Search

This collection is made up of five letters from James Colquhoun at St. James's Place, London, to William Auriol Drummond-Hay between May and September 1834. At the time, Colquhoun served as British Consul-General for the Hanseatic Cities of Hamburg, Bremen, and Lübeck, and Drummond-Hay was British consul at Tangier, Morocco. The correspondence relates to diplomacy and suppression of piracy in the Mediterranean, the danger to British capital in case of Neapolitan or Hanseatic depredations on foreign cargoes, Neapolitan vessels en route to Morocco, the state of Moroccan ships, and the appropriateness of the Hanseatic Senates' desire to express tangible appreciation to Drummond-Hay for protection of their commerce.

• May 29, 1834. A Neapolitan Frigate and several corsairs headed to Tangier with instructions to negotiate or, in the case of failure, to resort to force; at the same time a Neapolitan Brig of War has left England to join them there. "The large quantity of British Capital in Foreign Ports & consequently of shipments on British account, distributed in the ships of all nations expose British Interests to be affected indirectly by any depredations committed on Cargoes under the Hanseatic or Neapolitan flag & indeed under almost every flag. . . . The only security for British as well as foreign Commerce in the Mediterranean & on the European Coasts bordering on the Atlantic is via the dismantling of the Piratical Vessels which it is hoped will be enforced & immediately follow the settlement of the Neapolitan question."
• June 2, 1834. The Hamburgh Senate thinks it difficult or impossible to "abolish the piratical system and as Morocco in particular will probably not be brought for some time to alter her System, the Hanseatic negociation must be persevered in, with a view to a final settlement." The Senate is fully aware of the benefits Drummond-Hay's work has provided for the protection of "Hans. Towns" commerce. They are preparing further instructions and in the meantime trust entirely on Drummond-Hay's "Judgment & diplomatic tact still to shield them from any hostile Measures and trust that the piratical Vessels in question will be dismantled forthwith as the best earnest of Security."
• June 30, 1834. Believes the arrival of the Neapolitan fleet and apparent support by a French force will put to rest the risk of putting a Moroccan flotilla to sea. Discusses the state of Moroccan vessels.
• September 1, 1834. Spoke with Secretary of State Thomas Spring Rice regarding the Hanseatic Republics' Senates' desire to express esteem for Colquhoun's diplomatic talents. Rice wants to talk to Lord Palmerston [i.e. Foreign Secretary Henry Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston] about it, so that the two men act on the same principles. "I pointed out the distinction between a British Diplomatic Functionary receiving unlimited presents from Indian Princes or Barbary Pirates and his receiving a well earned Compliment from the States to whom he had rendered services under the auspices of his own Government."
• September 18, 1834. Pleased that Secretary Rice has approved of the Senates making an acknowledgment of Colquhoun's "services at Morocco to Hanseatic Commerce during the last 5 years."

This 47-page manuscript, dated March 1760, is a series of certified copies of legal documentation from the British Vice-Admiralty Court of Gibraltar, relating to the ship Immacolata Concezione & St. Ignazio di Loyola, commanded by Roman citizen Lorenzo Ghiglino. The ship was captured by the British privateer St. Albans (Captain Edward Vernon) in October 1759 off the coast of Cadiz, Spain. The Immacolata... was brought to Gibraltar where the ship and its cargo were condemned as prizes. This manuscript provides a detailed account of the complex legal and commercial practices during the Seven Years' War. It outlines Ghiglino's earlier encounter with New York privateers in 1757 during his initial voyage to Cap Français, Saint Domingue, his acquittal in the New York Vice-Admiralty Court in 1758, efforts to secure sugar and coffee cargo in Saint Domingue in 1759, his re-capture near Cadiz by Edward Vernon, and legal arguments about prize law. The manuscript is on loose sheets, connected by stab sewing near the top edge.

This 47-page manuscript, dated March 1760, is a series of certified copies of legal documentation from the British Vice-Admiralty Court of Gibraltar, relating to the ship Immacolata Concezione & St. Ignazio di Loyola, commanded by Roman citizen Lorenzo Ghiglino. The ship was captured by the British privateer St. Albans (Captain Edward Vernon) in October 1759 off the coast of Cadiz, Spain. The Immacolata... was brought to Gibraltar where the ship and its cargo were condemned as prizes. This manuscript provides a detailed account of the complex legal and commercial practices during the Seven Years' War. It outlines Ghiglino's earlier encounter with New York privateers in 1757 during his initial voyage to Cap Français, Saint Domingue, his acquittal in the New York Vice-Admiralty Court in 1758, efforts to secure sugar and coffee cargo in Saint Domingue in 1759, his re-capture near Cadiz by Edward Vernon, and legal arguments about prize law. The manuscript is on loose sheets, connected by stab sewing near the top edge.

This manuscript includes formal copies of depositions, Vice-Admiralty Court sentences or decrees, petitions and memorials, orders, letters, passports, declarations, bills of sale, certificates, accounts and invoices, bills of lading and health, interrogations, monitions, claims, allegations and their answers.

These documents provide a record of Lorenzo Ghiglino's Atlantic mercantile practices. They include commentary on the cargo being shipped aboard the Immacolata Concezione and speculation about the financial reasoning that would explain the goods. For example, Lorenzo Ghiglino's answers to Vernon's allegations against him in Gibraltar explained that his initial transatlantic voyage in 1757 "wore a very promising aspect[,] European goods being greatly wanted at Cape François & American produce vastly cheap at that Port by reason of the circumstances of the war with Great Britain which rendered it extremely hazardous for the French to transport their American produce to Europe." However, Judge Lewis Morris's opinion delivered on October 13, 1758, in the New York Vice-Admiralty court questioned the logic. He noted that the Spanish merchant backing Ghiglino's venture, Don Francisco Xavier de los Rios, gave "orders to purchase great quantities of Indigo" despite his presumed knowledge that "it is highly penal for the Subjects of any neutral state to export indigo from Cape Francois & that it is necessary that every Vessel shou'd duly appear to be a French bottom before she can export Indigo from the Cape..." Morris therefore decided it was more likely that de los Rios was covering for French merchants attempting to sell French goods in the West Indies, illustrating the complex business practices occurring during the international conflict.

Documentation of Ghiglino's voyage back to Europe in 1759 details the ongoing impact of the war on business. Mercantile constraints imposed by the British prohibited Ghiglino from loading a cargo in New York to sell in Spain and Italy, which forced him to travel to Spanish and French colonies in the West Indies to purchase goods. For the first leg of his trip to Monte Christi, he requested permission "to man the ship with French Prisoners which will save him a great expence in the article of wages." The copy of "The Governor of Monte Christi's Certificate" verified that Ghiglino was unable to secure cargo in the city over the course of a month and a half, as merchants refused to bring sugar to market there "on account of there being many English Privateers on this Coast who daily commit acts of Piracy on the Spanish Vessels trading in this commodity." Ghiglino instead travelled to Cap Français, and his purchases of sugar and coffee are documented, listing amounts and costs, as well as unsuccessful attempts by planters to secure freight for their goods to Europe. Claims by several other crew members and passengers illustrate the smaller scale trading happening aboard merchant ships.

The court records also speak to the financial imperatives motivating privateers. The copy of the New York Vice-Admiralty Court's 1758 sentence reveals the reason why the privateers who captured the Immacolata Concezione never pursued their appeal of the case in England. The merchants tasked with selling the perishable cargo, instead of holding the sums as dictated, "distributed the money arising from the Sales or a part of it among the owners or partys interested in the Privateers concern'd in the Capture. Being thus possess'd of all the proceeds of the Cargoe.... no wonder the Libellants were contented to drop the prosecution of their appeal & that they afterwards opppos'd the Genoese Captain acquiring his freight & gratification money." Later in 1759, Edward Vernon's rejection of Ghiglino's petition for additional time to secure advice from England addresses his financial concerns. Vernon noted the "considerable expense in guarding & preserving the said Vessel & Cargoe which have been exposed especially at this Season of the year to great accident and damages." Additionally, he acknowledged that the sugar cargo was "perishable especially as being on board an old Ship," and had already depreciated some twenty per cent in value.

This manuscript provides insight into maritime law, particularly through the allegations made by British privateer Edward Vernon at the Vice-Admiralty Court of Gibraltar and Ghiglino's answers. Arguments concerned issues like the ownership of vessels and cargoes, the possession of French papers, neutral rights to trade with French colonies, and the law of nations. The types of material in the document, including copies of passports, financial receipts, petitions and memorials, and more, illustrate merchants' understanding of the importance of good documentation to meet legal disputes.

The appeals process is also discussed in the records. The New York privateers claimed to have appealed the 1758 decision, causing Joseph Ghiglino to travel to England to defend the case. Upon arrival, finding no appeal lodged, he entreated the help of Secretary of State William Pitt. A copy of Pitt's June 10, 1758, letter to New York Governor James de Lancey pressing to have the case moved forward is included. While attending to the case in Gibraltar, Lorenzo Ghiglino petitioned for additional time to secure advice from England, suggesting the difficulties of international maritime disputes, and the file closes with the note that he will be appealing the condemnation of his ship and cargo to the Lords Commissioners of Appeals in England, which necessitated his receiving a full copy of his records.