Action of 1652-05-22

22nd May 1652
Part of : The First Anglo-Dutch War (1652 - 1654)
Previous action : Battle of Dover 19.5.1652
Next action : Action of 1652-06-17 17.6.1652

 

Commonwealth of England

 
English Squadron, Anthony Young
Ship NameCommanderNotes
President (34) Anthony YoungFleet Flagship
Nightingale (30) Jacob Reynolds (d.1666)
Recovery (20) Francis Allen (d.1662)
 

Dutch Republic

 
Dutch Convoy Escort, Joris van der Zaen (d.1652/53)
Ship NameCommanderNotes
Zeelandia (34) Jacob Huyrluyt
Kampen (54) Joris van der Zaen (d.1652/53)Fleet Flagship
 

Notes on Action


Description of the actionTRN2
On May 12th, 1652, Captain Anthony Young, in the President, accompanied by two other "frigates," fell in off the Start with a small squadron of a dozen ships. Taking them to be Ayscue's vessels, he stood towards them, but, on coining up, discovered that they were homeward-bound Dutch merchant ships, convoyed by three men-of-war wearing flags as admiral, vice-admiral, and rear-admiral. The Dutch admiral, on being summoned, struck his 'flag and held his course, but the vice-admiral who followed him refused point-blank, bidding Young come aboard and strike it himself. Young naively sent his master aboard, only to meet with a further refusal. On this the President ranged up on the Dutchman's weather quarter and again called on him to strike. The vice-admiral refused, and Young at once gave him a broadside, which was as promptly returned. The Dutch admiral hauled his wind the wind seems to have been north-west and tried to weather Young, who found himself obliged to put his helm down to prevent the admiral from getting out to windward of him and boarding. Meanwhile, Captains Chapman and Reynolds had fired on the rear-admiral astern. They now came up with the vice-admiral, but, as they overhauled him, the Dutchman struck his flag, and the rear-admiral did the like.

Young demanded that the vice-adrniral should be sent into port with him to make good the loss to the "frigates." To that the admiral said that so long as the dispute concerned the flag alone he did not interfere, but that he would resist to the uttermost any interference with the possession of the ship.

Nothing further was done. Young, who had lost one man killed and four wounded, wrote, " I do believe I gave him his bellyful of it; for he sent me word he had orders from the States, that if he struck he should lose his head; but at length he did strike, which makes me conceive he had enough of it." Whitelocke, who repeats many hearsay reports, records that the Dutch admiral offered in explanation the suggestion that his vice-admiral was drunk. When he goes on to say that after the fight the Hollanders gave Young " such loving salutes, confessing their faults, and so they parted good friends," he rather discredits his story.



Previous comments on this page

Posted by vittorio on Wednesday 15th of July 2015 20:15

In the description of the action:
Captains Chapman ? Maybe you changed by Francis Allen.
What the name of the third dutch man-of-war ?
Thanks !

Make a comment about this page





Recent comments to other pages

Date postedByPage
Monday 17th of February 2020 10:45Myf ThompsonNathaniel Bateman (c.1723-1797)
Sunday 16th of February 2020 16:03stephen GovierSir Charles Cunningham (d.1834)
Sunday 16th of February 2020 10:59CyBritish Sixth Rate ship 'Rose' (1757) (20)
Sunday 16th of February 2020 09:02Colin PeckhamBritish Sixth Rate ship 'Rose' (1757) (20)
Saturday 15th of February 2020 22:12Peter.van-VelzenRice Edwards (d.1779)