Examples of America as a “Pirate Nation” and the attempts of Britain to suppress the Stuart conservative scourge across the ocean are actually quite abundant and easy to find! One such example was inveterate English reformer Francis Nicholson. From 1688-1689, just after the accession of the Dutch Protestant reformer King William of Orange, Francis Nicholson was sent as lieutenant governor to the Dominion of New England. He quickly gained a reputation as a progressive and immediately alienated his less than enthusiastic conservative constituents in Stuart-favoring America. The Crown, though, appreciated his efforts at liberal reform there, and upon his advisable departure from New England, he proceeded to Virginia to be their governor from 1690-1692. The liberalizing British Crown was impressed with his reform efforts and appointed him next to serve as Maryland’s governor from 1694-1698, and again as governor of Virginia from 1698-1705.
Americans, however, did not take a shine to the
reformer Francis Nicholson – in fact, they took great offense! Of his second
term in this colony, biographer Natalie Zacek writes that “Virginians recoiled
at Nicholson's military gruffness and his uncouth public courtship of Lucy
Burwell,” both reasons bordering on juvenile.[1] More to
the point, his “attempts at reform threatened the power of such men as William
Byrd I, so that several members of the governor's Council—including Nicholson's
former ally, [James] Blair—convinced the Crown to remove him.”[2]
Americans fought back fiercely at liberal reform! British reformers could
seldom grow amenable roots “beyond the lines of amity” in America. It was
especially hard while at war. Note that, for America today, war is frequent
overseas – if not brutally constant – with hired mercenaries to do the dirty
work and bring back the oil and drugs – the “golden” treasures of modern
times.
Immediately following Nicholson’s administrations in
faraway America, the Crown put aside their colonial reform efforts for Queen
Anne’s War, in which the future “Blackbeard,” or Jamaican gentleman Edward
Thache participated. Nicholson returned to London and petitioned the last
Stuart queen to make an expedition to take French territories in Canada.
Nicholson then captured the French Port Royal in that territory on October 2,
1710, but couldn’t hold it. Still, this battle began the conquest of Acadia and
permanent British control over Nova Scotia. In that effort, Nicholson combined
forces with Sir Hovendon Walker, then commander of HMS Windsor – at one time, the ship on which Thache served – at the
head of his fleet, perhaps with Thache still aboard (as the date that he
received discharge from Windsor is
still as yet unknown). Much to
Nicholson’s ire, however, many ships in Walker’s fleet foundered on rocks near
the mouth of the Saint Lawrence River. The Royal Navy forced a cancellation of
the expedition, which greatly angered Nicholson, who had led the land forces,
but then had to retreat. Overall, however, the British were eventually
successful.[3]
Francis Nicholson spent some time afterward as Nova
Scotia’s governor, residing far to the south in Boston. There, he re-attempted
his reform efforts once again, angering colonials, by removing “notorious”
American malcontents from office. Still, colonials joined together and claimed
Nicholson to be mad and had him declared incompetent. “Malcontents” regained
their positions and cast the incorrigible reformer Nicholson from New England.
This sordid ad hominem political
tactic – with the rhetorical use of the term “treason” – enabled colonial
conservatives to maintain their power in America against the efforts of British
Whig reformers. Understand that these tactics often work with uneducated
voters. Is it any surprise that the tactic still works well for today’s
American conservatives whose base is primarily poor Southern and rural voters?[4]
Undeterred by his defeats in New England – with reform
still the fervent wish of the growing Whig ministry under George I – Francis
Nicholson then found appointment as the first royal governor of South Carolina
during the more turbulent second phase of the Golden Age of Piracy from 1721 to
1725. By this time, during the latter part of the Golden Age, British reform at
first appeared to make some headway in a stubbornly corrupt America.
Nicholson’s instructions from the Crown cite the usual dealings with Indians,
trade, and such, but a preamble to these instructions involved the legal issues
surrounding piracy. His superiors realized that their initial efforts at reform
could not be trusted purely in corrupt colonial hands. Once the Crown gained
control from the Lords Proprietors – Carolina’s former private owners,
interested only in what profit they might gain – they would still attempt to
utilize their captured Bahamian base in America to ensure further reform. But,
as all best laid plans….
Apparently, American resistance to reform was not
because of the Lords Proprietors’ abusive influence. Americans – even free of
private or proprietary rule – still did not want liberal reform and had proven
quite obstinate and stubborn. American gentlemen resented being told what to do
and fervently proved themselves as the quintessential “Commonwealth of
Pyrates”! To protect their heroes, Americans abused the procedures for piracy
trials under the outline laid out by Sir Charles Hedges in the late seventeenth
century. Edward Randolph’s earlier assertion that pirates in America “could not
try pirates” – meaning themselves – was reflected in the Crown’s instructions
to their colonial administrators.
The preamble to Nicholson’s instructions from the
Board of Trade called for no less than seven men, the governor or his
representative being required as one, to form an admiralty court. Also, the
other six being “no person but Such as were known Merchantts, factors, or
Planters or Such as Captains, Lieutenants or Warrant Officers in any of his
said Late Majesties Ships of Warr or Captains, Masters, or Mates of some
English shoar Should be Capable of being So Called and Sitting and Voting in
the said Court.”[5]
The use of the word “English” is ambiguous here – not “British,” although the
distinction is barely noticed today when these distinctions do not carry quite
the same connotation. Why write this detail or make this distinction? Americans
had not been prone to put French or Spanish citizens on their admiralty courts
– nationality could not have been the problem. Could it be that “English shoar”
in his instructions referred to the actual shores of England herself – not an English possession or colony? As
influenced by Edward Randolph’s words, the apparent meaning may be subtle, but
the Crown had not trusted natural-born Americans – as well as foreigners –
judging pirate trials or administering justice to their own. As with any colony
of Britain, many English vessels visited the colonies on a regular basis. South
Carolina records show a regular pattern of trans-Atlantic commerce from
Bristol, Liverpool, London, as well as West Indian traffic. These “Captains,
Masters, and Mates” of “English shoars” – not colonial or provincial – would be
readily available to serve on such courts in America.
Francis Nicholson’s superiors were quite serious –
their subtly anti-pirate preamble went on for almost five full pages before
Nicholson’s actual instructions began. They listed three anti-piracy acts: 11th
William III, 1st George I (not only to prevent piracy, but
specifically piracies on the king’s ships), 10th Anne I (on building
county jails), and 12th William III (reiterating 13th
Charles II for support of the navy overseas). One certainly got the impression
that the Crown did not trust those remote provincials in the American
wilderness. They seem to have had good reason!
The instructions themselves contain the usual
references, with specific exception. No. 56 was undoubtedly generated by the
government’s extreme difficulties with the Richard Tookerman-Henry Wills piracy
case of that same year in London Courts. This instruction read that “no persons
for the future be Sent as Prisoners to this Kingdom from the said Province of
South Carolina, without Sufficient Proof of their Crimes, and that proof
transmitted along with the Said Prisoners.”[6] Capt.
Edward Vernon probably nodded his approval for the Crown’s caution – still
smarting financially from that affair. He paid £1,200 in fines from the
resulting judgment of false arrest, a travesty of justice expertly manipulated
by veteran American pirates Tookerman and Wills.
It’s helpful to compare this
corruption with Republican President Donald J. Trump, his personal attorney
Rudy Giuliani, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Vice-President Mike Pence, and
Attorney General William Barr in obstructing the wheels of justice in Trump’s
first term (2017-2020): betraying American citizens to dictators, colluding
with foreign states, and extorting others to illegally upset elections! George
Washington clearly saw this “foreign influence” in our affairs as disgraceful. For
an American Administration to collude with foreigners is a betrayal of the
nation. Let’s be clear, though – this is still not “treason” – this betrayal of
Trump’s office – or “treason” as President Trump often accused of his many
detractors, including the famed “whistleblower” exposing Trump’s extortion of
Ukraine’s president – oh, no – it’s not treason. You see, according to the U.S.
Constitution, no war had been declared by America – the “Commonwealth of
Pyrates!” So, neither Trump nor his opponents can be accused of actual “treason”
in the course of their betrayal of the United States of America! Trump et al basically pirated or robbed our
“democracy” to fill their coffers of treasure and stay in power – ostensibly
indefinitely! These political brigands cared not with whom they colluded to
obtain their goals – even America’s longest-term enemy, Russia!
As recognized by Sebastian
Prange, recognizing the Golden Age historical connection requires that we
precisely understand the terms and their usage through time. As Prange saw it “pirates
are more likely to be portrayed as pests than as political actors,” erroneously
thrust “into a realm of illegitimacy and subversion,“ yet capable of true
agency even in government.[7] “Piracy”
wrongly conjures base anti-heroic thoughts of “plunder,” “notoriety,” and “illicit
romance” rather than simply “theft” – like hold-ups and robberies are generally
seen as blue-collar crimes in the minds of Americans today. Thanks to
historians like Marcus Rediker, we now think of pirates in that same Marxist
sense - as desperate poor people who fought against wealthy oppressors in a
democratic revolt – but this is simply not true for the wealthy and educated
pirate captains – those capable of the intricate math necessary for navigation
– those captains of the most technologically-advanced machines of their day –
or sailing vessels. It shifts our thinking away from crimes committed by their
government contractors – or similar wealthy Americans today – essentially the
same theft, bribery, extortion, and other white-collar crimes committed also by
their counterparts in the eighteenth century. Using the term “piracy” – essentially
for crimes at sea, instead of the actual word “crimes,” warps our impression anachronistically
away from recognition of the criminal element today – also even government
agents. Calling them “pirates” invokes scenes of Errol Flynn swinging through
the air with a bandana on his head and a knife in his teeth. In reality,
pirates were criminals who stole another person’s property. The criminal methods
are the same – their tools have simply changed – they now wear business suits
instead of periwigs or tri-corn hats. Wealthy American conservatives through
the Civil War up to the present day have relied on this chronological confusion
to mislead the general populace and distract them from their own crimes of
greed, including in earlier times, slavery. This pattern has not changed
because humans have not changed – we did not evolve that much in only a few
centuries! Yes, there are still “pirates”or “criminals” – men of greed – in
America’s patrician population despite the efforts of men like Edward Randolph
and Francis Nicholson in the eighteenth century – or Progressives today!
Instructions 67-70 to Francis
Nicholson may have been of particular interest to the wealthy well-educated war
veteran and later “pirate” Edward Thache. These instructions concerned
“Merchants and Planters of the West Indies” in corresponding and trading with
the French Islands in those parts. The 5th and 6th
articles of their mutual 1686 treaty prohibited “to Trade and Fish in all
Places possessed or which shall be possessed by the other in America.”[8] The Crown worried that
intelligence or military secrets would leak to their Catholic enemy by continuous
contact with these English traders – indeed as privateers and pirates gained
intelligence from them. For example, while at the Virginia Capes with Benjamin Hornigold,
pirate Edward Thache may have been quite pleased to learn from Capt. Pritchard
about the future visit of a large, lightly-manned and gunned slave ship (La Concorde) near Martinique. Pritchard
had come upon the pirates as he sailed northward from his most recent port of St.
Lucia, in the French Windwards. Still, once Thache arrived there, and soon
after taking La Concorde, Thache might
also have been quite annoyed with such English merchants like Christopher
Taylor trading to Bequia – with the French. Taylor was the only man in any
record who claimed violence was done to him directly by Thache, although greed –
the money – may also have influenced Thache to do so. Furthermore, Thache never
hanged Taylor from the yardarm, as he threatened; so, it may yet have been a
bluff.[9]
Stuart Tories, Jacobites,
and many elite Americans of conservative persuasion saw King William’s
progressive policies and those of his successors and their many reforming administrative
“Dutch dogs” as weakness. War had been natural for these conservatives – as,
indeed, war fuels the pecuniary desires of mercenary corporations like
Blackwater or Xi today – essentially, corporate “piracy.” One may have heard in
their youth that “Might made right; strength over weakness made a resilient
nation – it commanded trade and ensured profit,” or “Only the truly strong
could be truly free.” Perhaps you’ve heard “Sorry. Nothing personal – it was
just business!” We still think like the pirates of yesterday and care little
about what happens to the failed companies we leave in our brutal capitalistic
wake. We could be tempted to say it’s “human nature” because we have behaved
this way for generations!
“Piracy had become so
interwoven into the social infrastructure of the Atlantic colonies,” writes
Douglas R. Burgess, “that it helped shape the
policies of many colonial governments,” and gave rise to more lenient policies
on crime.[10] Piracy built a complacent and
corrupt America where “human nature” was considered absolutely “greedy,”
“corrupt,” “immoral,” and just awful! But, it’s simply not true – humanity is
not evil.
Piracy of select humans was
essentially corrupt – it completed Queen Elizabeth’s task begun in 1588 after
the defeat of the Spanish Armada – to steal Spain’s wealth and colonies. These
select humans founded America and raised children of similar thought. Americans
grew to love their pirate heroes. Piracy provided “many goods and luxuries that
colonists from Boston to Charleston later took for granted.”[11] The political differentiation
began with King William’s War (1688-1697) or Nine Year’s War. America began accepted
criminality while Britain moved away from that practice. Differentiation from
England had occurred for at least the past five generations, 3,000 miles away,
“beyond the lines” of amity, with West Indians consistently winning Spain’s
former empire and riches. It appeared that criminality worked, so America so no
reason to stop its crimes!
A significant ideological band
snapped that tore mother from child. The strong and martial Stuart ideologues
in America saw no reason to change their methods with all the winning – with
their coffers overflowing with treasure! There existed little incentive to
change – the profit made in America was far beyond British experience at home. By
far, Anglo-Americans won the lion’s share of the gold, silver, sugar, indigo,
rum, and molasses – treasures that once belonged to Spain! They began to purchase
the majority of slaves in America and grow the most sugar, or “white gold.” Pirates
were capitalists because semi-legalized theft was more profitable than open
legality. Of course, they should keep the profits for themselves, not share it
with the British who they saw as ignoring their legislative needs and who
pressured them to change! Americans today don’t recognize this so easily
because “legal” and “illegal” are wholly ambiguous and relative terms, just
like “treason,” “sovereign,” “freedom,” or the essentially criminal “pirate.”
Pirates and capitalist criminals hide in modern linguistic ambiguity – always
in political rhetoric.
Conservatives or Tories of
the eighteenth century both in England and America saw their world and their
profit coming to an end when a German king took the throne of Britain. It did
not really matter that he was Protestant and not Catholic, although much has
been made about that distinction and the religious differences had played their
part. The main points, however, had more to do with the money, but were
financial, political, and, to an increasing extent, cultural – the new king was
a threat to martial Stuart policies in America that aided them to take whatever
they wanted. George I – more specifically, his ministers – were viewed as the
most liberal and alien administration yet foisted upon them from 3,000 miles
away – not English, Scottish, Irish,
or even Welsh! George I was an immigrant king in his own country! One could
imagine today’s autocratic Trump administration would have rejected it
outright!
Jacobites, followers of the Stuart line of James III, or the ousted “Pretender,” responded with an attack on England to restore his rightful place on
the throne in 1715. Pirates of the Golden Age in the West Indies may have
believed that their actions aided the same agenda – but more importantly, their
profits. These conservatives lashed out at a purportedly unfair system that
threatened their more violent imperial traditions. Still, they were not yet
prepared to mount a full-throated revolution and probably would have backed
down even during the Jacobite Revolution of 1715 had it not been for the glittery
treasure, a source of great profit, spilled on the Florida shores in July of
that same year! The timing created a perfect storm across the Atlantic that
created the Golden Age of Piracy, the Commonwealth of Pyrates, or modern America.
During the Golden Age of
Piracy, Douglas Burgess asserts, “Loyalty [or at least casual
deference] to the English flag, which had been a hallmark of the profession
[piracy] since the sixteenth century, gradually succumbed to a quite different
sentiment: ‘war against all the world.’”[12] War against everyone else
– the foreign; differences of religion, politics, and especially other cultures
became anathema to an increasing isolationist America – then including the West
Indies. This shift in basic intent denoted a change in far more than just
politics: it was also territorial, cultural, racial, and financial – feudally
Stuart in aggressive style. Burgess said that this shift caused some, like
Marcus Rediker, to “posit a protodemocracy of pirates that stood apart from and in
conflict with the Crown and its colonies.”[13] Burgess’ desire to explain
piracy as a phenomenon separate from emerging American politics, however,
handicaps his reliance on the already handicapped theories of Rediker.
Americans all across the continent and in the West Indies enjoyed and
benefitted from the same “pirate,” imperial, or one-sided autocracy. Rediker was partly correct except that
his “conflict with the Crown and colonies” was more directly a conflict of the
colonies, but with a rejected Crown.
America tested its hegemony on the water, revolting against England in the
Golden Age and simply failed the first time around – the second, however, would
succeed. The argument is inescapable – we diverged from Britain in that they
moved away from piracy/criminality while we firmly embraced it and created our
culture from it. The umbilical cord had
snapped. America began to truly see itself as an independent “Commonwealth of
Pyrates.” No amount of redeemer or conservative rhetoric would change that.
[1]
Natalie Zacek, “Francis Nicholson (1655–1728),” Encyclopedia Virginia (Richmond:
Virginia Foundation for the Humanities, 2016),
http://www.encyclopedaniavirginia.org/ (accessed 30 Jul 2016).
[2] Ibid.
[3]
Nicholson reportedly tore off his powdered wig
and threw it to the ground when he heard the news of the fleet disaster.
[4]
A study of U. S. Census records since 1850 for
northern versus southern states and their respective abilities to read and
write (possessing of a basic education) is highly instructive on this point.
Ancestry.com it!
[5] "South Carolina Probate Records, Bound Volumes,
1671-1977," images, FamilySearch
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-19424-37315-19?cc=1919417 : 21 May
2014), Charleston > Miscellaneous record, 1696-1729 > image 128 of 301;
citing Department of Archives and History, Columbia.
[6] Ibid., image 138 of 301.
[7] Prange, “A Trade of No Dishonor,” 1270.
[8] Ibid., image 139 of 301.
[9]
Still, Thache expressed a particular annoyance
with the French, who consistently threatened his home of Jamaica and with whom
he fought consistently in the former war. His actions after capturing his Queen Anne’s Revenge demonstrate a
steady determination to hurt the French in the French Windward Islands and
later at Petit Goâve in French Hispaniola.
[10] Douglas R. Burgess, Jr., The Pirate’s Pact: The Secret Alliances Between History’s Most
Notorious Buccaneers and Colonial America (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2009),
169.
[11]Ibid.
[12] Burgess, Politics
of Piracy, 200.
[13]Ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment