Navigation
Navigation
Editorial history
08/11/12: CSG, created page
Contents
Thomas Chinn, captain of the Thomas Bonadventure, testified as to navigational chocies to be made in the Mediterranean when sailing from Cyprus. At issue was whether it was common and sensible to take a direct course from Cyprus to the straights of Gibraltar, or to proceed indirctly via Zant.
- "38. .......................................................And there is noe doubt but that
39. it often happens that shipps sayling from the Road of Salina meet with crosse
40. and contrary winds so as they cannot hold the direct Course, but must and
41. doe sayle this way and that way as they may to gett advantage of wind. And he
42. saith that in turning to and fro the whole traverse may happen to be or
43. contayne one hundred or more leagues more than the Course in a direct
44. lyne when the wind is favourable, howbeit he saith the sayd traverse may
45. and ought to be made as neere the direct line as may be and never to exceed
46. six eight or ten leagues ˹or thereabouts from the latitude which is direct˺ to the intent that when the wind proves good the shipp
47. may still be in her ready way homewards to take advantage of it, which if
48. she sayle and hundred or more leagues from the direct Course she cannot doe
(in margin) neither is it usuall for shipps to sayle so farr from their direct latitude."
- HCA 13/71 f.30r: Case: XXXX XXXX and others against XXXX XXXX and others ("Examined upon the sayd allegation"); Deposition: 2. Captaine Thomas Chinn of Shadwell in the County of Middlesex Mariner aged 40; Date: 04/03/1655(56). Transcribed by Colin Greenstreet[1]
Expert judgment
Need for a pilot
Crossing the barr at Porto Port
John Thomas was the surgeon on the Anne of London. He admitted in his evidence that he was "noe sea man" and could not judge the difficulty of getting into Porto in Portugal. Neverthless, he had heard that all ships entering that port "doe make use of a Pylott skilled in these parts for enterance there.˺
- "37. To the 3 hee saith hee was never at Porto Port before the voyage
38. in question and is noe sea man and therefore knoweth not what to Judge of
39. the danger of getting into that Port, but beleeveth ˹and hath heard that˺ the enterance therein
40. is dangerous for that there is a barr to bee passed over and may
41. well require the assistance of a good Pylott experienced in the enterance
42. thereinto ˹And as hee hath heard all shipps doe make use of a Pylott skilled in these parts for enterance there˺ And saith the sayd Joggles did (at his first arrivall there
43. after his Mate had overshott the Port as aforesayd) shoote off gunnes
44. for a Pylott to come X which is the usuall course, and saith that none
45. did come, And further saveing his foregoeing deposition hee cannot answere"
- HCA 13/71 f.460v Case: James Cowse against daniel Jeggles Master of the Anne of London; Deposition: Deposition of John Thomas ("hee goeing Chirurgion"); Date: XXXX. Transcribed by David Pashley[2]
Daniel Jeggles confessed that he had only been once to Porto Port many years back, and therefore needed a pilot to guide the ship into the difficult port. He let off a gun five times over three days to indicate to local fishermen he needed a pilot, but none came, he surmising that they thought his ship to be a Turkish man of war.
"26. To the 2 hee saith that hee this deponent went Gunner of the shipp the Anne
27. of London the voyage in question and knoweth that about the latter end of October
28. 1654 the sayd shipp sett sayle from Gravesend bound for Porto Port in Portugall
29. and received with severall goods and Merchandizes aboard ˹her˺ and came safely to the
30. Coast of Portuagll about the twelfth of November 1654 and there beate up and
31. downe two and f{ro} about the sparse of two dayes with good weather to looke for
32. the sayd port and the sayd Jeggles ˹having found the Port of Porto Port ˺or his confessed ˹and aXXXX aboard˺ before this deponent and his
33. precontests John Prentise and John Thomas) acknowledging that hee had never
34. bin there but onse, and that many yeares before the voyage in question, and that
35. hee was not well acquainted with the barr of the sayd harbour of Porto Port ˹for that the barr did often alter as wynde and weather occasioned˺ and
36. therefore had durst not adventure in without helpe of a pylott, And hee saith that
37. to that purpose the sayd Jeggles in the tyme hee beate soe up and downe at sea
38. neere the Port of Porto Port did fire three gunnes the first day and two the next
39. to cause some Pilott to come aboarde, hee having espied some ffishermen upon
40. the Coast, but the ffishermen (as hee beleeveth being fearfull that the sayd Jeggles
41. his shipp had bin a Turkes man of warr) durst not come up) nor did come up to
42. the sayd Jeggles whereupon noe pilott comming the sayd Jeggles stood off to
43. sea and after the sayd two dayes ill weather Comming the sayd Jeggles his shipp
44. was by the stresse thereof driven Southwards as farr as the Burlings betweene
45. Porto Port and Lisbone and then for want of a Pylott and alsoe by stresse of weather
46. was forced to put into Lisbane which is about forty five leagues from Porto Port"
- HCA 13/71 f.461r Case: James Cowse against Daniel Jeggles Master of the Anne of London; Deposition: 3. Thomas Yeomans of saint Katherines Neere the Tower London Mariner Gunner of the shipp the Anne of London aged 34 yeares; Date: 17/01/1656(57). Transcribed by Jil Wilcox[3]
Pilot's right of sole command
Disagreement between Pilot and Captain, leading to grounding on Thames estuary mud flats
The case of William Wilkinson against James Warren dealt with the right of a Pilot to sole command of his ship. James Warren had been hired as Pilot of the ship the Exchange to conduct the ship from the Port of London to the Downes.
The ship was bound for Virginia, and should, for its burden and intended voyage, have had a crew of thirty, or at least twenty-eight men, but started out with fewer than twenty-two men and boys. Some crew (Dutchmen) were still at Gravesend when the ship departed from its mooring there. From the Hope in the Thames estuary onwards there were a number of disagreements between William Wilkinson the ship's captain, and James Warren, the hired pilot.
John Humphreys, a thirty-two year old Southwarke mariner stated the custom and law as he understood the right of a Pilot to sole command of a ship:
- "1. To the third Article hee saith, That it is and ever hath been usuall, since
2. this deponent first knew what belonged to Navigation, That a Pilott undertakeing the
3. pilotting of a ship from place, should have the sole ordereing direction, and
4. Command of the said shipp and Companie, and that although the Master
5. of such shipp bee himselfe aboard. yet hee ought not in any manner to
6. contradict or apprise the said Pilotts Command in any thing concerning the
7. sayleing of the said shipp. And so much hee beleeveth to be conforme to the
8. Sea lawes and Customes in that Case provided and generally received, to
9. which hee referreth himselfe, And further, cannot depose./"
- HCA 13/71 f.47v Case: William Wilkinson against James Warren; Deposition: 1. John Humphrey of the parish of Saint Mary Magdalens in Southwarke in the Countie of Surrey Mariner aged 32; Date: 02/04/1656. Transcribed by Colin Greenstreet[4]
John Humphreys then provided a chronology of events, leading to the ship's grounding. Unmooring the ship after clearance on a Saturday at Gravesend, the ship set off on a Sunday in a high wind under the command of the Pilot, the captain still ashore. It reached the Hope in the Thames estuary that same day, where the captain boarded the ship.
The pilot wished to anchor at the north shore port of Lee, a frequent stopping point in the estuary, but Wilkinson insisted that they proceed to the redd sands. On the Tuesday the set off in high wind across the flats to part of the estuary called the Narrow.
Humphreys testified that he heard contradictory commands ring out from Pilot and Captain, one calling for "to putt the helme a port and the other on starboard." But in the "great confusion" Humphreys was uncertain who issued which instruction
- "10. To the 4th Article hee saith, That at or about the time predeposed, the
11. arlate James Warren did conduct and pilott the said shipp the Exchange
12. from this Port to Gravesend where shee and her ladeing arrived in safety
13. upon and being there cleared upon a Saturday, the next morning the
14. said Wilkinson being himselfe ashore at Gravesend sent to the said Warren
15. then aboard to sett sayle with the said shipp towards the Downes, the wynd
16. being then somewhat too high in this judgement conveniently to unmoore the
17. said shipp which was done with very great difficultie and trouble, and so
18. shee came in safety to an anchor in the Hope, and the next morning
19. being the munday morning ensueing, the said Wilkinson comeing aboard
20. his said shipp commanded the said Warren to sett saile from thense, to
21. which hee this deponent knoweth not what the said Warren replyed, but saith
22. hee well knoweth, that severall of the said Dutchmen were then ashoare
23. at Gravesend and not aboard the said shipp, soe that there was not a
24. convenient number of men then aboard to mannage her, shee requiring
25. according to her burthen and intended Marchants Voiage for Virginia
26. 30. or at the least 28. men as aforesaid sufficiently to man her. The
27. premisses hee declareth upon the grounds predeposed. And further cannot
28. depose
29. To the 5:th Article hee saith, That upon the said XX Mr Wilkinsons coming
30. aboard the said shipp at the Hope, the said James Warren upon his
31. importunitie sett saile with the same to Lee, shee having then, as this
32. deponent remembereth (the Dutchmen being returned aboard) her former number
33. of about 22. men and one boy, And saith the wynd was then very
34. high at the North-west or neere that point, and the said Warren
35. was very earnest to have come to an anchor at Lee aforesaid, and to that
36. purpose had caused to be taken in her foretop saile of the said shipp, but the
37. said Wilkinson absolutely refused soe to doe or permitt to be done, whereupon
38. the said Warren was enforeced contrary to his good will and likeing to sayle
39. to the redd sands. The premisses this deponent well knoweth, for that hee was
40. Boatswaine of and aboard the said shipp, and saw and observed all the
41. passages by him predeposed. And further cannot depose:-/:-
42. To the 6:th hee saith, That upon the Tuesday morning next ensueing the
43. shipp sett sayle to goe over the flatts, and in her passeing over the
44. same to a place in the Sea called the Narrow, but saith, that hee this
45. deponent did not nor could not then particularly observe, what Course the said
46. Warren steared, hee this deponent being then intent upon other buisinesse
47. in the said shipps fore Castle, neither did this deponent observe at how
48. many fathoms water shee then was; hee further saith, That during the
49. said storme of wynd in the said shipps passage over the fflatts aforesayd
50. hee this deponent heard two contrary commands given, the one commanding to
51. putt the helme a port and the other on starboard, but which of them
52. gave either of the said commands particularly, this deponent saith, That
53. by reason of the great confusion then aboard, hee this deponent could not
54. distinguish"
- HCA 13/71 f.47v Case: William Wilkinson against James Warren; Deposition: 1. John Humphrey of the parish of Saint Mary Magdalens in Southwarke in the Countie of Surrey Mariner aged 32; Date: 02/04/1656. Transcribed by Colin Greenstreet[5]
Skills as steersman
- 4. George Dawny late servant to Mathias Hatton of the Tower Libertie London, Compasse Maker, aged 23 yeeres
