[Boston]
Saturday 13th. June 1778
The Court after the Closest Inquiry and the Most Mature Consideration are of Opinion That no part of the Charge is Supported Against Capt. Manley1 except that he was deficient in establishing a proper System of Signals previous to the Ships Sailing and during the Cruise2 and also of Imprudence on 30th. of May 1777 in laying by for a large Ship of the Enemy to come down upon him before he had tryed her Sailing3 That the Court have the fullest reason to Attribute this Conduct rather to Inexperience than any Censurable Motive The Court are further of Opinion that Capt Manley did all that lay in his power to Save the Hancock and that he did not in any Instance during the Cruise discover any want of Courage but on the Contrary great Zeal for the good of the Service he was Engaged in The Court therefore Acquit him of every part of the Charge and beg leave to recommend him to Congress as a Spirited & brave Officer.—
Dudley Saltonstal President4
(Copied)
D, RNHi, William Vernon Papers.
1. Manley had commanded the Continental Navy frigate Hancock.
2. For Capt. Hector McNeill's charges against Manley for not using and observing signals during their cruise in May to July 1777, see NDAR 9: 170, 180–81, and 304–5.
3. This refers to McNeill's charge that during their encounter on 30 May 1777 with H.M.S. Somerset and a convoy of transports, Manley, contrary to McNeill's advice, lay to with sails up in the path of four large oncoming ships. See NDAR 8: 1043–44; and 9: 305.
4. Capt. Dudley Saltonstall commanded the Continental Navy frigate Trumbull.
