
27.
William Burke.
28.
vSamuel Chew.
29.
Gustavus Conyngham.
30.
Benjamin Dunn.
31.
John Green.
32.
Seth Harding.
33.
John Hazard.
34.
Henry Johnson.
35.
Peter Landais.
36.
John Nicholson.
37.
Samuel Nicholson.
38.
William Pickles.
39.
John P. Rathburn.
40.
Thomas Simpson.
41.
John Skimmer.
42.
William Stone
43.
Silas Talbot.
44.
Samuel Tucker
45.
Daniel Waters,
508 List of Officers
LIEUTENANTS
1. Robert Adamson.
2. Joseph Adams.
3. Thomas Albertson.
4. Blaney Allison.
5. John Angus.
6. James Armitage.
7. Rhodes Arnold.
8. Josiali Audibert.
9. John Baldwin.
10. William Barnes.
11. Joshua Barney.
12. Benjamin Barren.
13. William Barren.
14. Benjamin Bates.
15. George Batson.
16. Daniel Bears.
17. John Bellenger.
18. Elijah Bowen.
19. Christopher Bradley.
20. Jacob Brooks.
21. John Brown.
22. Philip Brown.
23. Isaac Buck.
24. Charles Bulkley.
25. Edward Burke.
26. Ezekiel Burroughs.
27. Samuel Cardal.
28. George Champlin.
29. John Channing.
30. Seth Clarke.
31. David Cullam.
32. Richard Dale.
33. James Degge.
34. "William Dennis.
35. Peter Deville.
36. Silas Devpl.
37. Arthur Dillaway.
38. Joseph Doble.
39. Marie Sevel Dorie.
List of Officers 509
40.
William Dunlap.
41.
William Dupar.
42.
43.
John Fanning.
Joshua Fanning.
44.
Wilford Fisher.
45.
Patrick Fletcher.
46.
Robert French.
47.
William Gamble.
48.
Nicholas E. Gardner.
49.
Joseph Greenway.
50.
51.
Stephen Gregory.
William Grinnell.
52.
James Grinwell.
53.
Simon Gross.
54.
Elijah Hall.
55.
William Ham.
56.
Benjamin Handy.
57.
58.
James Handy.
Robert Harris.
59.
Abraham Hawkins.
60.
61.
John Hennesey.
Stephen Hill.
62.
63.
Christopher Hopkins.
Esek Hopkins, jr.
64.
William Hopkins.
65.
George House.
66.
Robert Hume.
67.
68.
Aquilla Johns.
John Kemp.
69.
John Kerr.
70.
Michael Knies.
71.
Benjamin Knight.
72.
William Leeds.
73.
Edward Leger.
74.
John Lewis.
75.
76.
Muscoe Livingston.
George Lovie.
77.
Cutting Lunt.
78.
Henry Lunt.
79.
80.
John McDougal.
John Mclvers.
List of Officers
81. Jonathan Maltbie.
82. John Margisson.
83. Robert Martin.
84. Richard Marvin.
85. Luke Mathewman.
86. William Mollison.
87. John Moran.
88. William Moran.
89. William Morrison.
90. Alexander Murray.
91. Isaac Olney.
92. Benjamin Page.
93. David Phipps.
94. James Pine.
95. Jonathan Pitcher.
96. Robert Pomeroy.
97. David Porter.
98. William Potts.
99. Jonathan Pritchard.
100. Benjamin Reed.
101. Peter Richards.
102. John Rodez.
103. James Robertson.
104. John Robinson.
105. Peter Rosseau.
106. Robert Saunders.
107. John Scott.
108. Robert Scott.
109. John Scranton.
110. Nicholas Scull.
111. Benjamin Seabury.
112. James Sellers.
113. Josiah Shackford.
114. Peter Shores.
115. John Sleymaker.
116. Daniel Starr.
117. James Stephens.
118. John Stevens.
119. Adam W. Thaxter.
120. Mathew Tibbs.
121. Daniel Vaughan.
List of Officers 511
122.
Thomas Vaughan.
123.
124.
Joseph Vesey.
Thomas Weaver.
125.
David Welch.
126.
Hezekiah Welch.
127.
128.
129.
130.
John Wheelwright.
Jacob White.
Jacob White (?).
Richard Wickes.
131.
James Wilson.
132.
Robert Wilson.
133.
Hopley Yeaton
134.
Samuel York.
MARINE CORPS
MAJOR
1. Samuel Nichols.
CAPTAINS
1. Edward Arrowsmith.
2. Seth Baxter.
3. Abraham Boyce.
4. Isaac Craig.
5. Benjamin Dean.
6. James Disney.
7. John Elliott.
8. Robert Elliott.
9. Joseph Hardy.
10. John Hazard.
11. William Holton.
12. William Jones.
13. Dennis Leary.
14. William Mathewman.
15. William Morris.
16. Robert Mullen.
17. William Nicholson.
18. George Jerry Osborn.
19. Richard Palmes.
20. Matthew Parke.
21. Miles Pennington.
22. Andrew Porter.
23. Rice.
24. Gilbert Saltonstall.
25. Samuel Shaw.
26- Joseph Shoemaker
List of Officers 513
27. Spence.
28. John Stewart.
29. John Trevitt.
30. Elihu Trowbridge.
31. John Welch.
LIEUTENANTS
1. William Barney.
2. William Barney (?).
3. Henry Becker.
4. Pete/ Bedford.
5. David Bill.
6. Gurdon Bill.
7. Abraham Boyce.
8. Peregrine Brown.
9. Benjamin Catlin.
10. Seth Chapin.
ohn Chilton.
ames Clark,
ames Cokely.
ames Connolly.
William Cooper.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16. David Cullam.
17. Robert Cummings.
18. Henry Dayton.
19. Robert Davis.
20. Panatier De la Falconier.
21. Lewis De la Valette.
22. John Dimsdell.
23. Stephen Earl.
24. Thomas Elting.
25. Thomas Elwood.
26. Zebadiah Farnham.
27. William Fielding.
28. Thomas Fitzgerald.
29. John Fitzpatrick.
30. Samuel Gamage.
31. William Gilmore.
32. Peter Green.
33. John Guignace.
34. Roger Haddock.
List of Officers
35.
James Hamilton
36.
Jonas Hamilton.
37.
William Hamilton.
38.
John Harris.
39.
John Harris ( ?).
40.
Richard Harrison.
41.
Samuel Hempsted.
42.
Daniel Henderson.
43.
Samuel Holt.
44.
Benjamin Huddle.
45.
William Huddle.
46.
Robert Hunter.
47.
William Jennison.
48.
Kelly.
49.
Hugh Kirkpatrick.
50.
Daniel Longstreet.
51.
David Love.
52.
Eugene McCarthy.
53.
James McClure.
54.
Richard McClure.
55.
Charles McHarron.
56.
Robert McNeal.
57.
Peter Manifold.
58.
Stephen Meade.
59.
Jonathan Mix.
60.
Hugh Montgomery.
61.
Abel Morgan.
62.
William Morris.
63.
Alexander Neilson.
64.
Avery Parker.
65.
Samuel Powars.
66.
Thomas Pownal.
67.
Samuel Prichard.
68.
Thomas Plunkett.
69.
William Radford.
70.
Franklin Reed.
71.
Jerry Reed.
72.
Nathaniel Richards.
73.
Alpheus Rice.
74.
75.
Jabez Smith.
Walter Spooner.
List of Officers 515
76.
Edmund Stack.
77.
Daniel Starr.
78.
J. M. Strobach.
79.
Benjamin Thompson.
80.
George Trumbull.
81.
Thomas Turner.
82.
Nathaniel Twing.
83.
Abraham Vandyke.
84.
Zebulon Varnam.
85.
Wadsworth.
86.
Samuel Wallingsworth.
87.
88.
89.
James Warren.
James Warren (?).
William Waterman.
90.
Jacob White.
91.
James H. Wilson.
92.
Jonathan Woodworth.
APPENDIX C
A LIST OF ARMED VESSELS IN THE SERV
ICE OF THE UNITED STATES DURING
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION 1
PRINCIPAL FLEET OF THE CONTINEN
TAL CONGRESS
No. of
Period of
Rig.
Name.
guns.
Service.
. 1 ship
Alfred
24
1775-1778
^2 ship
Columbus
20
1775-1778
X3 brig
Andrew Doria
14
1775-1777
4 brig
Cabot
14
1775-1777
5 sloop
Providence
14
1775-1779
6 sloop
Hornet
10
1775-1777
7 schooner
Wasp
8
1775-1777
8 schooner
Fly
8
1775-1777
9 brig
Lexington
16
1776-1777
10 brig
Reprisal
16
1776-1777
11 brig
Hampden
14
1776-1777
12 sloop
Independence
10
1776-1778
13 sloop
Sachem
10
1776-1777
14 sloop
Mosquito
4
1776-1777
15 frigate
Raleigh
32
1777-1778
16 frigate
Hancock
32
1777
17 frigate
Warren
32
1777-1779
1. The term "Period of Service" is used in a somewhat
general sense. The dates are close approximations.
Among the vessels used by the Naval Department as
packets, merchantmen, or scout-ships are the following:
"Despatch," "Georgia Packet," "Phoenix," "Mercury,"
"Baltimore," "Enterprise," and "Fame."
Lift
of Armed I
7 esscJs 517
18 frigate
Washington
32
1777-1778
19 frigate
Randolph
32
1777-1778
20 frigate
Providence
28
1777-1780
21 frigate
Trumbull
28
1777-1781
22 frigate
Congress
28
1777
23 frigate
Virginia
28
1777-1778
24 frigate
Effingham
28
1777-1778
25 frigate
Boston
24
1777-1780
26 frigate
Montgomery
24
1777
27 frigate
Delaware
24
1777
28 ship
Ranger
18
1777-1780
29 brigantine
Resistance
10
1777-1778
30 sloop
Surprise
1777
31 frigate
Alliance
32
1778-1785
32 ship
General Gates
18
1778-1779
33 brigantine
Retaliation
1778
34 galley
Pigot
"~8
1778
35 frigate
Confederacy
32
1779-1781
36 sloop
Argo
12
1779
37 brig
Diligent
12
1779
38 ship
Saratoga
18
1780-1781
39 ship of the
line America
74
1782
40 ship
Washington
20
1782-1784
41 ship
Due de Lauzun
20
1782-1783
42 frigate
Bourbon
36
1783
FLEET FITTED OUT IN FRANCE
1 ship
Bon Homme
R.ichard 42
1779
2 ship
Indian 40
1777
3 frigate
Deane or Hague32
1777-1783
4 frigate
Queen ofFrance 28
1777-1780
5 ship
Pallas 30
1779
6 ship
Ariel 20
1780-1781
7 cutter
Cerf 18
1779
8 cutter
Revenge 14
1777-1779
9 brig
Vengeance 12
1779
10 cutter
Dolphin 10
1777
1 1 lugger
Surprise 10
1777
518
List of Armed Vessels
POLLOCK S FLEET
1 ship
2 sloop
3 schooner
Morris
West Florida
24
1778-1779
1779-1780
1779
WASHINGTON S FLEET
1 schooner Hannah .... 1775
2 schooner Lynch .... 1775-1776
3 schooner Franklin .... 1775-1776
4 schooner Lee 4 1775-1776
5 schooner Harrison .... 1775-1776
6 schooner Warren .... 1775-1776
7 brigantine Washington 10 1775-1776
8 schooner Hancock .... 1776
9 sloop Gen l Schuyler .... 1776
10 sloop Gen l Mifflin .... 1776
11 galley Lady Washington 1776-1777
ARNOLD S FLEET 1
1 sloop
Enterprise
12
1776
2 schooner
Royal Savage
12
1776
3 schooner
Revenge
8
1776
4 schooner
Liberty
8
1776
5 gondola
New Haven
3
1776
6 gondola
Providence
3
1776
7 gondola
Boston
3
1776
8 gondola
Spitfire
3
1776
9 gondola
Philadelphia
3
1776
10 gondola
Connecticut
3
1776
11 gondola
Jersey
3
1776
12 gondola
New York
3
1776
13 galley
Lee
6
1776
14 galley
Trumbull
8
1776
15 galley
Congress
8
1776
16 galley
Washington
8
1776
17 galley
Gates
8
1776
1. Several of Arnold s vessels were employed on the
Lakes in 1775.
INDEX
ABACO, Island of, 58.
Abercrombie, Lieutenant-Colonel, 414.
"Accomac," the, 406, 411.
Accounts, Naval, settling of, 70, 196, 225, 227-
228, 246-247. 303-304, 440.
"Active," the, 335 and note, 349, 352.
Adams, John, early naval services, 32, 36-41,
46, 48, 51, 82-83, 86, 97, 98 and note, 135;
in France, 161, 254-255, 257, 276, 292; and
Massachusetts naval affairs, 321, 324.
Adams, Samuel, naval services, 83, 86, 89 and
note; administrative views, 186, 211, 215,
225; and Penobscot expedition, 349.
"Admiral Duff," the, 345.
"Admiral Keppel," the, 369.
Admiralty Courts, of Continental Congress,
48-49, 67-68, 203, 233, 478; of Massachus
etts, 68, 148, 322-323, 327-328: of Connecti
cut, 365, 474; of Pennsylvania, 148, 391-
392; in France, 266-267, 282-283; of Vir
ginia, 403-405; of South Carolina, 423-424;
of Maryland, 444, 474; of North Carolina,
459; of Georgia, 462; of Rhode Island, 467-
468, 474; of New York, 476; of New Hamp
shire, 476-477; of New Jersey, 477-478.
"Adventure," the brig, 397, 406.
"Adventure," the schooner, 397.
Africa, 173, 176, 279-280.
Agent of Marine, appointment of, 218-226;
office of, 226-228; legislation under, 228-
235; movement of fleet under, 235-240;
recommendations of, 240-244; last work of,
244-250; 257, 302, 394.
520 Index
"Albany," the, 350.
Alexander, Charles, 123.
"Alfred," the, 52, 55, 57, 59, 97, 133, 158, 175,
281.
"Alliance," the, 122, 204, 206, 220, 231, 235,
236-238, 248-250, 295-300, 302.
"Amelia," the, 442.
"America," the, 111, 122, 145, 204, 219-220,
235, 247.
"American Congress," the, 398.
"American Turtle," the, 364.
Amsterdam, 264, 311, 436-437.
"Andrew Doria," the, 52, 57, 59.
Annapolis, 442, 446.
"Annapolis," the, 442.
Antigua, 306-307, 344.
Appeals in prize cases, 49, 68, 327, 365-366,
391, 404-405, 475, 477.
Appointments, in Continental navy, 52-55, 105-
107, 108-109, 119, 124-125, 160, 257-260,
309.
"Ariadne," the, 408.
"Ariel," the, 300.
"Argo," the, 469-470.
Arnold, Benedict, 73-78, 414, 415, 446.
"Arnold," the, 376, 379, 385.
Arnold and Phillips, raid of, 408, 413-415,
446.
Arnold s fleet, 71-78, 475.
Articles of Confederation, 197, 200-202, 417,
434-435.
"Atalanta," the, 206.
"Augusta," the, 385.
"Aurora," the, 468.
Aylett, William, 405.
Azores, the, 368.
BAGADUCE, Maine, 348-351.
Bahamas, the, 58, 328, 438.
"Bailie," the, 236.
Baltimore, 51, 56, 57, 93, 99, 102, 168, 249,
331, 442, 443, 475.
521
"Baltimore," the, 442.
Baltimore Committee of Observation, 93, 442.
Barbadoes, the, 176, 431.
Barclay, Thomas, 302-303.
Barney, Joshua, 248-249, 394.
Barnwell, John, 418, 459.
Barron, James, 397, 402, 407, 416.
Barren, Richard, 397, 407.
Barry, John, 109 note, 206, 236-238, 802.
Bartlett, Josiah, 86.
"Batchelor," the, 169.
Battle of the Barges, 449-451.
Beaufort, S. C., 423, 428.
"Beaufort," the, 428.
Belfast, 293.
"Bellona," the, 459.
Bergen, 304.
"Berkenbosch," the, 273.
Bermudas, the, 156, 167, 171, 173, 180, 206,
236, 328, 342, 457, 465.
" Betsey," the, 419.
Beverly, Mass., 63.
Bilbao, 256, 331.
Biddle, Nicholas, 54, 57, 120, 123, 430
Biddle, Owen, 373.
Bingham, William, 266, 305-306.
"Bishop Landaff," the, 471-472.
Blackburn, John, 454.
"Black Duck," the, 389.
Black Prince," the privateer, 260-261.
"Black Prince," the ship, 52.
"Black Princess," the, 260-261.
Blake, Edward, 420, 425.
Bland, Theodoric, 222, 223.
Blewer, Joseph, 382.
"Blonde," the, 350.
Board of Admiralty, appointment, 181-188:
duties, 188-189; pay, 189-190; selection,
190-194; legislative work, 194-203; move
ment of fleet under, 203-208; discontinu
ance, 208-209, 219-222, 227-229.
522 Index
Board of Treasury, Continental, 184, 188, 205,
247, 249, 250.
Board of War, Continental, 184, 187.
Board of War, Massachusetts, 329-332, 335-
337, 343, 345, 348, 351.
"Bolton," the, 59.
"Bon Homme Richard," the, 163, 258, 295-
298.
Bordeaux, 256, 276, 292, 436.
Bordentown, 97, 99, 102, 387.
Boston, 63, 93, 94, 113, 114, 139, 140, 148,
154, 168, 172, 203, 206, 247, 248, 328, 352,
353, 361.
"Boston," the, 91, 158, 204, 207, 292, 344,
390, 433, 434.
Boston Bay, 156.
Boucher, John Henry, 402, 444.
Boulogne, 262.
Bounties, 46, 128, 146, 198, 403, 410, 411, 432,
443.
"Bourbon," the, 92, 122, 204, 235, 240.
Bowen, Oliver, 459, 460, 461.
Boys, Captain, 395.
Braddock, Captain, of Georgia navy, 461.
Bradford, John, 69, 94, 95.
Bradford, William, 382, 387.
Brest, 256.
"Bricole," the, 433, 434.
"Britannia," the, 357.
British fleet on Lake Champlain, 76.
Brooke, Walter, 402.
Broughton, Nicholson, 33, 61-63, 66.
Brown, John, 227, 231.
Bryan, George, 190.
"Bulloch," the, 461.
Burden, George, 293.
Burgoyne, General, 77, 384.
Bushnell, David, 363-364.
Buzzard s Bay, 339.
"CABOT," the, 52, 57, 58, 59, 158, 175.
, 261.
Cadrigal, General, 438.
Caldwell, Thomas, 378.
Calvert, Captain, 308.
Canada, 72, 151, 173.
"Camden," the, 475.
"Camilla," the, 350.
Campbell, Captain, 461.
Campbell, Lord William, 419-420.
Cape Cod, 279.
Cape Fear, 156, 165, 452.
Cape Francois, 207, 237, 305, 331, 460.
Captures, Continental, legislation concerning,
49-50, 126-127, 200-201, 232-234. See
Prizes.
Carleton, Sir Guy, 76, 77.
Carmichael, William, 260.
Castine, Maine, 348.
Caswell, Governor, 458.
"Caswell," the, 406, 456, 458, 459.
Catherine II. of Russia, 274.
Champlain, Lake, 72-78, 475.
Champlin, George, 165.
"Chance," the, 169.
Charleston, S. C., 154, 156, 166, 167, 369, 419-
423, 425, 427, 432-434.
Chase, Samuel, 51, 82, 86.
Chatham, Conn., 92, 204.
"Chatham," the, 390.
Chaumont, Ray de, 296.
"Cherokee," the, 419, 420.
"Chester," the, 442, 444.
Chew, Samuel, 165.
Chickahominy shipyard, 400, 401, 413, 414.
Clinton, General Henry, 408, 445.
Clouston, John, 332, 343.
Cochran, Robert, 421-422, 427.
Coit, William, 359, 368 note.
Collier, Sir George, 350.
"Columbus," the, 52, 57, 59, 133, 175.
"Comet," the galley, 461.
"Comet," the schooner, 421.
524 Indc.v
"Commerce," the, 419.
Commerce, American, 241.
Commercial agents of Congress, 105, 253, 256-
257, 305-311.
Commercial Committee of Congress, 160, 162,
257, 307.
Commissary-General of Issues, 204.
Commissary-General of Prisoners, 96, 116, 209,
222.
Commissary-General of Purchases, 116.
Commissioners at Paris, 105, 116, 254; work
of, 255-294.
Commissions for Continental Navy, 50, 109,
188, 197, 199-200, 258; for privateers, 127,
200, 260-261, 321; for Massachusetts navy,
201; for Pennsylvania navy, 374.
Committee of Foreign Affairs, 160, 162, 255,
277-280.
Committee of Secret Correspondence, 162, 255,
258, 260, 276, 283, 305.
"Confederacy," the, 112, 122, 204, 207-208,
306, 390.
"Confederate," the, 208.
"Congress," the frigate, 92.
"Congress," the galley, 461.
Connecticut Council, 354, 355, 366.
Connecticut Council of Safety, 75, 95, 354-363,
369, 371.
Connecticut Gazette, 359, 362.
Connecticut General Assembly, 354, 355, 358,
360, 361, 363-367, 371-372.
Connecticut, Governor of, 75, 92, 95, 354-364,
369, 371.
Connecticut House of Representatives, 354,
366.
Connecticut Journal, 362.
Connecticut Navy, 315; beginning of, 355-360;
administration of, 360-363; regulations of,
361, 366-367; vessels, 355-360, 367-370;
end of, 369-370.
Connecticut, warfare of armed boats, 370-372.
Index 525
"Conqueror," the, 442, 444.
Consular bureau, 139-140.
Continental agents, 95, 103, 105, 257, 305, 307.
Continental Congress, movement for a navy in,
34-38, 81-84; legislation respecting navy,
37-38, 41-51, 84-85, 105-107, 109, 119-133,
145-146, 154, 196-203, 228-235, 245-250,
259, 261-263; legislation respecting Naval
Department, 37-38, 86-88, 93-94, 96-98,
101-103, 109, 113, 187-193, 195-196, 208-
209, 216-224, 301-304; prepares a fleet on
Lakes, 71-73; and prize courts, 48-50,
67-69, 203, 327, 365, 391, 404, 467, 477-
478; action respecting Esek Hopkins, 133-
138; action respecting consuls, 140; ignor
ance of navy, 182-183; establishes admin
istrative boards, 184, 212; factions of, 186;
210-216; refuses to increase navy, 240-244;
ends navy, 245; relations with 6 liver Pol
lock, 307-311; 315, 322, 333, 357, 385, 392,
402, 405, 409, 412, 417, 418, 421, 437, 438,
443, 447, 460, 465, 469, 472, 473, 475.
Continental Navy, movements for a, 32-42,
80-85; executive organs of, 38-41, 60 86-
90, 93-103, 187-196, 216-218, 223-228, 252-
257,302-307; rules of, 43-48; legislation re
specting, 42-51, 85-86, 121-133, 196-201,
228-230, 232-234; vessels of, 51-52, 90-93,
110-112, 114, 121-123, 156-158, 203-205,
219-220, 235, 247-249, 261-266, 281 306
315, 344, 349, 388, 394, 433, 434, 465, 469-
470; officers of, 51-55, 105-110, 117, 123-
126, 128-129, 133-139, 158-160, 165, 258-
260; expeditions of, 55-60, 168-169, 171-
173, 205-208, 236-239, 283-284, 286-300,
302, 308-311; uniform of, 117-118; condi
tions of, 141-160; general movements of
161-180, 276-280; recommendations for
increase of, 239-243; end of, 244-251;
breaches of neutrality by, 273-274, 284-
292; 375, 427, 444, 447.
526 Index
Contraband, 200, 232.
"Convention," the, 377, 385, 388, 389.
Conyngham, Gustavus, 173, 179, 258, 260,
268, 273, 287, 290.
Cook, Captain James, 258, 275 note.
Cook, George, 444, 449.
Cooke, Nicholas, 463, 465.
"Cormorant," the, 244, 415-416.
Cornwallis, surrender of, 239, 240.
Coromandel Coast, 170, 279.
Coruna, 256, 438.
Cottineau, Captain, 297.
Coulthard, Captain, 206.
"Countess of Scarborough," the, 164, 296-297.
Courts-martial and courts of inquiry, in Conti
nental navy, 44-45, 109, 131-139, 198-199,
228-232, 298-299, 300; in Connecticut
navy, 366; in Pennsylvania navy, 375,
386-387.
Court of appeals for trial of prize cases, 203.
Crane, Stephen, 84.
"Crane," the, 360, 369.
Crawford, John, 231.
Cregier, Thomas, 472.
Cropper, John, 450.
Cross, Stephen, 336.
Cushing, Nathan, 323.
Cushing, Thomas, 328
DALE, Richard, 258.
Dalton, John, 398.
Danish government, 304.
Dartmouth, Mass., 325, 339.
Davidson, Samuel, 378-379.
Davis, Caleb, 337, 338.
Davis, James, 453-454.
Dawson, George, 238.
Deane, Silas, 37, 38, 51-52, 54, 82, 86, 148,
154; in France, 254, 258-260, 266, 276-278,
282, 292.
"Deane," the, 171, 203, 220, 231, 232, 235,
236, 262, 263, 306, 344, 352, 390.
Indc.v 527
"Defence," the barge, 448.
"Defence," the schooner, 420, 421.
"Defence," the ship, of the Connecticut navy,
359, 368, 369, 370.
"Defence," the ship, of the Maryland navy,
441, 442, 449.
"Defence," the sloop, 339.
Delaware, 315.
"Delaware," the frigate, 93.
"Delaware," the schooner, 377, 385.
Deshon, John, 98, 99, 113, 196, 355, 357.
D Estaing, Count, 116, 139, 167. -
Devil s Island, 449.
Dewey, Admiral, 179.
"Diamond," the, 468.
"Dickinson," the, 386, 387.
"Diligence," the, 406, 411.
"Diligent," the brig, 349.
"Diligent," the schooner, 320.
"Dolphin," the cutter, 262, 281, 287, 289.
"Dolphin," the schooner, 442, 444.
Douglass, William, 72.
Dover, England, 262.
"Dragon," the, 406, 411.
"Drake," the, 164, 293.
Drayton, William Henry, 421.
Duane, James, 223.
"Due de Lauzun," the, 235, 237, 248, 303.
Dunkirk, 256, 260, 287, 290, 437.
Dunmore, Lord, 56, 396, 453.
"Duras," the, 295.
Dutch government, 273.
Dyer, Eliphalet, 82.
"EAGLE," the British ship, 364.
"Eagle," the, of the South Carolina navy, 430.
Eastern Coast, the, 320, 338, 339, 343, 344,
353.
East Haddam, Conn., 360.
Edenton, N. C., 93, 452, 455, 458.
"Effingham," the frigate, 92, 388.
"Effingham," the galley, 386.
528 lndc.\-
Ellery, William, 90, 182, 191-194, 196, 208.
Elliot, Samuel, 361, 362 and note.
Ellis, Richard, 458-459.
Ellsworth, Oliver, 222, 355.
"Enterprise," the ship, 76.
"Enterprise," the sloop, 72.
Executive Departments of Congress, 107.
Executive system, defects of, 210-214.
FACTIONS, in Congress, 186, 210-216.
"Fair American," the, 430.
"Falcon," the, 339.
Falconer, Nathaniel, 101.
"Fame," the, 306-307.
"Fearnaught," the, 448.
Ferrol, 291.
Fisk, John, 328, 332, 343.
Flags, 55, 120, 275-276, 327, 377.
Florida, 167, 173, 175, 461.
Floyd, William, 191.
"Fly," the, of Continental navy, 56, 57, 158.
"Fly," the, of Virginia navy, 416.
"Flying Fish," the, 451.
Forbes, James, 191, 192.
Ford, Samuel, 386.
Foreign Office of Congress, 160, 255.
Fort Mercer, 385.
Fort Mifflin, 385.
Forton prison, 267, 270.
"Fowey," the, 396.
"Fox," the, 163.
Franklin, Benjamin, 83, 378; in France, 254-
256, 261, 262, 265-274, 282-284, 295, 296,
298-303.
"Franklin," the galley, 54, 390.
"Franklin," the schooner, 63, 64.
"Freedom," the, 325, 332, 343, 352.
French fleet, 139, 166-167, 205, 207, 242, 247-
248, 263, 276, 294, 344, 371, 389, 413.
French government, 263, 265, 273, 282-289,
294, 295, 298.
Index 529
GADSDEN, Christopher, 38, 39, 82, 83, 86.
"Gallatea," the, 350.
Galvez, governor of Louisiana, 307-311.
Gates, General Horatio, 74, 470;
General Gates," the, 122, 165, 173, 306.
General Greene," the, 390-391.
General Mifflin," the, 70.
General Monk," the, 393, 394.
General Moultrie," the, 430, 431, 433, 434.
General Putnam," the, 70, 472, 473, 474.
General Schuyler," the, 70, 472, 473, 474.
Genoa, State of, 260.
Georgetown, S. C., 422, 426, 434.
Georgia Committee of Safety, 460.
Georgia Navy, 315, 459-462.
Georgia Provincial Congress, 459, 460.
Gerard, French minister to United States, 119,
140, 161, 166.
Germaine, Lord George, 457.
Gerry, Elbridge, 321, 323.
Ghent, 436.
Gibraltar, 268.
Gillon, Alexander, 435-440.
Glasgow, 276, 278.
"Glasgow," the, 59, 133, 186.
"Gloucester," the, 265.
Glover, John, 62, 63.
Goldsborough, Robert, 447.
"Good Intent," the, 274.
Gosport navy-yard, 93, 400, 408.
Goodrich, a Tory privateersman, 165.
Grannis, John, 136.
Grason, Thomas, 443.
Great Bridge, Va., 396.
Green, John, 258, 263.
"Greyhound," the, 350.
Grimes, John, 466.
Griswold, William, 356.
Groton, Conn., 371.
Guadaloupe, 331.
Guerard, Benjamin, 434.
530
lndc.\
"Guilford," the, 367, 370.
Gwinnett, Button, 461.
HABERSHAM, Joseph, 459.
"Hague," the, 236, 248.
Halifax, 156, 167, 465.
Hall, Captain, 430.
Hall, Giles, 355, 357.
Hallet, Allen, 345.
Hamilton, Alexander, 211, 213, 217-218.
"Hampden," the brig, 175.
"Hampden," the ship, 349, 476.
Hampstead, Joshua, 452, 453.
Hampton, Va., 396, 402, 412.
Hancock, John, 86, 89, 353, 472.
"Hancock," the frigate, 91, 158, 239, 344.
"Hancock," the galley, 390.
"Hancock," the schooner, 63.
Handy, Joseph, 450.
Handy, Levin, 450.
"Hannah," the, a merchantman, 475.
"Hannah," the, of Washintgon s fleet, 33, 61,
62.
Haraden, Jonathan, 343.
Harding, Seth, 207, 359.
Hardy, Captain, 461.
Harris, Captain, 407.
Harrison, Benjamin, 413.
Harrison, William Hanson, 447.
"Harrison," the, of Virginia navy, 416.
"Harrison," the, of Washington s fleet, 63, 65.
Harrison and Van Bibber, 443.
Hartford, Conn., 355.
Hartford Courant, 362.
Hartley, David, 269.
Hatcher, Captain, 461.
Havana, 237, 305, 309, 311, 435, 438.
"Hawk," the, 59.
Hayden, Uriah, 359.
"Hazard," the, 33-5, 342, 349, 352.
Hazelwood, John, 376, 380, 384, 385, 386, 388.
Heath, General, 116.
Henry, Patrick, 211.
"Henry," the, 411.
Hewes, Joseph, 38, 41, 86, 90, 454.
"Hibernia," the, 168, 169.
Hill, Whit mill, 193.
" Hinchinbrooke," the, 461.
Hispaniola, 175, 305, 457, 460.
Hodge, William, 262, 291.
Holker, John, 140, 205.
"Holker," the, 391.
Hollingsworth, Jesse, 442.
"Honor," the, 368.
Hopkins, Daniel, 208.
Hopkins, Esek, 53-60, 91, 105, 116, 125, 133-
139, 185, 419.
Hopkins, J. B., 53, 54, 168.
Hopkins, Stephen, 38, 39-40, 53, 81, 82, 86,
90, 91, 92, 119.
Hopkinson, Francis, 96-97.
"Hornet," the brig, 428.
"Hornet," the galley, 461.
"Hornet," the sloop, 55, 56, 57.
Hosmer, Titus, 203.
Houston, John, 86.
Howe, General William, 77, 384.
Howe, Lord Richard, 120.
Howe, Tyringham, 59.
"Hudson," the, 475.
Huntington, Benjamin, 356, 359.
Huntington, Daniel, 193.
"Hussar," the, 353.
"Hyder Ally," the, 394, 395.
IMPRESSMENT of seamen, 146.
"Independence," the brigantine, 325, 352.
"Independence," the galley, 442.
"Independence," the sloop, 281.
"Indian," the, 264, 304, 436.
"Industry," the, 389.
Ingraham, Edward, 453.
loor, Joseph, 431.
Ipswich, Mass., 322, 328.
532 Index
"Iris," the, 238.
Isle of Pines, 431.
"JACKALL," the, 236.
Jamaica, 156, 175, 345.
"Jane," the, 407.
"Jason," the, 169, 171.
Jay, John, 185, 186, 211, 219, 261.
Jefferson, Thomas, 303, 405, 409, 413.
"Jefferson," the, 407, 411, 414.
"Jemmy and Sallie," the, 430.
Jenifer, Daniel of St. Thomas, 193, 221.
Jersey, island of, 440.
"John," the, 169.
"John," the, 430.
"Johnson," the, 442.
Jones, John Paul, 54, 55, 106, 125, 164, 173-
176, 179, 183, 207; in Europe, 258, 270-
271, 273, 292-300, 303, 304, 449.
Josiah, James, 120, 123.
Joyner, John, 418, 435, 439, 459
"Judith," the, 429.
"KATY," the, 55, 464, 465.
Kidd, Captain, commander of a British ves
sel, 450.
Kingston, Mass., 325.
"King Tammany," the, 452.
Knox, Henry, 53.
"LADY WASHINGTON," the, 71.
Lafayette, 161, 295, 446.
Lake Champlain, battle of, 77.
Landais, Peter, 199, 258, 259, 294-300.
Langdon, John, 37, 38, 91, 95, 106.
Langdon, Timothy, 323.
Laurens, Henry, 89, 311
Laurens, John, 437.
"L Aventure," 433.
Lawrence, John, 387.
Lebanon, Conn., 355.
Ledyard, William. 371.
Index 533
Lee, Arthur, 186, 211, 254, 280, 282, 300.
Lee, R. H., 38, 83, 86, 89, 93, 186, 211, 215,
256.
Lee, William, 186, 211, 256.
"Lee," the galley, 461.
"Lee," the schooner, 63, 65.
Leghorn, 277.
Lempriere, Clement, 419.
Lewis, Francis, 86, 90, 191-194, 196, 208, 475.
"Lexington," the, 281, 287, 289, 291.
"Liberty," the armed boat, 397, 415, 416, 417.
"Liberty," the brig, 397, 407.
Lilly, Thomas, 397.
Little, George, 353.
Liverpool, 206, 278.
"Liverpool," the, 384.
Livingston, Musco, 119.
Livingston, William, 119, 477-478.
Logic, Commander, 236.
Long Island, 70, 368, 370, 474.
L Orient, 237, 256, 286, 299, 300. 302.
Louis XVI., 202, 294, 436.
Lovell, Solomon, 350.
"Loyalist," the, 415, 416.
Loyalists, 338, 348, 370, 448.
Luxembourg, Chevalier, 436, 439-440.
Luzerne, French minister to United States, 248
"Lydia," the, 389.
"Lynch," the, 63, 64.
Lyon, Samuel, 386.
McCLEHANY, William, 231.
McDougall, Alexander, 213, 217-218 224
McKean, Thomas, 222.
Macpherson, John, 119.
McQueen, John, 435.
Machias, Maine, 320, 339.
"Machias Liberty," the, 320.
Madeira, 237.
Madison, James, 192.
"Magnifique," the, 247.
Mahan, A. T., 78, 143.
534
Manchac, 309.
Manly, John, 64, 65, 123, 163, 236.
Marblehead, Mass., 62, 63, 149.
"Margaretta," the, 339.
"Maria," the, 169.
Marine Committee, appointment of, 80-87;
offices of, 87; chairmen, 88-90; agents of,
90-103, 105-115; work of, 105-140; condi
tions of the naval service under, 141-160;
general movements of its fleet, 161-180;
defects of, 181-186; superseded, 187; 69,
70, 247, 279, 349.
Marines, Continental, 43 and note, 51, 58, 117-
118, 123, 129, 131, 136, 158-159, 197, 207,
229-230; of Massachusetts, 326; of Con
necticut, 357, 358; of Pennsylvania, 376,
377 392; of Virginia, 397, 398, 410, 411;
of South Carolina, 420, 422, 427, 430, 440;
of Maryland, 441, 445, 447; of North Caro
lina, 452.
"Mars," the, 201, 273, 338, 343, 344.
Martha s Vineyard, 339.
Martin, Joshua, 457.
Martinique, 204, 266, 305, 331, 353, 407, 443,
457.
Maryland commissioners for defense of Chesa
peake bay, 447.
Maryland Committee of Safety, 441, 442.
Maryland, Governor of, 443.
Maryland Governor and Council, 441, 445,
446, 447, 448.
Maryland Legislature, 445, 447, 448, 451.
Maryland Navy, 122, 315, 402, 415, 441-451.
Maryland Provincial Convention, 441, 442,
443, 444.
Mason, George, 398.
"Massachusetts," the, 325, 332, 343.
Massachusetts Agent of the Commonwealth,
337, 338.
Massachusetts admiralty courts, 68, 69, 322-
323, 327.
Index 535
Massachusetts Board of War, 329-332, 335,
336, 337, 343, 345, 348, 351.
Massachusetts Commissary-General, 338, 353.
Massachusetts Committee of Foreign Affairs,
343.
Massachusetts Committee of Safety, 319.
"Massachusetts Constitution, 337.
Massachusetts Council, 37, 319, 320, 322, 323,
324, 341, 347, 351, 422.
Massachusetts General Court, 319, 321, 323-
326, 329, 332-336, 338, 339, 341.
Massachusetts, Governor of, 337, 338, 353.
Massachusetts House of Representatives, 319,
321, 324, 347, 351.
Massachusetts Navy, 151, 201, 275, 315-353,
470; beginnings of, 318-328; documents re
specting, 328-329, 332-333; 334-337, 345-
347; administration of, 329-332, 337-338;
regulations respecting, 325-327, 333-3~35;
vessels of, 325, 331, 335-339, 341-344, 352-
353; expeditions of, 332-333, 341-353; end
of, 353.
Massachusetts Provincial Congress, 318, 319.
Massachusetts trading vessels, 330-331.
Matthews and Collier, raid of, 408.
Mauritius, 179, 279.
Maxwell, James, 401, 409, 413.
"Medea," the, 352.
Mercury," the, 311.
"Merlin," the, 385.
Middletown, Conn., 355, 359.
Mifflin, Samuel, 380.
Mifflin, Thomas, 192.
"Mifflin," the, 367.
"Milford," the cartel-ship, 270.
"Milford," the frigate, 344.
Milligan, Captain, 461.
Mill prison, 267, 268, 270.
"Minerva," the merchantman, 475.
"Minerva," the, of the Connecticut navv, 356,
357, 358.
536 Index
Mississippi, the, 175, 307-311, 430.
Mobile, expedition against, 166, 311.
"Molly," the, 122.
"Montague," the, 120, 165.
Montgomery, General, 458.
Montgomery, James, 390.
"Montgomery," the frigate, 92.
"Montgomery," the ship, 71, 472-475.
"Montgomery," the sloop, 376, 379, 380, 385,
386.
Moore, Lieutenant, 339.
Moravian mission, 274.
Morgan, Captain, 430
Morris, Gouverneur, 211, 214.
Morris, Robert, 86, 90, 173-176, 182 and note,
211; agent of marine, 218-251, 256, 257,
302, 394; and the Pennsylvania navy, 376,
378, 394.
Morris, Thomas, 256.
"Morris," the, 308-309.
"Mosquito," the, 407.
Moylan, Stephen, 62, 63.
Mud Island, 384.
NANCY," the, 65, 236.
Nantes, 256, 262, 266, 284, 286, 331, 369.
Nantucket, 279, 328, 342, 465.
Nassau, New Providence, 58, 173, 419.
Nautilus," the, 350.
Naval administration in the states, in general,
315-318.
Naval Agents, of Washington, 62-63, 69-70;
of Congress, 90-96, 103, 105-107, 110, 116,
117, 150, 189, 195, 196, 221, 227, 247, 256-
257, 263-264, 266, 303-311; of Massachus
etts, 327, 329; of Connecticut, 361-363; of
Virginia, 401; of South Carolina, 426; of
Maryland, 442-443; of North Carolina, 458-
459.
Naval Committee, appointment of, 35-39;
quarters of, 39; description of, 39-40; act
ive life of, 40-41; legislative work, 42-51;
Index 537
prepares a fleet, 51-56; appoints officers,
52-55; orders of, 56; summary of work, 60;
its successor, 87; settling of its accounts,
246-247.
Naval Office at Paris, origin of, 252-253; duties
and work, 253-254, 257-304; personnel of,
254-255; headquarters of, 255; agents of,
256-257; movements of the fleet under,
286-300.
Naval operations, 161-180.
Naval stations, Continental, 154-155; British,
155-156.
Navy Board at Boston, origin of, 97-103; du
ties of, 105-116, 164-165: abolition of, 221,
223, 227; 145, 168, 171, 176, 178, 182, 189,
191, 195, 196, 197, 247, 349, 469.
Navy Board at Philadelphia, origin of, 96-97,
99-103; duties of, 105-116; abolition of, 221,
223, 227; 145, 189, 195, 196, 197, 247.
Navy of the American Revolution. See Con
tinental Navy, Massachusetts Navy, Con
necticut Navy, etc.
Nesbit, J. M., 95.
Neutral rights, 200, 253, 266, 271-274, 281-
292.
New Bedford, Mass., 339.
Newbern, N. C., 93, 452, 453, 455, 457, 459.
Newburyport, Mass., 62, 91, 320, 328, 336.
Newfoundland, 164, 167, 169; Grand Banks of,
166, 170, 236; fisheries of, 180, 276, 291-
292.
New Hampshire Navy, 315, 349, 476-477.
New Haven, Conn., 73, 355, 360, 362.
New Jersey, 315, 477-478.
New Jersey Provincial Congress, 477.
New London, Conn., 92, 93, 95, 116, 165 196
236, 355, 357, 359, 362, 363, 371.
New Orleans, 160, 307-309.
New Providence Expedition, 55-60, 133.
New York, city of, 52, 69, 70, 75, 93, 154, 155,
206, 207, 239, 247, 364, 368, 471, 473.
538 Index
Newport, R. I., 99, 194, 371.
New York Committee of Safety, 70, 472, 474,
475.
New York Convention, 96.
New York, Governor of, 47G.
New York Marine Committee, 471, 472.
New York Navy, 70-71, 315, 471-476.
New York Provincial Congress, 71, 72, 471,
472.
New York Secret Committee, 475.
Nichols, Samuel, 58, 123.
Nicholson, James, 123, 124, 125 note, 206,
238-239, 441, 444, 446, 449.
Nicholson, Samuel, 236, 258, 262, 263.
Niles, Robert, 357, 370.
Niles, Samuel, 356, 357.
Nixon, John, 52, 95, 96, 97, 376, 378.
"Noble," the, 407.
"North," the, 350.
North Carolina Council of Safety, 451, 452.
North Carolina Naval Commissioners, 451-454.
North Carolina Navy, 315, 451-459.
North Carolina Provincial Congress, 452, 456.
North Yarmouth, Maine, 322.
Norwich, Conn., 92, 355, 356, 359, 360, 372.
"Notre Dame," the, 428-431, 433, 434, 435.
O BRIAN, Jeremiah, 320.
Ocracoke Inlet, 155, 400, 406, 452, 454-459.
Officers, in Continental navy, 45-46, 50, 109,
123; in Massachusetts navy, 333; in Con
necticut navy, 357; in Pennsylvania navy,
374; in Virginia navy, 397, 401; in North
Carolina navy, 452 ; in Rhode Island navy,
464.
"Oliver Cromwell," the, of the Connecticut
navy, 359, 368-370.
"Oliver Cromwell," the, of the Virginia navy,
415.
Olney, Joseph, 168.
Olney, Richard, 471.
"Orpheus," the, 208.
539
Osbornes, Va., engagement at, 414.
Ossabaw Island, 461.
"Otter," the, 350, 449.
"Oxford," the, 265.
PACA, William, 203, 447.
Paine, R. T., 82.
Palfrey, William, 302.
"Pallas," the, 296.
Palmer, Joseph, 324.
Parsons, Alston and Company, 305.
"Patriot," the armed boat, 397.
"Patriot," the schooner, 416.
Pay, in Continental navy, 46, 50-51, 128, 145-
146, 198; in Massachusetts navy, 325-326,
333; in Connecticut navy, 357, 361, 366-
367; in Pennsylvania navy, 380-381; in
Virginia navy, 397, 403, 411, 416; in South
Carolina navy, 422, 432; in Maryland navy,
441, 443, 445; in North Carolina navy, 452.
"Peggy," the, 423.
Pendleton, Captain, 459.
Pennell, Joseph, 227, 246, 247, 250.
Pennsylvania commissioners for defense of the
Delaware, 393-395.
Pennsylvania Committee of Safety, 373-381, 391.
Pennsylvania Council of Safety, 378-381.
Pennsylvania Convention, 378*.
Pennsylvania General Assembly, 389, 391-394.
Pennsylvania Navy, 123, 315, 373-395; begin
nings of, 373-380; rules and regulations,
375; commodores, 378-379; pay, 380-381;
navy board, 381-383; in 1777 and 1778
383 : 389; in 1779, 390-391; prize courts,
391-392; in 1782, 393-395.
Pennsylvania Navy Board, 377, 381-383, 385,
387-389.
Pennsylvania Provincial Conference of Com
mittees, 379.
Pennsylvania Supreme Executive Council 378
382, 383, 387-392, 394. 395.
54O Index
"Pennsylvania Farmer," the, 452-454.
Penobscot Expedition, 337, 347-352, 476.
Pensacola, 175, 308, 311.
Pensions, 46, 129-131, 366, 381, 392, 410, 447.
Philadelphia, 39, 73, 92, 93, 94, 99, 102, 115,
140, 154, 166, 171, 196, 235, 238, 247, 311,
360, 373, 383, 384, 385, 389, 393, 413, 437-
440, 465.
"Phoenix," the, 408.
Pickering, Timothy, 323.
Pickles, William, 309-311.
Piercy, Thomas, 297.
"Pigot," the, 469, 470.
Pinckney, Colonel, 423.
"Plater," the, 442.
Plymouth, Mass., 63, 64, 98, 322.
"Polacre," the, 433.
Pollock, Oliver, 160, 307-310.
"Polly," the, 430, 431.
Pontchartrain, Lake, 309, 310.
Porto Rico, 237.
Portsmouth, N. H., 64, 91, 93 106, 111, 116,
122, 169, 196, 204, 476.
Portsmouth, Va., 400.
Portuguese government, 273.
Poughkeepsie, N. Y., 92, 96, 166.
Pray, Captain, 460.
President of the Continental Congress, 89, 118,
188, 257, 301.
Prince Edward Island, 66.
"Prince Frederick," the, 169.
"Prince of Wales," the, 430.
Prisons, naval, 150-151, 267.
Prisoners, naval, 151, 188, 209, 222, 227, 245,
261, 267-272, 281, 341.
Privateers and Privateering, Continental, 49-
50, 112, 119, 127-128, 136, 146-148, 201,
306, 308; in Europe, 260-261, 281; English,
151, 164, 165, 345-347, 411, 429, 445, 446,
449-451; Massachusetts, 148-149, 320-323,
327, 339-341, 344-347, 349; Connecticut,
Index 541
148, 364-365; Pennsylvania, 148, 382, 390,
392-393; Virginia, 148, 405; South Caro
lina, 427, 428, 429; Maryland, 148, 443,
444; North Carolina, 459; Rhode Island,
146, 148, 467-468; New York, 475; New
Hampshire, 476.
Prize Agents, Continental, 93-95, 103, 110,
195-196, 226-227, 247, 303-304; of Massa
chusetts navy, 327; of Connecticut navy,
363; of New York navy, 474.
Prizes of Continental navy, 59, 163-164, 165,
168-169, 172-173, 177-178, 206, 236, 237,
267,273, 281-288, 293, 296-297, 308, 311; of
Washington s fleet, 62, 64-71; of Massa
chusetts navy, 332-333, 335, 343-347,
353; of Connecticut navy, 357, 361, 368-
369; of Pennsylvania navy, 385, 391, 394;
of Virginia navy, 407; of South Carolina
navy, 418-419, 429-430, 431, 438-439; of
Maryland navy, 449; of Georgia navy, 461;
of Rhode Island navy, 464; of New York
navy, 474.
Prizes, sharing of, in Continental navy, 43,
46, 49-50, 51, 127, 129-130, 232-234; in
Washington s fleet, 62; in Massachusetts
navy, 326, 333; in Connecticut navy, 361,
366; in Pennsylvania navy, 381; in South
Carolina navy, 427-428, 436, 439-440; in
Maryland navy, 443, 448; in Rhode Island
navy, 468; in New York navy, 473.
Pritchard, Paul, 427.
Promotions in the Continental navy, 123-125.
Prosper," the, 421.
"Protector," the barge, 450.
"Protector," the ship, of the Massachusetts
navy, 201, 336, 344, 345, 353.
Protector, the ship, of the Virginia navy, 406.
Providence, R. I., 91, 93, 95, 98, 113, 135,
136, 148, 360, 468.
"Providence," the frigate, 91, 172, 204, 207,
292, 433, 468.
542 Index
"Providence," the sloop, 55, 57, 59, 173, 175,
349, 465.
Prussian government, 177
"Putnam," the, 377, 385.
" QUEEN OF FRANCE," the, 169, 171, 172, 204,
207, 263, 433.
Quincy, Joseph, 32.
"RAISONNABLE," the, 350.
"Raleigh," the brig, 408.
"Raleigh," the frigate, 91, 281.
Randall, Thomas, 472.
Randolph, Peyton, 82, 119.
"Randolph," the, 92, 430.
"Ranger," the galley, 387.
"Ranger," the ship, 106, 168, 169, 171, 172,
292-293, 433, 434.
Rank, naval, 123-126, 197, 257-258, 422.
Rathburn, John P., 172.
Rations in Continental navy, 1 28-129 ; in Massa
chusetts navy, 333 ; in Maryland navy,
447.
"Rattlesnake," the, 426.
Read, George, 86.
Read, James, 101, 196, 226, 250.
Read, Thomas, 123, 374, 376, 378.
"Rebecca," the, a merchantman, 308.
"Rebecca," the sloop, 461.
Recaptures, 50, 232, 322-323.
Red Bank, 373, 384.
Reed, Joseph, 391.
"Renown," the, 414.
"Reprisal," the, a privateer, 308.
"Reprisal," the sloop, 262, 269, 281, 283, 284,
286, 287, 291.
"Republic," the, 325, 331.
Resistance," the, 165.
"Resolution," the, 442.
Revenge," the brig, 345.
Revenge," the cutter, 262, 281, 290, 291.
Revere, Paul, 350.
Index 543
Rhode Island Committee of Safety, 463, 464,
466, 467.
Rhode Island Council of War, 138-139, 467,
468, 469.
Rhode Island General Assembly, 80, 463-470.
Rhode Island, Governor of, 465-467.
Rhode Island Inferior Court of Common Pleas,
138.
Rhode Island instructions to the Continental
Congress, 33, 80-85.
Rhode Island Navy, 80, 315, 463-471.
"Richmond," the, 416.
Richmond, Va., 401, 414, 447.
"Rising Empire," the, 325, 338.
Roach, John, 106, 107.
Robertson, William, 435.
Rodgers, William, 472, 473.
"Roebuck," the, 208, 352, 384.
Rogers, Josias, 394.
"Rose," the, 80, 463, 464.
Ross, Elizabeth, 377.
Ross, John, 256.
"Rover," the, 470, 471.
"Royal Charlotte," the, 430.
Rules and Regulations, of Continental navy,
43-48, 109, 110, 202-203, 231; of British
navy, 47-48, 202; of Massachusetts navy,
333-335; of Connecticut navy, 361, 366;
of Pennsylvania navy, 374, 375, 391; of
South Carolina navy, 422; of Maryland
navy, 447; of New York navy, 472.
Rush, Benjamin, 374.
Russian navy, 304.
Rutledge, Edward, 36.
Rutledge, John, 82, 119, 424, 429, 430.
ST. AUGUSTINE, Fla., 156, 419, 429, 430
St. Christopher, island of, 175.
St. Eustatius, island of, 237, 305, 306, 331.
457.
St. Mary s Isle, 293.
St. Thomas, island of, 335.
544 Index
Salem, Mass., 62, 149, 320, 328.
Salisbury, Mass., 91, 325.
"Sally," the, 389.
Salter, Titus, 476.
Saltonstall, Dudley, 54, 57, 133, 350, 352.
Saltonstall, Gilbert, 206.
Saltonstall, Gurdon, 154.
Salvage, 50, 201, 232, 323.
Samson, Simeon, 343.
Sandy Hook, 370, 390, 474.
"Saratoga," the, 122, 204, 208.
Sartine, French minister of marine, 274, 278,
296.
Savage, P. H., 330.
Savannah, 156, 167, 418, 459.
Saybrook, Conn., 74, 359.
Schuyler, General, 71-74, 116, 213.
"Schuyler," the, 367.
Schweighauser, a commercial agent in France,
256.
Seal of the Naval Department, 199, 209, 222.
Seamen in Continental navy, difficulties of en
listment, 144-147; numbers, 158-159.
Searle, James, 101.
Sears, Isaac, 358.
Secretary of Congress, 140, 209, 222.
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, 214, 255.
Secretary of Marine, 208-209, 214-218, 221,
224, 229.
Secretary of War, 216.
Secret Committee of Congress, 162.
Selkirk, Earl of, 293.
Selman, John, 63, 66.
"Serapis," the, 163, 164, 296, 297.
Seymour, Stephen, 426.
Seymour, Thomas, 380.
"Shark," the, 360, 369.
Shaw, Jr., Nathaniel, 95, 355, 362-363.
Sheridan, Patrick, 231.
Sherman, Roger, 221, 355.
"Sibylle," the, 237.
Indc.r 545
Simpson, Thomas, 1G8, 172.
Skimmer, John, 120, 165.
Smith, James, 72, 471, 472.
Smith, Meriwether, 220, 221.
Smith, William, 101.
"Somerset," the, 448.
"South Carolina," the, 436-440.
South Carolina Council of Safety, 418-421.
South Carolina, Governor of, 432, 434.
South Carolina House of Representatives, 432,
434
South Carolina Legislature, 423-428.
South Carolina Navy, 173, 275, 315, 418-440;
beginnings of, 418-424; operations of, 418-
421 428-434, 437-440; navy board, 424-
428; ordinances of 1777 and 1778, 427-
428; privateers, 428-429; Gillon and the
"South Carolina," 435-440.
South Carolina Navy Board, 424-428.
South Carolina, President of, 423-425, 427,
429, 430.
South Carolina Privy Council, 423, 425, 430.
South Carolina Provincial Congress, 420-422.
South Quay, Va., 400, 406, 455, 456.
Spanish-American War, 179.
Spanish fleet, 166, 173, 242.
Spanish government, 219, 273, 282, 308.
"Speedwell," the, 389.
"Spitfire," the, 466.
"Spy," the, 356, 357, 368, 370.
State Navies, 152-153, 160; in general, 315-
318; in particular, 318-478. See Massa
chusetts navy, Connecticut navy, etc.
Stonington, Conn., 357.
Stormont, Lord, 269-270, 284-289.
Stranger, Captain, 345.
Submarine invention, 363-364.
Subsistence money, 128, 198.
Suffolk, Va., 455-456.
Sullivan, Captain, 430.
Sullivan, General, 469, 470.
546 Index
Sullivan, James, 321, 323.
Superintendant of Finance, 216, 219, 224,
227.
"Surprise," the, 262, 281, 287
Swanzey, Mass., 325.
Swedish Court, 273.
"Sylph," the, 309.
TALBOT, Silas, 469-470.
"Tamar," the, 419-420.
"Tartar," the, of the Massachusetts navy, 339,
353.
"Tartar," the, of the Virginia navy, 406.
Taylor, Richard, 397, 407.
"Tempest," the, 406-407, 411, 414
Ternay, Chevalier de, 207.
"Terrible," the, 448.
Texel, the, Holland, 204, 271, 297-298, 437.
"Thetis," the, 407, 411.
Thompson, Thomas, 133.
Tilghman, Walter, 447.
Tillinghast, Daniel, 95.
Tories, 338, 348, 370, 448
Travis, Edward, 397.
"Trepassey," the, 206.
"Trimmer," the, 393.
"Truite," the, 433, 434.
Trumbull, Jonathan, 92, 95, 354, 355.
"Trumbull," the, 92, 113, 204, 206, 220, 235,
238-239.
Tucker, Samuel, 292.
Tufts, Simon, 420-421.
Turner, George, 227.
Turpin, Joseph, 421.
"Tyrannicide," the, 325, 328, 342, 343, 345,
349, 352.
UNIFORMS, of Continental navy, 117-118; of
Massachusetts navy, 327; of Pennsyl
vania marines, 377; of Maryland marines,
441.
547
VARXUM, J. M., 223.
Vergennes, French minister, 261, 284, 285,
289, 291.
Vernon, William, 98-99, 113, 182.
"Victory," the, 87.
"Virginia," the frigate, 93, 124.
"Virginia," the ship, of the Royal navy, 350.
"Virginia," the ship, of the Virginia navy, 407.
Virginia Board of Trade, 409.
Virginia Board of War, 409.
Virginia commissioners for defence of Chesa
peake bay, 415-416.
Virginia Commissioner of Navy, 409, 415.
Virginia Committee of Safety, 396-398.
Virginia General Assembly, 401-404, 408-411,
415.
Virginia Governor and Council, 399, 401, 403,
411.
Virginia Naval Commissioner, 409.
Virginia naval magazines, 401.
Virginia Navy, 152, 315, 396-417, 429, 446-447,
449, 450, 456-458; beginnings of, 396-403;
navy board, 398-403; admiralty courts,
403 : 405; vessels, 397-398, 405-408, 414-
417; raids, 408, 413-415; later legislation,
408-413, 415-416; end of navy, 416-417.
Virginia Navy Board, 398-403, 405, 408, 409,
424.
Virginia navy-yards, 400, 408, 414.
Virginia Provincial Convention, 396, 398, 403.
WALLACE, James, 463.
Ward, Artemas, 69, 351.
Ward, Samuel, 81, 83.
Waring, Thomas, 190-191.
W T arner, Seth, 74.
Warren, James, 51, 98, 112, 330.
"Warren," the frigate, 92, 119, 136, 168, 171,
349, 468.
"Warren," the schooner, 63.
Warwick, Va., 401, 414.
548 Index
Washington, George, 33, 37, 42, 48, 73, 116,
154, 166, 167, 204, 211, 362, 388, 422, 446,
468, 473; fleets of, 61-71 ; on failure of navy,
184-186; on committees of Congress, 213.
"Washington," the, of the Continental navy
(frigate), 92, 388.
"Washington," the, of the Continental navy
(ship), 235, 248-249, 393-396.
"Washington," the, of the Georgia navy, 460-
461.
"Washington," the, of the North Carolina
navy, 452-454.
"Washington," the, of the Rhode Island
navy (galley), 466.
"Washington," the, of the Rhode Island
navy (sloop), 464, 465.
"Washington," the, of the Virginia navy, 406,
456.
"Washington," the, of Washington s fleet, 63,
65.
"Wasp," the, 55, 57, 158.
Waterford, Conn., 370.
Waterbury, David, 77, 358.
"Watt," the, 206-207.
Weaver, Lieutenant, 58.
Webb, William, 377.
"West Florida," the, 310-311.
West Indies, the, 80, 151, 161, 165, 167, 169,
173, 175, 179 , 207, 236, 237, 242, 283, 305-
307, 335, 342, 358, 368-369, 406, 424, 429,
430, 449, 452.
Wethersfield, Conn., 355, 356.
"Weymouth," the, 368.
Whaley, Commodore, 450..
Whaling fleets, 151, 170, 268, 278-279.
Wharton, John, 96, 97, 101, 196, 374, 387.
Whipple, Abraham, 54-55, 57, 80, 133, 172,
433, 464-465.
Whipple, William, 89, 90, 105-106, 190, 211.
White, Robert, 373.
"Whiting," the, 360, 369.
Indc.Y 549
Whiting, Thomas, 260.
Wickes, Lambert, 173, 179, 262, 269, 287-291.
Williams, Jonathan, 256.
Williams, J. F., 345.
Williamsburg, Va., 93, 398.
Willing, Captain, 308.
Wilson, W T illis, 458.
Wilmington, N. C., 93, 434.
Winder, William, 101, 196.
"Winthrop," the, 339, 353.
"Wolodimer," the, 304.
Woodford, Thomas, 193.
Wynkoop, Jacobus, 72, 74.
Wythe, George, 203.
"YARMOUTH," the, 431.
"York," the, 416.
Yorktown, siege of, 415, 446
Young, John, 208.
ZUBLY, John J., 82.
14 DAY USE
RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED
LOAN DEPT.
RENEWALS ONLY TEL. NO. 642-3405
This book is due on the last date stamped below, or
on the date to which renewed.
Renewed books are subject to immediate recall.
8fr
WDWSCCRC
APR 1 3 1999
LD21A-60m-3, 70
(N5382slO)476-A-32
General Library
University of California
Berkeley
YB -37335 .
U.C.BERKELEY LIBRARIES
COM5WS1SDS
1=27)
"
