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 be 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
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.”[406]

During every year of the Revolution attempts were made to increase the Massachusetts navy. In the fall of 1777 the brigantine “Hazard” was added. On August 6, 1777, the General Court resolved that, since the armed vessels at the lowest computation had netted the state £55,000, the Board of War should purchase or build two vessels mounting 28 and 32 guns, respectively. In January, 1778, it reduced the sizes of these vessels almost one-half; and finally it gave up building them.[407] 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.[408] In April, 1778, the General Court resolved to build a frigate of 28 guns, which would carry two hundred officers and men.[409] This vessel was built at Newburyport and was named the “Protector.” In the fall of 1779 it was nearing completion. The launching of the “Protector,” 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 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 Hamper of ale or Beer together with a Tierce hams Neet
Tongs or Corn Beef will be necessary to comply with the Customs in
these Cases.”[410]

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 government under a Constitution on October 25, 1780, there was no longer much need for a Board of War. According to the provisions of the new Constitution, the Governor was commander-in-chief of the navy; and he was authorized to “train, instruct, exercise, and govern it,” and to call it into service 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 ministerial duties.[411] The Governor and the Agent 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 machinery of the state continued. On January 1, 1783, the Agent was discontinued. His naval duties fell to the Commissary-General.[412]

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 mounting not less than ten or more than fourteen 4’s or 6’s were ordered. The expense incurred was to be met by the sale of the “Rising 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 “guarda coasta.” On November 12, 1782, a committee was appointed to purchase a vessel of twelve or sixteen guns to be used in protecting 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.[413] 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 “Defence;” in the winter of 1781-1782, the “Tartar,” which was built by the state; and in the spring of 1782, the “Winthrop.”

Private naval enterprise throughout the Revolution was exceedingly active in Massachusetts. In 1775, some months before the General Court granted letters of marque, Massachusetts citizens, unauthorized, were capturing the vessels of the enemy. Scarcely 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 Vineyard 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 “Margaretta,” Lieutenant Moore, after mortally wounding the commander and inflicting a loss of fourteen men. Still other British vessels were captured off the coast of Maine during the summer of 1775.[414]

With the act of November 1, 1775, granting to the Council the power to issue letters of marque and reprisal, all such private enterprises 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 commissions. 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 Massachusetts for the years 1777 to 1783 was 998.[415] In 1779 one hundred and eighty-four prizes captured by privateers were libelled in the Massachusetts prize courts.[416] 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 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 privateersmen being as confident of victory, when upon an equal footing with the English, as these were of gaining it of the French in the last war.”[417]

The rivalry between the state service and the privateers for seamen was exceedingly active. 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.”[418] In 1778 the General Court found some difficulty in securing commanders.

The movements of the armed vessels of the Massachusetts navy are quite similar to the movements of the naval vessels of Congress.[419] 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 vessels, however, cruised more frequently nearer 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 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.[420] 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 Affairs which sent her to France and Holland for supplies.

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 “Milford” which had been especially annoying and destructive to the trade of the state.[421] In February, 1781, the “Protector” was cruising with the Continental frigate “Deane” thirty leagues windward of Antigua. 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.[422]

The capture of a prize often amounted to little more than the chasing of a merchantman and the firing of a few shots as a signal 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 Massachusetts vessel was concerned was that between the “Protector,” 26, Captain John Foster Williams, and the privateer frigate “Admiral Duff,” 32, Captain Stranger. It occurred on June 9, 1780, in latitude 42° N. and longitude 47° W. The engagement 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.[423] The following brief account of one of these minor engagements, told in the simple and direct language of the Massachusetts 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 simple and vivid description shows with clearness the character of the minor engagements of the Revolution.

“I have the pleasure of sending this to you by Mr. John Blanch who goes prizemaster of my Prize, the Privateer Brig Revenge, 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 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 captured her as follows: on the 29 Inst. at 4 PM. I made her about 4 leagues to windward coming down upon us, upon which I cleared the Ship and got all hands to Quarter, 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 return’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 & compell’d them to Strike their Colors, during the whole Engagement we were not at any one time more than half Pistol Shott distant & some part of the Time our Yards were lock’d with theirs—I had Eight men wounded only two of which are Bad—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 Surgeons Mate.”[424]

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 vessels cruising against the British transports, merchantmen, and small privateers, and to leave the coast to be defended by the seacoast establishment and by local forces. In August, 1777, the Council agreed with this policy for it then spoke of the Continental vessels, the state vessels, and the privateers as “improper” to be employed in clearing the coasts of these “vermin.”[425] 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 and the defence of harbors and seacoast, “which have been left in such an unguarded 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.”[426] 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 Revolutionary fleets were adapted. Those vessels that cruised continually near the American coast, sooner or later, fell foul of the stouter and better armed ships of the enemy. Moreover, the Board of War, had it not responded 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 hundred 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.[427] This made a fine vantage-point as 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 concerting with the Continental Navy Board at Boston and with the government of New Hampshire an expedition to capture and destroy this British station. Samuel Adams, who had recently retired from the chairmanship of the Marine Committee of Congress and had returned to Boston, furthered the enterprise. To the fleet which was now formed, New Hampshire contributed the “Hampden,” 22; the Navy Board at Boston, the Continental vessels, “Warren,” 32, “Providence,” 12, and “Diligent,” 12; and Massachusetts, the three state brigantines, “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 manned by more than 2,000 men. Besides the armed fleet there were twenty transports 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 Massachusetts. Paul Revere was Chief of Artillery 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 Penobscot, and attacked Bagaduce with only partial 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 received 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; together with three small vessels at the garrison, the “Nautilus,” 16, “Albany,” 14, and “North,” 14. The British fleet mounted 248 guns and carried more than 1,600 men. In number of guns and men the advantage lay with the Americans, but in weight of metal and tonnage it was probably with the British. On the morning of August 14 the British fleet came in sight of the American. The two fleets were barely in range of each other’s guns when the Americans were seized with a panic, and fled with their vessels helter skelter up the river, pursued 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 was annihilated. 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 Hampshire and Massachusetts.

The total cost of this expedition to Massachusetts as calculated by the Board of War was £1,739,175. The larger part of this sum, £1,390,200, was charged to 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 exception, was the whole trading fleet of the state. Soon after the disaster a joint committee of the Massachusetts House of Representatives 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 unanimously, “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 Saltonstall; and he was dismissed from the navy. Rarely has a more ignominious military operation been made by Americans than the Penobscot expedition. A New Englander 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 disaster and disgrace.”[428]

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 captured the “Freedom” and “Independence.” On May 5, 1781, His Majesty’s ships “Roebuck,” 44, and “Medea,” 28, captured the “Protector,” 26, with more than one hundred and thirty men on board.[429] 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.[430] 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 arrived. On June 4, 1783, the Commissary-General was directed to sell the “Winthrop,” the last vessel in the navy. The “Tartar” had been sold during the past winter.[431] Captain Little’s accounts were being settled in March, 1785.

FOOTNOTES:

[383] 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.

[384] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, August 21, 1775. O’Brian’s name is found spelled in various ways.

[385] Ibid., September 29, October 2, October 4,. 1775; Records of General Court of Massachusetts, October 4, 1775.

[386] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, September 28, October 6, 9, 14 17, 18, 19, 27, November 1, 1775.

[387] Austin’s Gerry, I, 94-95; Works of John Adams, X, 37.

[388] Amory’s Sullivan, II, 378-79, James Sullivan to Gerry, December 25, 1779.

[389] Records of Massachusetts Council, November 14, December 9, December 12, 1775; Pickering’s Pickering, I, 79-80; Amory’s Sullivan, I, 63.

[390] Records of General Court of Massachusetts, December 29, 1775.

[391] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, 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 in building and fitting the two ships. It does not appear that further action was taken.—Records of Massachusetts Council, January 11, 1776.

[392] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, February 6, 1776; Records of Massachusetts Council, February 7, 1776.

[393] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, February 16, 1776.

[394] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, February 7, 1776; Records of Massachusetts Council, February 8, 1776.

[395] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, April 12, 1776.

[396] Ibid., April 27, 1776.

[397] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, April 29, 1776; Records of Massachusetts Council, April 29, 1776.

[398] Ibid. (Records), July 26, 1776.

[399] Goodell, Laws of Massachusetts, February 14, April 13, May 8, 1776.

[400] Records of Massachusetts Council, October 29, 1776. The naval documents introduced in the narrative on the Massachusetts navy are typical of similar ones in other states.

[401] Resolves of Massachusetts, October 26, 1776.

[402] Winsor’s Memorial History of Boston, II, 543.

[403] 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 Cæsar” 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 brigantine “Perch,” which was obtained by Massachusetts in the fall of 1777 for the sole purpose of conveying the news of Burgoyne’s surrender to the American Commissioners at Paris. The letters and dispatches were intrusted with Jonathan Loring Austin, secretary 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; Hale’s Franklin in France, I, 155.

[404] Board of War Letters, Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, May 23, 1777.

[405] Massachusetts Resolves, January 8, January 24, 1777. On December 6, 1776, six naval offices were established, which included a captain’s clerk, prizemaster, and sergeant of marines.

[406] Massachusetts Resolves, March 21, 1777.

[407] Ibid., August 6, 1777; January 17, 1778.

[408] The following is an extract from the enlisting 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 Superior Officers on board or belonging to the said Brig Active and on board any Such Boats or Vessel or Vessels as foresaid.

“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 Continental Service.”—Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, XL, 20.

[409] Massachusetts Resolves, April 21, 1778.

[410] Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, XLIV, 279.

[411] 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.

[412] Massachusetts Resolves, October 4, 1782.

[413] Massachusetts Resolves, March 21, 1780; February 19, March 6, April 23, 1781; November 12, 1782; March 26, 1783.

[414] Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, VI, 564; Maclay, History of American Privateering, 52-60.

[415] 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.

[416] Boston Gazette for 1779.

[417] Virginia Gazette, June 19, 1779.

[418] Journals of House of Representatives, January 6, 1779.

[419] 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 “Republic,” 1776-1777; sloop “Freedom,” 1776-1777; brigantine “Massachusetts,” 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 following captains or commanders were the chief officers in the Massachusetts navy: Jeremiah O’Brian, John Lambert, John Fisk, John Foster Williams, John Clouston, Jonathan Haraden, Daniel Souther, Simeon Samson, Richard Welden, Allen Hallet, James Nevens, John Cathcart and George Little. Massachusetts did not establish the rank of commodore.

[420] These three vessels captured the four prizes mentioned in the following advertisement, which appeared in the Continental Journal and Weekly Advertiser for July 3, 1777, a paper published at Boston. The advertisement 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 instant 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. Inventories to be seen at the sheriff’s office Cornhill, and at the place of sale.

“W. Greenleaf, Sheriff.”

[421] Massachusetts Resolves, April 26, 1777; Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, XL, 29, 55.

[422] Massachusetts Resolves, March 2, 1781.

[423] Boston Gazette, July 24, 1780.

[424] Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, XLIV, 408.

[425] Ibid., 268.

[426] Journals of Massachusetts House of Representatives, April 7, 1779.

[427] Amory’s Sullivan, II, 376-78, James Sullivan to John Sullivan, August 30, 1779. James Sullivan says that, on the occupation of Bagaduce by the British, Boston and neighboring seaports were greatly alarmed at the prospect 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 expedition.

[428] Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, CXLV, 199-203, 350; Weymouth Historical Society 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; Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, 7th, II, 430; Proceedings of Massachusetts Historical Society, 2nd, XII, 201-202; Clowes, Royal Navy, IV, 28-29.

[429] Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, XXXIX, 45.

[430] Ibid., CLVIII, 274, Message of Governor Hancock to House of Representatives, February 6, 1783.

[431] 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 commission and employed in other services.