The controversial Scarborough harbour

Dr Rita Pemberton

THE DECISION by the administration of Tobago in 1769 to shift the island’s capital from Georgetown to Scarborough was not unanimous. There was controversy over two important matters.

Plantation owners whose properties were located in the northern and windward parts of the island expressed concerns about the difficulties of doing business in Scarborough. Given the poor state of roads and the absence of any road connecting Scarborough and the more distant locations, commuting would be difficult.

Some members of the planting community advocated Plymouth as a better location, since it possessed a natural, safe harbour and was accessible from all parts of the island; it was easier to get to Plymouth by sea than to Scarborough over land.

The other major problem aired was the challenges posed by the Scarborough harbour, which was difficult to manoeuvre. The harbour is surrounded by reefs and there is a narrow channel through which entry could be gained safely, but to those who were not familiar, access to the harbour was fraught with danger. It was considered particularly hazardous at night-time. This was not an ideal location for trade, on which the island depended.

Despite its obvious disadvantages, Scarborough was the preferred site of the majority of the large planters. Since only a few large planters lived in the Plymouth area, they were outweighed in the assembly by the voices of the members of the large planting community, whose properties were in and around Scarborough and on the western side of the island.

Scarborough was more advantageous for this group, because it was within easy reach and more convenient and economical for them to do business and organise their trading arrangements.

The Scarborough harbour was not popular with the shipping fraternity because of the regularity with which ships ran aground on the reefs. Some shippers refused to use it, preferring one of the safer harbours at Plymouth or Courland, and travelled by road to do business in Scarborough.

The accidents led to constant complaints from mariners, who raised safety concerns about the Scarborough harbour.

In response, the council and assembly determined in 1818 that the movement of vessels into the port at Scarborough needed to be regulated and guided by the implementation of safety mechanisms.

For these purposes, a law was formulated which included the terms and conditions for appointing an official to exercise the required controls, manage and control entry into and exit from the harbour, and ensure compliance with the law.

The official, who was to be called the harbour master and pilot, was to be recommended by two freeholders and was required to put up a surety bond of £500. His job was to bring vessels safely into the harbour without impeding free navigation by smaller craft used by fishermen and local traders. All vessels were to be moored into position as directed by the harbour master, and the penalty for those who refused to obey his instructions was £10.

The law required that the harbour master should have an efficient vessel and a crew of four able-bodied men and was to be always prepared for a signal from Fort King George indicating that a vessel wished to enter the port.

It was the responsibility of the harbour master go out to Minister Rock at Bacolet and safely escort any vessel wishing to enter the port and escort departing vessels whenever required.

Every vessel entering the port was required to pay a pilot’s fee of threepence per ton to the harbour master and harbour dues of sixpence per ton. If an escort service was required from the Scarborough harbour to Sandy Point, Great Courland Bay or Little Courland Bay, an additional pilot’s fee of threepence per ton was required.

Captains of vessels who refused to pay the fees would be referred to a justice of the peace, who would impose a fine which doubled the regular fees.

Users of the port were forbidden from throwing any items, such as ballast or rubbish, into the bay. The purpose of this clause was to prevent items which could prove hazardous to shipping from being thrown into the sea. It resulted from the number of damaged vessels that were abandoned in the harbour.

If found guilty based on the evidence of two witnesses, the penalty for offenders was £33 plus £5 for the first offence, £10 for the second and £20 for a third and every subsequent offence, as well as damages to any affected person.

The harbour master was authorised to require the captain of any vessel entering the harbour, within 24 hours of his arrival, to adjust any projecting parts of his vessel that might impede traffic in the port and encumber smaller vessels. Refusal to comply made the captain liable to a fine of £5, which was to be levied every 24 hours until the matter was rectified.

Other potential encumbrances, such as the carcasses of dead animals, thrown into the harbour attracted a fine of £10 for every such offence.

The discovery of any ill person aboard any vessel entering the port would cause the vessel to be forbidden to anchor until a report on the state of the person and the ship was provided to the customs authorities, who would determine whether the vessel would be permitted to anchor or instructed to depart the harbour. The fine for non-compliance was £100.

Vessels or wrecks lying or sunk in the harbour or on the beach in Scarborough were to be removed by the owners within 30 days or would be considered abandoned and forfeited for the use of the colony. The harbour master and or informant was entitled to half of any penalties paid and the other half would be used for the benefit of the colony.

The law provided for fitting and maintaining a buoy at Minister Rock in Scarborough and Beef Barrel Rock at Courland to guide ships away from reefs and rocks.

For the edification of the public, the law was to be printed and circulated to all users of the port.

Despite this measure, while the Scarborough harbour continued to provide unexpected defence against enemy ships, it was still a challenge to mariners, with some operators opting for continued use of the harbours at Plymouth and Courland throughout the 19th century.