CHAPTER IX[ToC]
CUTTERS' EQUIPMENT
In an earlier chapter we quoted from Marryat a passage which showed that the mariners of a Revenue cutter were dressed in red flannel shirts and blue trousers, and also wore canvas or tarpaulin petticoats. The reason for the last-mentioned was appreciated by smuggler and Preventive men alike, and if you have ever noticed the Thames River Police dodging about in their small craft you will have noticed that at any rate the steersman has in cold weather some sort of apron wrapped round his legs. But in the period of which we are now speaking the attached apron or petticoat was very useful for keeping the body warm in all weather, especially when the sitter of the Preventive boat had to be rowed out perhaps in the teeth of a biting wind, for several miles at night. And the smugglers found their task of landing tubs through the surf a wet job, so they were equally glad of this additional protection.[11]
The period to which Marryat referred was the end of the eighteenth century. As to the uniform of the Revenue officers we have the following evidence. Among the General Letters of the Customs Board was one dated June 26, 1804, from which it is seen that the commanders of the cruisers petitioned the Board for an alteration in their uniform and that also of the mates, this alteration to be made at the expense of the officers. The commanders suggested for their own dress:—
"A silver epaulette, the button-holes worked or bound with silver twist or lace, side-arms, and cocked hats with cockades, and the buttons set on the coat three and three, the breeches and waistcoats as usual:
"For the undress, the same as at present.
"For the mates, the addition of lappels, the buttons set on two and two, and cocked hats with cockades."
The Board consented to these alterations with the exception of the epaulettes, "the adoption of which we do not approve, lest the same should interfere with His Majesty's Naval Service." Now in reading this, it is important to bear in mind that between the Revenue and Navy there was a great deal of jealousy.[12] It went so far, at least on one occasion, as to cause a Naval officer to go on board a Revenue cutter and haul the latter's flag down. The reason these epaulettes were disallowed may be explained by the fact that it was only nine years before the above date that epaulettes had become uniform in the Navy, for notwithstanding that epaulettes had been worn by officers since 1780, yet they were not uniform until 1795, although they were already uniform in the French and Spanish navies.[13] Since, therefore, these adornments had been so recently introduced into the Navy, it was but natural that with so much jealousy existing this feature should not be introduced into the Revenue service. Just what "the undress, the same as at present" was I have not been able to discover, but in the Royal Navy of that time the undress uniform for a captain of three years' post consisted of a blue coat, which was white-lined, with blue lappels and cuffs, a fall-down collar, gold-laced button-holes, square at both ends, arranged regularly on the lappels. For a captain under three years the uniform was the same, except that the nine buttons were arranged on the lappels in threes. For master or commander it was the same, except that the button-holes were arranged by twos.[14]
It was in January 1807 that the Customs Board took into consideration the appointment of several Revenue cruisers and the expediency of one general system for manning them according to the tonnage and construction of the vessel, the service and station on which she was to be employed. They therefore distinctly classed the different cruisers according to their tonnage, description, and number of men originally allowed and since added, whether furnished with letters of marque or not. And believing that it would be beneficial to the service that the complement of men should be fixed at the highest number then allotted to cutters in each respective class, they accordingly instructed the commanders of the different cruisers to increase their respective complements "with all practicable dispatch."
We now come to an important point concerning which there exists some little uncertainty. By a letter dated July 17, 1807, Revenue officers were reminded that they were by law bound to hoist the Revenue colours and fire a gun as a signal "before they in any case fire on any smuggling vessel or boat."