Kidd's Crewmembers In The Nineteenth Century

Unfortunately for merchant interests, enticing pirates to quit their criminal endeavors failed as badly as the military efforts to stop them. Although pardons were successful at bringing pirates into shore, they did not keep them for long. Many shook the hand of the governor, swore his allegiance to the crown, and then shortly returned to preying on vessels at sea. The failure of pardons to slow the proliferation of piracy cannot all be blamed on piratical greed. Pardons were specific to regions and times, and the vague language they contained raised fear of trickery. Justices at the oyer and terminar court at Old Bailey in London executed two of William Kidd’s crewmembers in 1701 despite the fact they turned themselves in under a royal pardon. The court determined that since they did not hand themselves over to one of the four appointed commissioners specified in the proclamation their pardon was invalid. …show more content…
During the seventeenth century, pirates easily found welcoming colonial ports eager to separate the itinerant from his ill-gotten hard currency. This neglect at best, active collusion at worst, made it nearly impossible to fight piracy as long as the perpetuators could disappear into colonial towns after committing their crimes. These enabling attitudes changed during the eighteenth century, closing off potential safe havens, and helping to tighten the noose around pirate’s necks. However, the closing of friendly ports was only a piece in the larger imperial mosaic designed to rid the oceans of pirates. The perceived threat they posed to national and local interests ensured that officials would employ any means necessary to obtain security, even if it meant trampling on English rights, while totting the judiciousness of the English legal