Running away to sea?

[Galium]

Charles Crockford son of Joshua and Martha was baptised in Bedford 30 January 1774.

PCC will of Charles Crockford, seaman serving aboard HMS Romney was proved 10 October 1798. Administration granted to Joshua Crockford, of St Paul, Bedford, father.  So Joshua and Martha's son is likely to be the person who joined the Navy.

However, the Northampton Mercury of 10 November 1792 carries an appeal for the return of Charles Crockford, apprenticed to Robert Taylor, whitesmith of St Neots, Huntingdonshire, who eloped from his master's service on the night of 17 October. He is aged "about 19" - so a similar age to the Charles Crockford from Bedford. The newspaper says that if he returns within fourteen days he will be forgiven, but after that anyone harbouring, or employing him will be prosecuted, "as the Law directs".

I haven't found any other record from his naval service, (apart from a previous will, in which he leaves everything to a woman named Sarah Brown, of Bedford) or of his death (HMS Romney, launched in 1762 wasn't  lost until 1804.)

I've searched apprenticeship records on Ancestry and FindMyPast, but can't find anything referring to a Charles Crockford bound to Robert Taylor of St Neots.

If the two men are one and the same, how likely is it that Charles would get away with unlawfully leaving his apprenticeship and joining the Navy?  If he had been discovered, would the Navy have been prosecuted?

[philipsearching]

If the two men are one and the same, how likely is it that Charles would get away with unlawfully leaving his apprenticeship and joining the Navy?  If he had been discovered, would the Navy have been prosecuted?

I would think that, given the political turmoil in Europe following the French Revolution in 1789 and British conflicts with France, Spain, and the Netherlands in the early 1780s, the Royal Navy would want all the fit young men they could get.  The RN would surely not have co-operated with an attempt by a master to recover an apprentice (in the same way the British Army were unco-operative in sending under-age volunteers back home in the Great War).

Philip

[ShaunJ]

Just a thought - his will was signed on 1 May 1797. He may have moved from the Romney to another ship between then and his death in (presumably) mid-1798.

[Rena]

If an apprenticeship led to a well paid profession/trade, then I'm not sure anyone would run away to sea.

One other reason for him disappearing off the streets would be the "press gangs".

https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/yourcountry/overview/pressgangs-/

[Galium]

Thank you for your thoughts, Philip, Shaun and Rena.   I did consider press gangs, but thought that maybe St Neots - which is where he disappeared from - is a bit far from the coast for them to be operating there.
  Good point about the Navy not caring too much for how a young man has come to be in their service, as long as he was useful to them.

I don't know how I'd discover whether he had moved to another ship after writing his will. Wouldn't that be mentioned in the probate clause? 

[Maiden Stone]

If an apprenticeship led to a well paid profession/trade, then I'm not sure anyone would run away to sea.

Adventure. A broken heart. Impetuosity. A cruel master or workmates.
He may have had no say in the decision of occupation when he was apprenticed.

[Galium]

I wondered whether he was abandoning a pregnant young woman - but there is no likely looking baptism in St Neots in 1793. It's still possible, though I don't suppose I'm ever  likely to find out whether that was the case.

[Maiden Stone]

I wondered whether he was abandoning a pregnant young woman - but there is no likely looking baptism in St Neots in 1793. It's still possible, though I don't suppose I'm ever  likely to find out whether that was the case.

An apprentice wouldn't be able to marry. Nor would he have had money to pay child-support.