The Palace at Mempawah
A British Pirate
This article describes the accusation of piracy made in 1806 by the Sultan of Sambas against Captain Anthony Burnside, an Irishman, who was then a trader based in Calcutta. The material gives new insight into the relations between the Supreme Government in Calcutta, and the authorities in Penang.
Sambas was by no means as “piratical” as was popularly believed at the time. The Sultanate was certainly aggressive towards its neighbors Pontianak, Mempawah, and Banjarmasin by the beginning of the nineteenth century, and was soon to form alliances in northern Borneo and with the Illanun of Sulu.
The result was the establishment of a formidable maritime raiding force that ranged widely along the coasts of Borneo and included ongoing warfare on land and at sea between Sambas and Pontianak. The Dutch had a trading outpost at Pontianak until they withdrew in the 1790s.
During these events, there was continued trade with Sambas by British country vessels. – i.e., vessels involved in regional trade based in India, the East Indies, and China – which anchored off the mouth of the river and sent boats up to the town. A sailing directory for British mariners named Mempawah as “one of the best markets to the eastward” for the sale of opium; Sambas was the next best. Sukadana also received special mention, but no emphasis was placed on Pontianak.
The reputation of Sambas suffered considerably with the surprise attack on the country ship Calcutta off Selakau in July 1803. The massacre of Captain Drysdale, most of the officers, many of the crew and all the armed sepoys who were on board. Pangeran Anom, the half-brother of the Sultan of Sambas, was the prime suspect in this aggression.
The arrival of the Sultan prevented further bloodshed. He explained to John Burgh, the only surviving officer, that the attack was triggered by the dishonesty of Drysdale. He had bought opium from an accompanying country vessel that had previously been contracted to Pangeran Anom, intending to sell it to Pangeran Anom at a higher price.
After the capture of the Calcutta, both the Sultan and Pangeran Anom repeatedly offered Burgh command of the ship in the service of Sambas. The stated aim being to capture the Chinese junks that traded with Pontianak. Burgh refused, saying that he would then be liable to be put to death by the British as a renegade and pirate. These events were reported by Burgh when he was released at the end of 1803.
The authorities at Penang at first ignored the events because of the difficulty of mounting a successful attack against Sambas. It lies many miles up a river that becomes progressively narrower and more winding. However, they became alarmed by reports that Pangeran Anom was preparing to put the well-armed Calcutta to sea, presumably crewed by its lascars who had been detained at Sambas. Accordingly, a small naval expedition was despatched to the Sambas River in June 1805 and the Calcutta, which was moored not far from the mouth, was recaptured.
The EIC authorities in Penang (and later in Java) understood a major cause of attacks by the local inhabitants was the dishonest practices of some European country traders. They accordingly explored various ways of regulating this trade. The traders themselves, both the ships’ captains and their backers, naturally opposed any regulation and were prepared to risk attacks, which were, in fact, very rare. The capture of the Calcutta was due to extreme carelessness by Drysdale in allowing on board a large number of armed men, and ignoring a warning that Pangeran Anom had been overheard giving instructions to start the surprise attack. Trade with Sambas was still an attractive proposition for country traders based in Penang and Calcutta.
Anthony Burnside as a country trader
In voyages between 1799 and 1807 he commanded the Phoenix and then the Clyde for voyages from Calcutta along the coasts of India to the British settlement at Bencoolen [Bengkulu] in West Sumatra. There is nothing out of the ordinary in Burnside’s activities as described so far. In fact, in the long voyage from 1806 until the beginning of 1809, he appears to have followed many of the recommendations set down by Elmore.
The accusation of piracy committed by Burnside
The earliest reference to Burnside is in an extract of a translated letter (not dated) from the Sultan of Sambas, addressed to James Carnegy, a leading trader in Penang. The Sultan said that in February-March 1806 he had given Captain Taylor a letter, together with a present of two slave girls, to be taken to the “great man,” i.e. the Governor at Penang or Governor-General in Calcutta. The aim was obviously to reestablish good relations with Penang following the recapture of the Calcutta; however, the Sultan had received no reply.
Soon afterwards, the Clyde and Burnside arrived off the mouth of the Sambas River. According to the Sultan, Burnside captured a prahu from Sambas that was proceeding to Java. He removed money and arms and afterwards released the prahu. When Burnside went to Sambas to trade, the Sultan’s brother (almost certainly Pangeran Anom) asked if he could buy cargo on three months’ credit, and (according to the Sultan) Burnside was paid after four months.
Burnside then complained that the gold received in payment was “mixed and adulterated.” The Sultan’s brother told him to bring the gold ashore to be replaced, but he would not do so; instead, he rejected a portion of it, which the Sultan replaced.
During this business, two prahus belonging to the Sultan arrived from Java and were captured by Burnside, who immediately sailed. The Sultan complained to Carnegy that the value of the money and arms removed by Burnside amounted to 17,000 Spanish Dollars. In addition, Burnside had “vouchers for goods traded with the Sultan’s brother.” Translation of the letter to Carnegy was certified by “Thos Raffles, Secy. to Govt.”
The Sultan followed up his complaint in a letter to the Governor at Penang. The Sultan repeated that Burnside had taken two of his prahu with their cargo, coming from Java, and a prahu going to Java, with money and arms. An account of which he had sent to Carnegy so that my friend (presumably again the Governor) could inquire into the affair. He sent a gift of wax along with the letter.
At the end of March 1808, the EIC authorities in Penang sent a letter to Lord Minto, the Governor-General in Calcutta. In the letter, they expressed their belief that many British vessels had been plundered and their crews massacred because of the improper conduct of some commanders.
The correspondence was forwarded to the Advocate-General in Calcutta, Robert Smith, who reported at the end of July 1808 that the case against Burnside appeared strong and that he should be brought to trial. It seemed to him to be a case of “very unauthorized reprisal, if not of downright piracy.” Accordingly, he recommended that Burnside should be given a copy of the complaints and asked to defend the charge. Further, a letter should go to Penang to seek additional information from Sambas or elsewhere, and especially whether anyone from the vessels that had been assaulted could be sent to Calcutta or depositions could be made at Penang. Burnside was given a copy of the complaint.
Burnside’s Response
Burnside sent a lengthy reply on 3 October 1808. He acknowledged that on 11 April 1806, he had detained a vessel and said that he had ascertained that it contained “property belonging to a Dutchman who lived on Madura.” He had taken “a few things out of her” and they were listed in his ship’s logbook. Furthermore, he had been with the Sultan of Sambas several times after the “transaction” and the latter had never mentioned it beyond saying that there was much more on the prahu than he (Burnside) was aware of.
On 21 August, during the second visit, Burnside went ashore (presumably upriver at Sambas). His Chief Officer wrote to him saying that he had detained a sloop under Dutch colours and that he wished him to go aboard to examine the vessel. Burnside said that the Sultan told him that the vessel was indeed Dutch property and that he had his prahu out trying to capture it before it entered the river. The Sultan hoped that Burnside would give him the cargo of salt and the sloop itself. Burnside’s reply was that if he could prove the vessel to be Dutch, he would hand it over to the Sultan, and he would pay his debts immediately, which was agreed. Burnside then went on board and the crew acknowledged that it was Dutch, from Java.
The next day, when Burnside was back on the Clyde, a man arrived and warned him not to go ashore again because he believed that Burnside would be captured and his ship taken. As there were (according to Burnside) many “Pirate Prows” in the river, he was greatly alarmed, particularly because of the fate of the Calcutta and the murder of Captain Drysdale. Accordingly, Burnside wrote to the Sultan saying that he would not go ashore again and that if he was not paid his debts, he would blockade the port and seize as many prahus as possible. A few days later, he detained one of the Sultan’s prahu and informed the Sultan, who again said that he would not settle his debts unless Burnside went ashore.
Burnside again refused and wrote once more, saying that he would wait only another day for a final answer. He had been told that Sambas was collecting all the Pirate Prows they could to capture his ship, and had offered a reward of 5000 Spanish Dollars for his head. He then had to leave, as southerly gales were setting in, and he lost two of his anchors and had to cut the others away for the safety of the ship.
The EIC’s Reaction
Despite the spirited defense, the EIC Council in Calcutta thought that Burnside’s letter was not a complete justification for his conduct according to maritime law. As further inquiry might be necessary, they forwarded his letter to the Advocate-General for advice. He was found guilty of aggressive conduct towards “the Natives of the Eastern Islands.”
Any lingering wish by the EIC in Calcutta to pursue the affair would have been pre-empted when Burnside left Calcutta for the last time on 8 December 1808 on the Hibernia, bound for Australia. The timing of the departure may have been fortuitous, but he may have sought to avoid a trial, or been advised that his departure would be a suitable way of quietly bringing the matter to a close.
Burnside, after spending time in Australia, was cannibalized (eaten) by the Maori in New Zealand.
PIRACY AGAINST THE SAMBAS “PIRATES”? THE CASE OF CAPTAIN BURNSIDE – AND WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM AFTERWARDS IN THE ANTIPODES by F. Andrew Smith, Borneo Research Bulletin vol. 40 condensed with permission.
BorneoHistory.net