Privateers and PrivateeringStatham, Edward Phillips
History
Privateers and Privateering
Statham, Edward Phillips
Naval biography; Privateering
"She is called _L'Invention_, of Bordeaux, mounting 24 guns, with 207
men. She is of a most singular construction, having four masts, and they
speak of her in high terms, though they say she is much under-masted. I
directed Captain Hotham to take her into Plymouth. I should have ordered
her up the river for their lordships' inspection, but I did not choose
to deprive Captain Hotham of his men for so long a time."
The corner of the letter is turned down and on it is written: "Acquaint
him that their lordships are highly pleased with the capture of this
vessel."
There is an enclosure giving the dimensions of the vessel, as follows:
Ft. In.
Length of keel 126 10
Extreme length 147 4
Breadth of beam 27 1
Depth of hold 11 9
Draft of water 13 9
Mention is also made of a sketch enclosed, but this is not now with the
letter. It is probable, however, that a small woodcut, on the first page
of vol. vii. of _The Naval Chronicle_, is copied from this sketch, and
the frontispiece of this volume is an enlargement and adaptation from
the woodcut.
The _Invention_ had less beam in proportion to her length than was usual
in those days, and perhaps Captain Thibaut was afraid of masting her too
heavily lest she should be "tender" under canvas. Her draft of water is
moderate for her other dimensions, which would be an additional occasion
of anxiety on this score; but, with a large spread of canvas, she would
have been very swift in moderate weather.
There does not appear to be any record to hand as to what became of the
_Invention_, whether she was afterwards sent up the river for the
inspection of their lordships, or taken on as a man-of-war; possibly
some dockyard archives may contain the information.
On August 25th, 1801, the Navy Board reported to the Admiralty that the
_Invention_ had been surveyed, and was a suitable vessel for the Royal
Navy, and asked whether her four masts should be retained; and
September 1st following they ask that the sketch of the ship may be
returned; but there is no reply to be found to either of these letters
in the proper place; so the further correspondence must either have been
lost or placed among other papers. Possibly the ship was not, after all,
taken for the Navy; if she was it would probably be under some other
name.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account