Sir Francis Burton (1825 ship (3))

Sir Francis N. Burton was launched in 1825 at Quebec. She made several voyages to India under a license from the EIC. She was wrecked on 16 February 1838.

For other ships with the same name, see Sir Francis N. Burton (ship).

History
United Kingdom
Name: Sir Francis N. Burton
Namesake: Francis Nathaniel Burton
Builder: Quebec City, Quebec[1]
Launched: July 1825[2]
Notes: The largest in burthen of three vessels named Sir Francis N. Burton launched in Quebec in 1825. This has led to some possible confusion.
General characteristics
Tons burthen: 410,[2] or 411[1] (bm)

Career

Sir Francis N. Burton first appeared in Lloyd's Register (LR) in 1826 with F. Boston, master, Pickth___ (or Peckerhance), owner, and trade Liverpool–Quebec.[3] She assumed British registry on 5 October 1827.[1] In 1827 Her master changed to J.White.

Year Master Owner Trade Source
1830 A.Reid Gibb & Co. Greenock–Bombay LR
1835 F.Scott D.Gibb Liverpool–Africa LR; homeport Liverpool
1837 F.Scott D.Gibb Liverpool–Africa LR; homeport Liverpool

Fate

On 16 February 1838, Sir Francis Burton was totally lost in Ardmore Bay,[4] (51°57′N 7°43′W) near Youghal. She was sailing from Liverpool to Demerara with a general cargo. By one report her crew were saved; by another, all 13 hands perished. Earlier, apparently the EIC turned her down when her owners would not make necessary improvements.

Citations and references

Citations

  1. Library and Archives Canada Item: 65670: SIR FRANCIS BURTON.
  2. Hackman (2001), pp. 312–313.
  3. LR (1826), Supple. pages "S", Seq.№S95.
  4. "Ship News". The Morning Post (20960). London. 24 February 1838.

References

  • Hackman, Rowan (2001). Ships of the East India Company. Gravesend, Kent: World Ship Society. ISBN 0-905617-96-7.
gollark: Not very GOOD sed syntax.
gollark: Oh, that's a command.
gollark: I mean the general sense of "you", since "one" sounds weirdly formal.
gollark: I mean, they're programmed with manual memory management somewhere lower in the stack, obviously, but you don't have to touch that so it is much less hassle.
gollark: The fact that you do *not* need to do this is why we have lots of nice applications which do not leak memory, are secure, and can be programmed in reasonable time.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.