And now let us bring this list of smuggling adventures to an end with the activities of a very ubiquitous French sloop named the Georges, which came into prominent notice in the year 1850. Her port of departure was Cherbourg, and she was wont to run her goods across to the south coast of England with the greatest impudence. In piecing together this narrative of her adventures, it has been no easy task to follow her movements, for she appeared and disappeared, then was seen somewhere else perhaps a hundred miles away in a very short time.
It appears that on April 19 the Georges, whose master's name was Gosselin, cleared from Cherbourg, and two days later was sighted by the commander of the Revenue cutter Cameleon off Bembridge Ledge, about one o'clock in the afternoon, about eight or nine miles E.S.E. After she had come up she was boarded by the Cameleon, and was found to have one passenger, whom the Cameleon's commander described as an Englishman "of a most suspicious appearance." But after being searched she was found perfectly "clean" and free from any appearance of tubs or smell of spirits. The Revenue cutter's commander therefore formed the opinion that the Georges was fitted with some concealments somewhere. In order to discover these, it would be essential for the craft to be hauled ashore. He therefore did not detain her, but, as she was bound for Portsmouth, put an officer and a couple of men aboard her till she should arrive at that port. One thing which had aroused suspicions was the finding on board of exceptionally large fend-offs. These were just the kind which were used by smuggling ships accustomed to be met at sea by smaller craft, into which the casks were transferred and then rowed ashore. And what was more suspicious still was the fact that these fend-offs were found wet; so they had most probably been used recently in a seaway when some tub-boats had been alongside the Georges.
Somehow or other, when she arrived at Portsmouth, although the matter was duly reported, it was not thought necessary to haul her ashore, but she was carefully examined afloat. The English passenger found aboard gave the name of Mitchell, but he was suspected of being Robinson, a notorious Bognor smuggler. And it was now further believed that the Georges had sunk her "crop" of tubs somewhere near the Owers (just south of Selsey Bill), as on the morning of the day when the Cameleon sighted her a vessel answering her description was seen in that vicinity.
On that occasion, then, the Georges could not be detained, and we next hear of her on May 3, when again she set forth from Cherbourg. She had no doubt taken on board a fine cargo, for she had a burthen of thirty-one tons, and this she managed in some mysterious manner to land in England. There can be no doubt that she did succeed in hoodwinking the Revenue service for a time, but it is probable that she employed largely the method of sinking the tubs, which were afterwards recovered in the manner already familiar to the reader. At any rate, Lieutenant Owen, R.N., writing on May 9 from the Ryde coastguard station to Captain Langtry, R.N., his inspecting commander, reported that this Georges had arrived off Ryde pier that morning at seven o'clock. She had five Frenchmen on board besides Gosselin. It was found that her tub-boat was a new one, and when she arrived this was on deck, but it had since been hoisted out, and Gosselin, having been brought ashore, crossed by the Ryde steamer to Portsmouth at 9 A.M.
What business he transacted in Portsmouth cannot be stated definitely, but it is no foolish guess to suggest that he went to inform his friends at what spot in the neighbourhood of the Isle of Wight he had deposited the casks of spirits a few hours previously. However, Gosselin did not waste much time ashore, for he had returned, got up anchor and sails, and was off Bembridge Ledge by five in the afternoon, at which time the Georges was sighted by Captain Hughes, commanding the Revenue cutter Petrel. The Georges was boarded and searched, and there was a strong smell of brandy noticed, and it was clear that her tub-boat had been recently used. Somewhere—somehow—she had recently got rid of her "crop," but where and when could not be ascertained. The Georges' master protested that he was very anxious to get back to Cherbourg as quickly as possible; and as there was nothing definite found on board this foreign craft, Captain Hughes decided to release her.
That was on May 9, then. But exactly a week later this same Georges came running into Torbay. On arrival here she was found to have no tub-boat, although in her inventory she was said to have a boat 21 feet long and 9 feet broad. Some of her crew were also absent, which looked still further suspicious. Still more, she was found to have battens secured along her bulwarks for the purpose of lashing tubs thereto. This made it quite certain that she was employed in the smuggling industry, and yet again there was no definite reason for arresting this foreign ship. We pass over the rest of May and June till we come to the last day of July. On that date the lieutenant in charge of the coastguard at Lyme (West Bay) reported that he had received information from Lieutenant Davies of the Beer station that a landing of contraband goods was likely to be attempted on the Branscombe station, which is just to the west of Beer Head. It was probable that this would take place on either the 1st or 2nd of August, and at night. Orders were therefore given that a vigilant look-out should be kept in this neighbourhood. Nothing occurred on the first of these dates, but about twenty minutes past eleven on the night of August 2 reports and flashes of pistols were heard and seen on the Sidmouth station as far as Beer Head.
These were observed by Lieutenant Smith and his crew, who were in hiding; but, unfortunately, just as one of the coastguards was moving from his hiding-place he was discovered by a friend of the smugglers, who instantly blazed off a fire on the highest point of the cliff. However, Lieutenant Smith did not waste much time, and quickly had a boat launched. They pulled along the shore for a distance of a mile and a half from the beach, and continued so to do until 2.30 A.M., but no vessel or boat could be seen anywhere. But as he believed a landing was taking place not far away, he sent information east and west along the coast. As a matter of fact a landing did occur not far away, but it was not discovered. An excise officer, however, when driving along the Lyme road, actually fell in with two carts of tubs escorted by fifteen men. This was somewhere about midnight. He then turned off the road and proceeded to Sidmouth as fast as he could, in order to get assistance, as he was unarmed. From there the chief officer accompanied him, having previously left instructions for the coastguard crew to scour the country the following morning. But the excise and chief officer after minutely searching the cross-roads found nothing, and lost track of the carts and fifteen men.
That time there had been no capture, and the smugglers had got clean away. But the following night Lieutenant Smith went afloat with his men soon after dark, and about half-past ten observed a signal blazed off just as on the previous evening. Knowing that this was a warning that the smuggling vessel should not approach the shore, Smith pulled straight out to sea, hoping, with luck, to fall in with the smuggling craft. Happily, before long he discovered her in the darkness. She appeared to be cutter-rigged, and he promptly gave chase. At a distance of only two miles from the shore he got up to her, for the night was so dark that the cutter did not see the boat until it got right alongside, whereupon the smugglers suddenly slipped a number of heavy articles from her gunwale. Taken completely by surprise, and very confused by the sudden arrival of the coastguard's boat, Lieutenant Smith was able to get on board their ship and arrest her. It was now about 11.15 P.M.
But, having noticed these heavy splashes in the water, the lieutenant was smart enough instantly to mark the place with a buoy, and then was able to devote his attention entirely to his capture. He soon found that this was the Georges of Cherbourg. She was manned by three Frenchmen, and there were still hanging from the gunwale on either quarter a number of heavy stones slung together, such as were employed for sinking the tubs. There can be no doubt that the Georges' intention had been to come near enough to the shore to send her tubs to the beach in her tub-boat, as she had almost certainly done the night before. But hearing the coastguard galley approaching, and being nervous of what they could not see, the tubs were being cast into the sea to prevent seizure.
Although no tubs were found on board, yet it was significant that the tub-boat was not on board, having evidently been already sent ashore with a number of casks. There was a small 12-feet dinghy suspended in the rigging, but she was obviously not the boat which the Georges was accustomed to use for running goods. Lieutenant Smith for a time stood off and on the shore, and then ran along the coast until it was day, hoping to fall in with the tub-boat. Just as he had captured the Georges another coastguard boat, this time from the Beer station, came alongside, and so the officer sent this little craft away with four hands to search diligently up and down the coast, and to inform the coastguards that the tub-boat had escaped. When it was light, Smith took the Georges into Lyme Cobb, and her crew and master were arrested. She had evidently changed her skipper since the time when she was seen off the Hampshire shore, for the name of her present master was Clement Armel. They were landed, taken before the magistrates, and remanded. But subsequently they were tried, and sentenced to six months' hard labour each in Dorchester gaol, but after serving two months of this were released by order of the Treasury.
On the 5th of August the boats from Lieutenant Smith's station at Branscombe went out to the spot where the Georges had been captured and the mark-buoy with a grapnel at the end of it had been thrown. There they crept for a time and found nothing. But it had been heavy weather, and probably the tubs had gone adrift without sinkers to them. At any rate no landing was reported along the shore, so it was doubtful if the tub-boat had managed to get to land. As to the Georges herself, she was found to be almost a new vessel. She was described as a handsome craft, "and very much the appearance of a yacht, and carries a white burgee at her masthead with a red cross in it, similar to vessels belonging to the Yacht Club."
The reference to the "Yacht Club" signifies the Royal Yacht Squadron, which was originally called the Royal Yacht Club. In those days the number of yachts was very few compared with the fleets afloat to-day. Some of the Royal Yacht Club's cutters were faster than any smuggler or Revenue craft, and it was quite a good idea for a smuggler built with yacht-like lines to fly the club's flag if he was anxious to deceive the cruisers and coastguards by day. Some years before this incident there was found on board a smuggling lugger named the Maria, which was captured by the Revenue cruiser Prince of Wales about the year 1830, a broad red pendant marked with a crown over the letters "R.Y.C.," and an anchor similar to those used by the Royal Yacht Club. One of the Maria's crew admitted that they had it on board because they thought it might have been serviceable to their plans. The point is not without interest, and, as far as I know, has never before been raised.
But to conclude our narrative of the Georges. As it was pointed out that she was such a fine vessel, and that Lyme Cobb (as many a seafaring man to-day knows full well) was very unsafe in a gale of wind, it was suggested that she should be removed to Weymouth "by part of one of the cutters' crews that occasionally call in here." So on the 7th of September in that year she was fetched away to Weymouth by Lieutenant Sicklemore, R.N. She and her boat were valued at £240, but she was found to be of such a beautiful model that she was neither destroyed nor sold, but taken into the Revenue service as a cutter to prevent the trade in which she had been so actively employed.
And so we could continue with these smuggling yarns; but the extent of our limits has been reached, so we must draw to a close. If the smuggling epoch was marred by acts of brutality, if its ships still needed to have those improvements in design and equipment which have to-day reached such a high mark of distinction, if its men were men not altogether admirable characters, at any rate their seamanship and their daring, their ingenuity and their exploits, cannot but incite us to the keenest interest in an exceptional kind of contest.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I
SLOOPS OR CUTTERS
The reputed difference between a sloop and cutter in the eighteenth century is well illustrated by the following, which is taken from the Excise Trials, vol. xxx., 1st July 1795 to 17th December 1795, p. 95.
In Attorney-General v. Julyan and others there was an action to condemn the vessel Mary of Fowey, brought under the provisions of sec. 4, c. 47, 24 Geo. III., as amended by sec. 6, c. 50, 34 Geo. III. There were several counts, including one with regard to the vessel being fitted with "arms for resistance," but the case turned on the question whether she was cutter-rigged or sloop-rigged. Counsel for the prosecution defined a cutter as "a thing constructed for swift sailing, which, with a view to effect that purpose, is to sink prodigiously at her stern, and her head to be very much out of water ... built so that she should measure a great deal more than she would contain."
Such a definition, however satisfactory it may have been to the legal mind, was one that must have vastly amused any seafaring man. The judge, quoting expert evidence, explained the difference between a cutter and a sloop as follows:—A standing or running bowsprit is common to either a sloop or a cutter, and a traveller, he said, was an invariable portion of a cutter's rig, so also was a jib-tack. The jib-sheet, he ruled, differed however; that of a cutter was twice as large as that of a sloop and was differently set. It had no stay. A sloop's jib-sheet was set with a fixed stay. Furthermore, in a cutter the tack of the jib was hooked to a traveller, and there was a large thimble fastened to a block which came across the head of the sail. There were two blocks at the mast-head, one on each side. "A rope passes through the three blocks by which it is drawn up to the halliards." The jib of a cutter "lets down and draws in a very short time." A cutter usually had channels and mortice-holes to fix legs to prevent oversetting.
APPENDIX II
LIST OF CRUISERS EMPLOYED IN THE CUSTOMS SERVICE FOR THE YEAR 1784
APPENDIX III
LIST OF CRUISERS EMPLOYED IN THE CUSTOMS SERVICE FOR THE YEAR 1797
(up to June 27)
| Vessel. | Commander. | Tonnage. | Guns. | Men. | Extent of Cruising Station. |
| Vigilant Yacht Vigilant Cutter |
Richard Dozell | 53 82 |
6 8 |
13 10adl. |
To attend the Honourable Board. In the winter season the cutter with ten additional hands cruised on the coasts of Essex, Ken, and Sussex |
| Diligence | William Dobbin | 152 | 14 | 32 | Milford to Solway Firth, or as the Board should direct. |
| Swallow | Thomas Amos | 153 | 10 | 32 | As the Board should direct. |
| Lively | Du Bois Smith | 113 | 12 | 30 | As the Board should direct. |
| Defence | Geo. Farr (Acting) | 76 | 6 | 18 | Gravesend to Dungeness. |
| Ant | Thomas Morris | 58 | 4 | 15 | Gravesend to the Nore. |
| Fly | Thomas Gibbs | 52 | 4 | 15 | Gravesend to the Nore. |
| Success | William Broadbank | 74 | 6 | 24 | Rochester to North Sand Head. |
| Otter | John Matthews | 68 | — | 13 | Rochester to the Buoy of the Woolpack. |
| Active | Thomas Lesser | 75 | 8 | 18 | Mouth of Medway to N. Foreland, round the Longsand and up the Swin to Leigh. |
| Swift | J. Westbeech (Tide Surveyor) | 52 | — | 8 | Downs to the Longsand. |
| Nimble | William Clothier (Acting) | 41 | 2 | 15 | Between the Forelands. |
| Tartar | B.J. Worthington | 100 | 10 | 23 | The Gore to Beachy Head. |
| Stag | John Haddock | 153 | 14 | 32 | Dover to Brighton, but extended on special circumstances. |
| Hound | J.R. Hawkins | 111 | 12 | 30 | N. Foreland to Isle of Wight. |
| Falcon | Charles Newland | 131 | 12 | 33 | Beachy Head to Isle of Wight. |
| Roebuck | John Stiles | 104 | 12 | 27 | Round the Isle of Wight. |
| Antelope | John Case | 97 | 10 | 26 | Round the Isle of Wight, and from Needles to Swanage. |
| Rose | William Yeates | 114 | 12 | 32 | From Lool to Lyme. |
| Swan | [Building at this date] | Beachy Head to Lyme. | |||
| Greyhound | Richard Wilkinson | 200 | 16 | 43 | Beachy Head to the Start. |
| Alarm | Andrew Dealey | 130 | 12 | 36 | Between Portland and the Start. |
| Ranger | Nathaniel Cane | 80 | 8 | 25 | Land's End to Cape Cornwall. |
| Busy | Alexr. Fraser (mate) | 46 | — | 11 | Plymouth Sound and Lawsand Bay. |
| Hinde | Gabriel Bray | 160 | 12 | 41 | Portland to St. Ives and Scilly. |
| Dolphin | Richard Johns (Junr.) | 139 | 14 | 32 | St. Ives to Padstow, round Scilly; Land's End to Helford. |
| Racer | James Wood (mate) | 40 | — | 9 | Chepstow to Ilfracombe. |
| Speedwell | John Hopkins | [Building at this date] | Holyhead, Bristol Channel, and to the Land's End. | ||
| Endeavour | Thomas Peregrine | 34 | — | 11 | The whole port of Milford. |
| Repulse | G.G.H. Munnings | 143 | 14 | 43 | North Yarmouth to Portsmouth. |
| Argus | John Saunders | 135 | 14 | 32 | Buoy of the Middle[25] to Lowestoft. |
| Hunter | Thomas Ritches | 143 | 14 | 32 | Harwich to Cromer. |
| Bee | A. Somerscalls (mate) | 28 | — | 9 | Humber, York, and Lincoln, and to guard Quarantine. |
| Eagle | George Whitehead | [Building at this date] | Tynemouth to Yarmouth. | ||
| Mermaid | John Carr | 112 | 10 | 30 | Berwick to the Spurn. |
| Viper | John Hudson (mate) | 28 | — | 9 | Isle of Anglesea to St. Bee's Head occasionally. |
[25] i.e. doubtless the channel better known as Swin Middle, leading into the estuary of the Thames.