HISTORY OF MANNING.

CHAPTER II.

WHEN discussing the question of our Naval Reserves, we are invariably reminded of the great resources possessed by continental nations in their trained seamen, as if those men could be marched on board their ships of war like so many machines whenever their services should be required; but James, in his Naval History (vol. 1, p. 53), states that though France, like ourselves, exercised the most rigorous powers of impressment, and had very large reserves of seamen "bound to serve the State," she was obliged, in 1792, when war was declared with England, to resort to various measures calculated to rouse the patriotism of her seafaring population, "and invigorate their efforts." With that object in view, we are told that violent invectives were cast upon the King and Government of this country, while enticing allurements were held out to the sailors in the shape of "prize money," augmentation of their pay, and bounties to their wives and children.

Although we have the advantage of our youths taking to seafaring pursuits with greater alacrity than those of any other nation, we must not forget that as they advance in years they require almost as many inducements as Frenchmen to serve on board ships of war, and that they resist with even more determination attempts at impressment. Indeed, compulsory service is more difficult to enforce with British seamen than with those of any other country. Our institutions are opposed to it; and the

spirit and dogged determination of our people, combined with the love of freedom, which has become part of their nature, would now render anything like the application of bodily force not merely futile, but dangerous.

More than a century ago this spirit asserted itself against the press-gang; and we should now have large mass of intelligent, and I might say, educated men, whose "trade unions" would amalgamate, and effectually resist, compulsory servitude.

We might appeal, and not in vain, to their patriotism, and with still more effect to their honour, where they had previously engaged for service when required: or we might more effectually do so when the war was popular, and especially if defensive; but though the law still upholds impressment, it would now be impossible to put it in force except in cases of extraordinary emergency; nor would it be desirable to do so.

Even when press-gangs existed as organised bodies, paid and upheld by the State, they produced the most mischievous results. While destroying almost every patriotic feeling in the seafaring population, they involved a stoppage of trade by placing an embargo on all outwardbound ships frequently to the ruin of our merchants. They were likewise very costly, and were the cause of so much bad feeling, misery, and distress, that at an early period of our history numerous schemes were propounded to obviate their necessity.

So far back as 1691, when our fleets, during peace, were manned, as at present, by volunteers, a plan was proposed* to meet an emergency, not unlike some of the schemes of our own time, whereby every boy, whose parents received alms, was to be indentured and bound, at the age of fourteen, to the King, and sent to Greenwich to be educated for the sea. All merchant vessels were to be obliged to

"Naval Speculations and Maritime Politics," by Henry Maydman.

take one apprentice to every six or ten men, according to the trades in which they were engaged; and a proportion of these boys was to be sent on board the ships of war, while others were to be distributed to learn trades connected with the sea, such as carpenters, caulkers, and sailmakers, the masters being bound to employ a certain number of them.

About the same period another scheme,* which was received with considerable favour, had for its object the raising of "20,000 men, which, with the officers, would be sufficient for the fleet," by means of requiring all owners of vessels, lighters, and boats, and all master shipwrights and other tradesmen, engaged in the construction and equipment of ships, to provide annually, under penalty, a certain number of men for the Navy, according to a graduated scale.

But it was not until 1696 that any Act of Parliament came into force having specially for its object + "the furnishing and supplying of His Majesty's Royal Navy with a competent number of able mariners and seamen which may be in readiness at all times for that service."

With the view of obviating the necessity of impressment, this Act contained provisions for the voluntary registration of seamen between the age of eighteen and fifty, to the number of 30,000, who were to be paid a retaining fee of £2 per annum to serve when required, and who, during their term of service, were to receive enhanced pay, a double share of prize money, and a home in Greenwich Hospital when disabled, or too old for active service.

These inducements, however, do not appear to have had the effect of raising the stipulated number of men.

The Navy then, as has too frequently been the case

* "England's Glory; a Bridle on the French King," by Captain George St. Lo, R.N.

+ William III., chap. 788.

с

since, was not the favoured arm of the national service, and the ruling powers, including royalty itself, showed a marked preference for the Army.

Consequently, the number of men who entered for the Naval Reserve never exceeded 17,000, nor could much dependence be placed on even half that number mustering voluntarily on an emergency. Indeed, it is a matter of wonder that the Government was enabled to induce men to remain in the service, as it appears that Parliament had neglected to vote the funds necessary for their annual retainers, and had fallen far behind in the payment of the wages they had earned. By a return laid before the House of Commons, a sum amounting to no less than £1,036,415 was at one time due to the seamen of the Navy, the whole or greater portion of which was never paid to them. Such conduct on the part of the Crown and Parliament, combined with the bad usage they had to endure, and the wretched provisions and accommodation with which they were supplied, created an immense amount of discontent amongst the seamen of that period, and the severest discipline could not suppress the mutinies which too frequently arose. Numerous instances are recorded where men were hanged for desertion, and even for demanding their pay.* Open defiance of the law and its public rididule were consequently matters of almost daily occurrence.†

Although the country was exasperated by the oppression to which the seamen were subjected, and the disorder which prevailed on board the vessels of the Royal Navy,

*See Ralph's "History of England" during the reigns of William and Mary, Queen Anne, and George I.

One of the handbills published by the seamen, and extensively circulated, called upon "all seamen that are weary of their lives and desire to serve R. W. (Royal William) on board the Navy Royal shall have for encouragement fair promises and no performance, as follows:-For each able seaman, 24s. per month, to be paid when he can get it, and to be hanged if he demands it."

no effective steps were taken by Parliament to remedy the existing state of things. Governments and statesmen acted very much as they pleased in those days; and the voice of the people was seldom heard except in the anguish of despair or in the tumult of revolt. The latter had, however, become so alarming that, in 1706, the House of Lords voted an address to the Queen, recommending an inquiry into the following points :-(1.) The effectual manning of the fleet; (2.) the encouragement and increase of the number of seamen; and (3.) the restoring and preserving the discipline of the Navy. But in defiance of these recommendations, and although the Act of 1696 had in many respects proved worse than worthless, from thousands of seamen being in hiding, Queen Anne continued to hang seamen for demanding what had been promised by Parliament, under pledge of her own royal word, and ignored the recommendations of the Lords. This law was repealed in 1710.

In 1719, Mr. John Burchett-who was for half a century Secretary to the Admiralty, a man of humane feelings, combined with considerable shrewdness and a thorough knowledge of the wants of the service-recommended the establishment of registry offices, wherein seamen were to enter their names, age, address, and where serving. By such means, he said, "the Admiralty would be at all times aware where and how the men were employed." But the more important object of his scheme seems to have been "that when a certain number of men have been employed a certain time in the service of the Crown they shall have license to enter themselves on board of merchant ships, and, when they have so served a limited time, be obliged to go on board the ships of the Royal Navy when there shall be occasion for them."

Nothing, however, came of these sensible suggestions, and impressment, with all its evils, continued in full force at a cost to the country of £300,000 per annum. Sir