© 2004-2017

Patagonia Bookshelf

Three captains of sealing vessels interviewed at the Falkland Islands (1789-90)
Spanish Viceroy's report plus testimony of the captains [in Spanish]

Three Sealing Captains at Falkland Islands (1787-90)

The decades following Bougainville's 1765 attempt to establish a colony in the South Atlantic (ref. this site) saw continued jostling on the world stage by the three major European powers — Spain, France and Britain.  Colonization, revolution and warfare (whether declared, recent or imminent) created conflicts on land and turbulence on the high seas.  With the passage of time, these three countries would progressively be compelled to yield the New World stage to Britain's independent-minded Atlantic colonies — the United States of America. It was within this context that a growing number of commercial expeditions were directed to the waters of the South Atlantic.

In the 1780's Spain's small settlement on the Islas Malvinas (= Îles Malouines = Falkland Islands) was proving insufficient to police the great expanse of coast and adjacent maritime zone. These had become the target of British and U.S. seal hunters, attracted by the region's hitherto largely untapped natural resources, and encouraged by the lucrative markets for oil and fur. The document presented here tells of three such ships' captains.

Compelled by circumstance to approach the Spanish authorities for assistance, they were questioned by Governor Ramón de Clairac, who dutifully delivered his report to the Viceroy, in Buenos Aires, for onward communication to the Spanish Court.  Although the captains were warned by Clairac to stay out of the King of Spain's dominions, his admonitions sound like a "paper tiger":  for instance, Captain Loveday had already spent two years in the area, and could tell of half a dozen other ships that he had met during this time. 

In the course of his questioning the Governor tried to obtain more information about a new colony that Britain was founding somewhere in the southern hemisphere.  Although all parties called it "New Ireland", the answers provided leave no doubt that it was actually New South Wales (nowadays a state of Australia).  The data given fit the facts — dates, route travelled, shipload of 200 women convicts, shortage of food, etc.   But, why the name?  Although it was used several times around this period, there is no evidence, as yet, that it ever applied to New South Wales — perhaps there was a miscommunication, or perhaps a mischievous deception:  more information is needed.

This transcript has been made from the original held in Spain, in the Archivo General de Indias. The final summary pages have not been transcribed. Spelling has been modernised, and English names of persons and ships are provided wherever they can be identified.
Source: AGI,ESTADO,80,N.1; accessed at PARES
This page last updated: 3-IX-2013