For millennia Britons have been trading goods with neighbouring and overseas communities, and ever since governments first tried to control domestic and international commerce, ‘smuggling’ has existed. Historically, this meant failure to pay the taxes required by law when importing certain categories of foreign items, avoidance of export duties on British commodities and evading regulations governing internal trade.

A national customs system first developed in the early 1200s and as shipping and global commerce advanced over time, revenue collection and trade control grew increasingly important to central government. In 1671 a Board of Commissioners of Customs was established by Charles II, its staff issuing instructions and regulations to appointed officers at all ports outside London. From the 1700s the Board handled a vast body of correspondence from local officers: much was later destroyed by fire but surviving letters comprise a key source for studying smuggling.

Apart from official legal and administrative documents relating to failed operations, firm historical evidence is scarce, for successful smugglers left little or no trace of their activities. We cannot know the precise scale of the ‘industry’ or many individual names. In 1783 one commentator estimated that some 60,000 men engaged in smuggling and reportedly more tea was smuggled illegally into Britain than that arriving through regular channels. A House of Commons account from 1825 itemised seizures over three years, including over 19,000 lbs of tea, 902,684 lbs tobacco, 227,000 gallons of gin and 135,000 gallons of brandy.

Smuggling operations
The heyday of ‘smuggling proper’ – a phrase used in the Royal Cornwall Gazette in May 1857 to describe the vanishing swashbuckling age of armed clashes on the beach and dramatic sea chases – was the late 1600s to mid 1800s, when smuggling occurred in every coastal region and river port of Britain. The port of London was the hub of illicit trade but smuggling was rife countrywide. Close proximity to continental supplies was essential to many operations: for instance, south coast smugglers acquired locally produced gin from ports directly across the English Channel, including Flushing, Ostend and Dunkirk, while some West Country smugglers bought brandy direct from Nantes. Warehouses of goods ready for shipment existed in locations like Calais, Boulogne and Dieppe, where communities of British expatriates were also involved. Additionally, intermediaries in the Channel Islands and the Isles of Scilly were used in the south, the offshore islands of Lundy and the Isle of Man serving smuggling operations in the Bristol Channel coasts, Irish Sea, Wales, north-east England and south-east Scotland.

Purchasing goods for smuggling into Britain often occurred out at sea. Continental suppliers of liquor, tea, French silks and other items subject to import duties might moor their own ships a few miles off the English coast: these were then met by buyers on fishing boats or other small vessels, who afterwards rowed back home and attempted to land their contraband on the beach. Smugglers also traded directly with regular merchant ships, for instance East Indiamen – the cargo ships of the English East India Company, whose officers and crew frequently conducted their own private trade, carrying alongside the main cargo personal consignments of tobacco from America, tea from China and fine Indian silks, muslins and printed chintzes and silks. This aspect of smuggling is sometimes overlooked, but many masters and seamen on legitimate trading ships were involved.

As well as establishing supply sources, smugglers had to raise capital for the initial purchase of contraband goods and, sometimes, for obtaining their own vessels. In areas including the West Country, working men formed syndicates to finance these necessities, although generally smugglers turned to wealthy individuals to discreetly provide funds. Financial backers were typically important figures in their community such as members of the local gentry motivated by the potential monetary returns – not necessarily interested in the goods themselves; however, other financiers were prosperous farmers or merchants, for whom smuggling goods in and out of the country extended their existing trade. Either way, these middlemen stood to gain the highest profits and took the least risk.

The most challenging and dangerous task was that of transporting contraband – whether obtained from a foreign port or from a vessel hovering off the coast – and landing it covertly on the shore. Sometimes there were engagements at sea between armed smuggling luggers and revenue cutters, the ships used by each improving considerably during the Georgian era. Concealment was paramount and sometimes goods were secreted underneath ballast or bulky cargo. Many smuggling vessels were also designed and built with hidden spaces for stowing contraband, such as false bulkheads or bow. Small luxury items were hidden ingeniously, expensive watches tucked into cheap imported French shoes, fine silk gloves folded inside wooden toys, even whisky bottles stuffed inside plucked turkeys. Casks of spirits were more cumbersome smuggled items, hard to conceal, and when landing the craft either had to find a quiet creek or run onto a suitable beach to unload, or remain offshore and transfer the casks or ‘tubs’ onto smaller ‘tub-boats’ to bring them in. This was time consuming, leaving smugglers’ vessels vulnerable, so sometimes a line of casks or tubs was weighted with sinking stones and dropped into the sea to be collected later.

The moment of landing precious contraband was a skilfully synchronised operation involving the smugglers at sea and men on the shore. The landsmen, most at risk, initiated operations, often making last-minute decisions about the location and creating elaborate diversions to confuse preventive officers patrolling the coast. Communications between ship and shore were often extremely difficult, the Smuggling Act of 1807 prohibiting any form of signalling using torches, fire, rockets, guns, flags or other devices. Professional smugglers often lacked the resources to handle large shipments alone and for substantial cargoes needed help from able-bodied men, with horses and carts or wagons. Porters carrying heavy tubs of liquor were defended by strong-arm men as they moved rapidly inland on foot and if horse-drawn transport was involved this could be a major undertaking: for instance, in 1744 the Collector of Customs at Eastbourne reported 500–600 horses assembled for a landing in Pevensey Bay, moving contraband from three cutters. Further examples also demonstrate how these local ‘armies’ could be raised with extraordinary speed.

Landing parties had to shift goods out of sight rapidly and on some beaches like Deal in Kent, special pits were dug for regularly secreting goods, networks of caves also used for temporarily concealing contraband. Some coastal cottages and farmhouses were employed, with or without their owners’ consent, especially old buildings with nooks and crannies, trapdoors and cellars. Certain coastlines are characterised by inlets and rivers that enabled transportation of goods inland using small boats. Smugglers also used ancient tracks, footpaths and drovers’ routes, with Kent and Sussex both especially well placed for reaching the capital. London was the greatest draw, the suburban ‘village’ of Stockwell being the main depot for southern operations. Reportedly in the mid-1700s smugglers arrived there at 2am or 3am, sold 1,000–2,000 lbs of tea to particular dealers and were out of town again by 6am.

Moving smuggled goods quickly on to cash buyers was essential, purchasers including known private clients. These were often establishment figures such as MPs and clergymen. Local tradespeople were also supplied, dealers often paying duty on some goods to provide a cover for the contraband articles. In the provinces smugglers might head to the nearest market town, although this was difficult in remoter areas like west Cornwall with few passable roads.

Smugglers and the law
The unenviable task of apprehending smugglers belonged to the Landguard and Waterguard sections of the Customs service. The Landguard comprised landwaiters who supervised the unloading of vessels from foreign ports, and riding officers, employed between 1698 and 1821 to patrol the cliffs on horseback. Riding offers kept watch in all weathers along isolated sections of coast and up to ten miles inland: many died from violent attacks or in dubious circumstances.

Offshore, coastwaiters and tidewaiters (or ‘tidesmen’) using rowing boats monitored the extensive British coastal trade that typically used smaller harbours and creeks and provided a convenient cover for smuggling. Even before a vessel docked it was boarded to ensure that it did not attempt an illicit drop of dutiable cargoes. The work was dangerous and poorly paid, but officers could augment their earnings with prize money for captured contraband. Many customs men were in any case corrupt, readily accepting bribes, or in deeper connivance with the smugglers.

Georgian governments desperate to eradicate smuggling introduced increasingly complex customs legislation and passed ever more draconian acts aimed at bringing culprits to justice. The 1721 Smuggling Act made convicted smugglers liable to transportation for seven years; in 1736 this was extended to unarmed smugglers resisting arrest, while those injuring or taking up arms against an officer faced the death penalty. In 1746 those simply assembling for ‘running’ (landing) contraband faced death. Notorious smugglers were named in the press and became outlaws if they failed to hand themselves in, while anyone harbouring them was also liable for the death penalty. Collective punishment might be meted out to whole communities aiding smugglers, with heavy fines imposed.

In reality, only rarely did a man inform against his neighbours, for fear of brutal treatment, even revenge killings. High-security arrangements were made to get informants safely to court to give evidence, and this wasn’t always sufficient to secure a conviction: judges and juries might find a witness unreliable or were reluctant to pass a sentence involving whole communities. They may have been sympathetic towards the smugglers, or feared reprisals themselves: indeed some magistrates were intimated and dared not commit an offender.

Free traders?
Many benefited from smuggling in the 18th and 19th centuries. Those involved spanned the individuals and gangs who acquired and transported contraband, their wealthy financiers, retailers and dealers trading in illegal goods, and middle- and upper-class consumers who enjoyed using imported tobacco, tea, spirits and fine fabrics without paying the lawful price. Ordinary people who turned to smuggling were generally motivated by rural poverty, high unemployment and what they viewed as unfair taxes imposed by a repressive government. There was widespread moral support for those who called themselves – and who were often termed by others – ‘free traders’.

The nature of smuggling was shifting by the mid-1800s. During the 1840s major revisions of trade tariffs removed duty on around 1,200 consumer items. ‘Traditional’ smuggling diminished considerably and as earlier coastal haunts became respectable Victorian seaside resorts, the lawless days of old passed into folklore. A few smugglers became famous, like Arthur Gray (38) of the notorious Hawkhurst Gang, originally a butcher’s apprentice, hanged at Tyburn in 1748 and worth c.£10,000. Most remained unidentified but with smuggling or ‘free trade’ prolific throughout Britain, conceivably many of our ancestors made a little money ‘on the side’ or enjoyed a tipple of contraband brandy!