Monty: Yup, I sure do know that Japan was an ally during the Great War; I’d better, because the coast artillery fort that I work at was protected from a German Pacific squadron (Von Spee) by the hasty despatch of two Japanese cruisers Asama and Idzumoin August-September 1914. In fact, here’s a photo of officers of the Imperial Japanese Navy and Canadian sailors in Esquimalt, September, 1914: http://www.islandnet.com/~kingdave/nippon.jpg (and I still think it’s ironic that we sold UGANDA/QUEBEC to the Japanese for scrap, as she had seen service against them just a few years previously.)
[[“In 1797, sixteen ships of the British fleet anchored at Spithead off Portsmouth refused to obey orders to set sail. By the terms of the day, the action was called a mutiny. By modern understanding, it would be called a wildcat strike.”
I beg to differ. Though it would not be called mutiny (unlawfully seizing control of a vessel)It would, in the U.S. navy, be refusing a direct order at best. In time of war, most likely: treason. The captains would be arrested, court martialed and replaced. The ships would then certainly get underway. ]] EvilGhandi
Actually, just to be a nit-prick, it almost surely wouldn’t be treason (although it would be considered a serious offense nonetheless). As specified in the Constitution, treason consists “only in levying War against [the U.S.], or in adhering to their emenies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” A simple refusial to wage war on behalf of the U.S. would not seem to meet this test.
I think, in the case of Spithead, desertion and refusal of a superior’s order is closer to the mark than treason. When they took over the ships and sent the officers ashore, it, undeniably, became mutiny.
I realize that the Spithead Mutiny was, legally speaking, a mutiny. But it wasn’t what most people would think of as being a traditional mutiny. The sailors who refused to follow orders were not protesting against their officers or the Navy, they were simply refusing to work until they got a payraise. It was in that sense that I wrote it was more of a strike than a mutiny. A majority of the officers who were sent ashore, as well as most of the Navy leadership in London, felt the sailors had a valid point and argued for a pay increase to Parliament.
