64 *

HISTORY OF MARINE ARCHITECTURE.

inserte d more would have been unnecessary, for the inferior parts of tha disputebecame eclipsed by those of a more consequential nature. In no time, perhaps,

was

“ The committee having prepared a report, and presented it to the house, upon a mature con-sideration it was approved and agreed to; and we think it our duty humbly to lay the tame beforeyour Majesty.”

“ The lords committee have heard many of the petitioners upon their oaths, and have caused themto put their depositions into writing, and sign the same.”

The lords committee observing that the complaints of the petitioners naturally fell underseveral heads, for the greater ease of the house, have endeavoured, in their report, to reduce the evi-dence they have received into the following order; always referring, as they proceed, to the depositionsthemselves.

One thing complained of was, the insufficiency of convoys appointed for the merchants, wherebytheir ships had, from time to time, become a prey to the superior force of the enemy.

A second point was, the merchants suffered great discouragement by tlieir being forced to wait longfor convoys, even after the time promised and prefixed for their sailing, whereby the charge of sea-men’s wages and vi&uals, demurrage of shipping, damage of goods, and loss of markets, made tradinginsupportable.

A third ground of complaint was, the untimely and unseasonable sailing of convoys, whereby trade,to the West Indies especially, was in a manner ruined.

A fourth was, the great want of cruizers in the Channel and Soundings.

A fifth complaint was, concerning the arbitrary proceedings of the captains of the Queen’s ships ofwar, in impressing seamen out of the merchant ships in the Weft Indies, as also, upon their return tothe ports of Great Britain, to the endangering of many, and the loss of several, ships.

In order to make out the firft head of their complaint relating to the insufficiency of convoys, theygave the following inftances.

Firft, in June, 1706, a fleet of merchant ships, under convoy of the Gosport man of war, boundfor the West Indies, were attacked in the Soundings, and the Gosport and eight or nine merchantships were takeu.

Secondly, the Lisbon fleet, under convoy of the Swiftsure and the Warspite, were attacked inMarch, 1706-7, and about fourteen merchant ships taken in the Soundings.

Thirdly, the Newfoundland fleer, under convoy of the Falkland and the Medway’s prize, were at-tacked in April, and some of them taken.

Fourthly, the coasting convoy was attacked in April off the Land’s End.

Fifthly, the convoy from the Downs, consisting of the Hampton-Court, the Royal-Oak, and theGrafton, sailed the firft of May laft, and the next day were attacked in the Channel, and the Hampton-Court, and the Grafton, and about twenty merchant ships, were taken by the Dunkirk squadron.

A sixth instance was, that of the Russia ships, outward bound, this year, which were attacked bythe Dunkirk squadron, and sixteen of them taken.

And farther, in respect to the Russia fleet, Mr. Dawson informed their lordships, that, on the29th of April, the governor and a committee of the Muscovian Company attended the Prince’scouncil, to know what convoy was appointed to conduct their ships to Archangel. They were told