custom of the sea, afford a curious instance of the quaint and barbarous usages of the period. They are as follows: "A captain may punish according to the offence committed (viz.), putting one in the billbows during pleasure; keep them fasting; duck them at the yard-arm, or haul them from yard-arm to yard-arm under the ship's keel; or make them fast to the capstan, and whip them there; or at the capstan or mainmast hang weights about their necks till their heart and back be ready to break, or to gagg or scrape their tongues for blasphemy or swearing. This will tame the most rude and savage people in the world." The naval force of the nation at this era no longer consisted of fleets hastily collected at the outbreak of war: a Royal Navy had become a permanent institution of the kingdom; there was no jealousy on the part of the Parliament, no outcry on the part of the people against the recognized rights of the Crown. Englishmen of that day looked upon their ships as walls of brass" for the defence of their country.2 66 Had Charles I. demanded supplies for the necessary maintenance of his fleet-the Commons were ever bountiful when the interests of the navy were at stake-or even had he been content to have called for a subsidy on his own authority, under the notion of necessity, and upon a prospect of danger, men could have submitted to it; 3 1 Mons. Nav. Tracts, 293. 2 Monson, 292. 3 Clar. i. 69. 3 Ship money, A.D. 1637. but when the King claimed as a right on his own allegation of public danger to require an inland county to furnish ships, or a prescribed sum of money, by way of commutation, for the defence of the kingdom; and when obsequious judges declared that there was a rule of government paramount to the rule of law; "this extraordinary demand startled even those who had hitherto sided with the Court. Symptoms of opposition were shown in different places, and actions brought against those who had collected the money. But the greater part yielded to the overbearing power of the Crown. Indolent and improvident men satisfied themselves that the imposition was not very heavy, and might not be repeated: men of moderate opinions were content to hope that their contribution, however unduly exacted, would be faithfully applied to public ends." A vain expectation, "as ship-money was imposed, by the admission of the royalists themselves, with the object not of maintaining a navy, but of furnishing the King with supplies, which might be increased at his discretion to any amount, and expended at his discretion for any purpose." 2 1 The whole nation was incensed and alarmed: still there was some hope of relief from the law; 3 but the famous decision in favour of the prerogative, which has made the name of Hampden so illustrious, put an end to all further attempts of obtaining redress by course of law.* The irrita 1 Hallam, Const. Hist. ii. 21, 23, 24. 2 Macaulay, i. 91. 3 Clar. i. 69. 4 Hallam, Const. Hist. ii. 23. tion of the people was greatly increased by this miscarriage of justice; and the general discontent, heightened by the illegal and imperious measures of the King and his advisers, soon afterwards gave rise to the great rebellion, the downfall of the monarchy, and the establishment of the Commonwealth. Though the question of ship-money is naturally connected with the navy, it is rather to be distinguished as a great constitutional example of the determination of the people to resist taxation without consent of Parliament, than to be remarked on as having any direct bearing on the government or management of the navy; indirectly its influence is felt even at the present day. The exclusive control of the navy is still vested in the Crown; but as there is no hereditary revenue applicable to its support, the whole establishment practically depends upon the supplies which are voted annually by the House of Commons, and specifically appropriated to the different departments of the service. During the Commonwealth a Committee of Parliament managed the affairs of the Admiralty, and kept the fleet in good order and well paid.1 Dependence of the navy upon Par liament. Navy managed by a Committee of Parliament. The leaders of the Long Parliament, always distinguished for their administrative ability, framed a system of laws for the government of the navy. The provisions of this measure appear to have Ordinance been carefully considered and discussed, as it came down from the House of Lords in Feb. 1644,2 1 Encycl. Brit. tit. Admiral. Campb. ii. 56. for the government of the navy, A.D. 1645. The instructions of the admirals and generals of the fleet for councils of war, A.D. 1653. and did not pass the Commons until April, 1645.1 It was entitled 2 "An ordinance and articles concerning martial law for the government of the navy." By this enactment, the rules of discipline were fixed, offences defined, trial by councils of war enjoined, and punishments directed according to the nature of the offence, and the known orders and customs of the seas.3 Additional powers were given to the admirals and generals of the fleet by ordinances passed in 1648 and 1653.4 Under the authority of these Acts, the following instructions for the trial of offenders by councils of war were issued by Robert Blake, George Monck, John Disbrow, and William Penn, admirals and generals of the fleet, set forth by authority of Parliament of the Commonwealth of England, and for defence of the same. "Whereas there are and may be from time to time sundry exorbitances and miscarriages amongst several persons in the fleet, for restraining whereof General Councils of War cannot be so frequently called as were requisite; for preventing therefore of the same, and for regulating and governing the fleet in better order for the future, according to the laws of war and ordinances of the sea, ordained 1 Journ. Comm. iv. 118. 2 Lord's Journ. vii. 255. I have been unable to discover a copy of this ordinance. 3 Referred to in the "Instructions of the Committee of Lords and Commons for the Admiralty and Cinque Ports:" Admir. Rec. Naval Coll. i. A.D. 1647. 4 Journ. Comm. vi. 150, vii. 340. and established by Parliament of the Commonwealth of England, We have thought expedient, and do hereby order as followeth : courts "That the chief flag (or commander), of each General squadron, with the assistance of the council of war martial. of the squadron under his command, do fully determine, sentence and punish all offences committed against any and every of the articles of the laws of war and ordinances of the sea by any person belonging to any of the ships in his respective squadron, provided that no execution or sentence of loss of life or limb do proceed (if the fact shall so deserve), until that we, the generals, be made acquainted with the crime (the criminal being still secured), as also with the depositions against and defences made by the offender, with all circumstances thereon depending, and the same delivered to the judge-advocate of the fleet to be enregistered and kept upon record." tial may be held whenever three together. Then follow powers authorizing the flag commander of a division to call to council with him the commanders of the ships of his division that shall be present, to the number of three at least, General and to determine, sentence, and punish all offences court-maragainst the said laws and ordinances of the sea; with a reservation of sentences involving loss of ships are life or limb, or the cashiering of a captain, for ratification of the generals; and sentences of cashiering lieutenants or masters, for the ratification of the chief flag commander of the squadron. Similar powers are given to the commander of a detachment with not less than three ships of war under his command. the |