Talk:Kitty (1800 ship)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / British / European / Napoleonic era Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815)

Ship or Ships?

According the cited source "Letters of marque against France 1793-1815" ([1]), several Kitty's were hired by the RN and reading this article I suspect that it conflates more than one. To begin with it states in the first paragraph; Kitty served the Royal Navy only from 17 May 1804 to 17 January 1805, then goes on to describe several actions taking place afterwards. Secondly the size of the crew (100) seems disproportionate for the size of the ship (166 tons).

The source lists the following Kitty's:

Ref No.    Type   Commander            Tons     Guns                       Men     Date of warrant
ADM 7/328  ?      Brown, William       145      10 x 4                     35      1793 February 28
ADM 7/328  Ship   Mount, John          366      20 x 9                     45      1794 January 13
ADM 7/328  Ship   Heron, John          146      12 x 4                     15      1794 April 28
ADM 7/328  Ship   Walker, George       366      20 x 9                     45      1796 March 5
ADM 7/328  Ship   Bachope, James       310      16 x 9                     25      1797 May 4
ADM 7/328  Ship   Pince, Robert        366      24 x 6&9                   35      1799 April 6
ADM 7/328  Ship   Murdock, William     366      22 x 9&12                  30      1800 July 16
ADM 7/649  Ship   McDonald, Alexander  366      12 x 9&12                  50      1803 August 9
ADM 7/649  Ship   Musgrave, Thomas     320      22 x 9&18&24 + 6 swivels  100      1805 February 5
ADM 7/649  Ship   Murdock, William     395      22 x 9                     77      1806 October 15
ADM 7/649  Ship   McBride, Duncan      305      12 x 6                     25      1808 December 6
ADM 7/649  Brig   Roach, John          116      10 x 6                     18      1812 October 2

The Letter of Marque website lists letters of marque, but only one of these, the vessel captained by Musgrave, was, as far as we know, hired by the Royal Navy. The information on the hiring is from Winfield. The other letters of marque were not hired. After her contract was up, Kitty continued to sail, under Musgrave, as a private man of war, ie, under a letter of marque, but not referred to as a letter of marque. The crew size is not abnormal. As a privateer/private man of war, she expected to capture prizes, which would necessitate prize crews. The rest of the Kittys above seem more likely to be letters of marque, i.e., armed merchant vessels with the right to take prizes should they run across the opportunity. To give you an idea of the disparity, look at the Battle of La Guaira (1812), which I have been working on. The privateer Saratoga, of 16 guns and 140 men, captured the British letter of marque Rachel, of 12 guns and 36 men. The 166 bm is a mistake; Winfield gives the tons burthen as 310.Acad Ronin (talk) 12:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]