[Company name] | Essay 2 | The Trial of William Kidd | Jessica Sweazea
11-11-2015
|

A scandalous conspiracy created by England for increased continuous revenue or a fair trial sending a guilty man to the gallows? Death as a victory of law or a demise of democracy at sea? The trial of William Kidd is an important and controversial topic of discussion for historians and students studying piracy. Whether or not William Kidd’s trial was manufactured to tarnish Kidd’s name and make an example of him is an important part of piratical history. The story of Kidd’s trial illustrates how the world of western piracy came to an end and how government handled piratical activities. Rediker describes pirates as uncivilized beings, drunks, thieves, madmen, and even almost unhuman like. In chapter eight, he wrote “the pirates were full of madness and rage” yet later in the passage Rediker later contradicts himself and also continued to state how humorous and knowledgeable the pirates were. These pirates were seen as outlaws, interrupting intercolonial trade, and a threat against principles of property, individuals, society, and nations. Many mariners were accused of piracy which is a crime against property by theft or destruction, causing Great Britain to take action. In 1699, Great Britain created the English Acts of Piracy. This began the trials for pirates throughout the English dominium. After, came the Proclamation for Suppressing Piracy in 1717 followed by another proclamation in 1718. This gave pirates amnesty and rewards for turning themselves and turning a leaf. This also increased the naval forces in Great Britain and was open to the public. The pirates, themselves, just found humor in these trials and mocked them. An example of this is found in Figure 13 (Rediker 2004) which is an illustration of a mock trial performed by the crew of Thomas Antis. As a result of the trails, pirates also kept defying social orders and relished over and cultivated their image against legal, family, church, and state ideals. In a matter of six years, William Kidd excelled in his practice and fell from grace. In 1695, Kidd begins privateering in London with a destination of the West Indies. After three years of privateering for the English government, Kidd and his crew returns to Great Britain. He returns home only to be accused of piracy. The issue was whether Kidd kept in terms of the letter of Marque, a government license authorizing someone to privateer. The terms of Kidd’s license states that he can privateer in the name of Great Britain, attacking pirates and French Ships. William Kidd’s story is that he approached a French ship with French passes and therefore captured the ship and its goods legally. However, the ship he captured was actually Armenian and gave the French passes because they thought Kidd’s ship was French. During Kidd’s trial essential evidence, the French passes, was missing. Kidd plead not guilty and attempted to hold the trial until the documents could be found otherwise he didn’t have the evidence he needed. The judge found him as guilty since he didn’t have the evidence. William Kidd was also on trial for another charge. (inclass n.d.) In 1697, Kidd argued with a crew member named Moore, resulting in Kidd striking Moore over the head with a bucket. The next day Moore died. The ship’s surgeon spoke at the trial on the possibility of Moore dying from scurvy not the head injury though that was not enough to convince the judge and jury. The judge also found William Kidd guilty on a charge of Murder. After being convicted of three counts of piracy, Kidd was Hang’d at “Hope Point”, an execution dock in Wapping on the Thames. His corpse was then enclosed in a metal cage and suspended in public as a warning to others. (Rediker 2004)
The film shown in class continues to explore the idea of a conspiracy behind the trial of William Kidd. (inclass n.d.) The justification comes from England who profits from the East India Company. The East India Company profits from trading with the Armenians. The Armenians urge for Kidd to be found guilty to return their goods and revenue. Even King William III and three jurors profited from all of the trading. The possible conspiracy is that Kidd was a scapegoat for England and the East India Company.
Lauren Benton, a scholar for NYC has a very opposite outlook on pirates in the period. Rather than Rediker, Benton states that “Pirates train to try not to break the law”. (Benton 2005) Benton’s larger argument is that there is not a progressive existence of legal regimes. International law was not universal and pirates were their own lawyers. At sea, Captains were considered judges, lawyers, and jury for any decisions about the ship and its crew. They would practice and assert their maritime knowledge when put on trial and would sometimes practice their arguments on ship prior to their arrival to shore. “Pirates went out of their way to obtain flawed commissions and to represent fraudulent commissions as valid.” (Benton 2005)
William Kidd used his knowledge to come up with a legal strategy for his trial. Kidd defended himself throughout the entire trial. The following is a quote by Lauren Benton describing Kidd’s defense. “In calling on these arguments, Kidd was relying closely on widely circulating understandings of the maritime legal order. No matter how remote, the possibility of prosecution, together with the need to establish ownership over seized goods, caused privateers-turned-pirates to anticipate defense arguments they might use at trial and to make efforts to preserve the pretense of legality, even while openly conducting unsanctioned raids and seizures.” (Benton 2005)
Benton goes on to oppose Marcus Rediker’s comments on maritime history. “The public hangings of pirates in Atlantic ports and the chase and capture of celebrated pirates in this decade have sometimes been characterized by historians as comprising an episode of terror and counter-terror, with, on one side, state terror in the form of mass hangings of pirates (Rediker 2004), and, on the other, the terror of increasingly desperate and openly criminal pirates.” (Benton 2005) She attacks Rediker’s imagery and states that this should be seen in a “longer framework” of Atlantic history and global maritime affairs.
On page 721, Benton claims that the men fought for their lives which contradicts Rediker’s romanticized version of piracy where the men die together. She argues that there was no solidarity. Her larger argument was that “Both trends followed decades of a more open-ended maritime politics…fragmented way and mariners both challenged the legal order and promoted it by insisting on the legality of a range of actions” (Benton 2005) and the shutdown on piracy altered but did not resolve the inconsistent legal status of a pirate.
In conclusion, one can make their own assumptions regarding to the theory of conspiracy behind the English government. However, the trial of William Kidd is a great example on how the trial should be understood that it was a victory of law and a demise of democracy at sea. The answer truly relies on the perspective of the reader though English law did win and rule Kidd to be guilty and made an example of him to other pirates and privateers. Also, the trials were beginning to phase out piracy in the western world. The two assumptions can be seen to go hand in hand. “As a place of international regulation, the sea was imagined more often as the negotiated product of multiple jurisdictional thrusts than as the birthplace of international norms.” (Benton 2005)

References
Benton, Lauren. 2005. "Legal Spaces of Empire: Piracy and the Origins of Ocean Regionalism." Society for Comparitive Studies in Society and History 700-724.
n.d. Film of William Kidd. 20 mins in class.
Rediker, Marcus. 2004. Villains of All Nations: Atlantic Pirates in the Golden Age. Boston: Beacon Press.