USA > Virginia > City of Portsmouth > City of Portsmouth > A record of events in Norfolk County, Virginia, from April 19th, 1861, to May 10th, 1862, with a history of the soldiers and sailors of Norfolk County, Norfolk City and Portsmouth, who served in the Confederate States army or navy > Part 36
USA > Virginia > City of Norfolk > City of Norfolk > A record of events in Norfolk County, Virginia, from April 19th, 1861, to May 10th, 1862, with a history of the soldiers and sailors of Norfolk County, Norfolk City and Portsmouth, who served in the Confederate States army or navy > Part 36
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37
Very respectfully, JNO. W. BORUM.
Commodore Marshall Parks, an intimate friend of Chief En- gineer Williamson, had many opportunities to learn from him the history of the Merrimac, and has furnished the author with the following testimonial, both as to the character of the model Con- strnetor Porter took with him to Richmond and as to Chief En- gineer Williamson's statement of what took place at the meeting of the board on the 25th of June, 1861.
NORFOLK, VA., January 9th, 1892.
DEAR SIR-In reply to your communication I will state that when I was appointed by the Governor and Council of North Carolina as commissioner with Commander Muse (who had re- signed from the United States Navy) to establish her navy, I had to visit the Gosport Navy Yard frequently to obtain supplies for the gunboats we had purchased and were fitting ont at Norfolk. I well recollect on one of those visits Naval Constructor John L. Porter exhibited to me a model of an iron-clad which was identically the same plan which was afterwards applied to the Merrimac.
He subsequently carried it to Richmond, and orders were given to carry out his plan. I went to Raleigh and informed the Gov- ernor and members of the Legislature of che plan, and suggested that some small iron-clads be built for the defense of the North Carolina sounds. I recollect that the plan so impressed me and
354
NORFOLK COUNTY, 1861-5.
them, that I was directed to write a " Bill " to authorize the Gov- ernor to have some vessels built on the plan, and it-was passed immediately.
The State of North Carolina soon after this decided to join the Confederacy, and I was directed to go to Richmond and turn over all the steamers we had purchased and fitted ont to the Confeder- ate States Navy Department. I have had a life-long acquaint- ance with Major W. P. Williamson, who was the senior engineer of the United States Navy, and during and since the war he always expressed himself to me that the Merrimac was converted into an iron-clad after the plans of Mr. John L. Porter, and that Lieuten- ant John M. Brooke had nothing to do with her except to super- intend the preparation of a portion of her guns.
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
MARSHALL PARKS.
As all of Naval Constructor Porter's original drawings are still in existence, subject to the inspection of any one who has any desire to look at then, and, as they speak for themselves, and as the foregoing letters are from gentlemen and officials who were in positions to know the facts of which they write, there can be but one conclusion drawn from them and that is that the Merrimac was converted into an iron-clad after the plans of Naval Construc- tor John L. Porter. The evidence may be summed up briefly.
Mr. Porter invented an iron clad in 1846, the plan of which submerged the eaves too feet below the water line. In May, 1861, he had a model made at the Gosport Navy Yard, changing somewhat the shape of the hull of his Pittsburg boat, but retain- ing the features of her shield and submerged eaves. She was submerged all around, eaves and ends.
In June, 1861, Lientenant Brooke was in consultation with Secretary Mallory on the subject of iron clads and Mr. Joseph Pierce, Master Ship Carpenter of the Gosport Navy Yard, and afterwards a Naval Constructor in the Confederate Navy, was sent to Richmond to help him develop his idea, but nothing was developed and no vessel was designed, no specifications drafted.
On the 23d of June Mr. Porter went to Richmond and took his model with him, and on the 25th, by order of Secretary Mal- lory, Messrs. Williamson, Brooke and Porter met in Mr. Brooke's office in the Navy Department and that model was laid before them. The form of the shield was adopted (even Mr. Brooke ad- inits this) and, according to Mr. Brooke's recollection, Mr. Wil- liamton suggessed that it be adapted to the Merrimac, but Messrs. Williamson and Porter say the proposition first came from Mr. Porter. Mr. Williamson could not have made the suggestion for he did not know that the Merrimac could carry the shield, but be that as it may, the shield which was on Mr. Porter's model was, according to the statements of all three members of the board, di-
355
THE "VIRGINIA" (MERRIMAC.)
rected to be adapted to the Merrimac, because there were no fa- cilities to build a new engine for a new boat, and Mr. Porter re- turned to the Navy Yard in Portsmouth to measure the remains of that vessel, and prepare the plans. He made the plans unas- sisted by anyone, originated all of the interior arrangements, de- cided how long her shield would be, fixed the angle of inclination at 35 degrees, and cut her down so that the ends of her iron plat- ing, or eaves, would be two feet under water, just as was contem- plated in his Pittsburg vessel of 1846, and in the model which he carried with him to Richmond.
Lieutenant Brooke's idea of submerging the ends of an iron- clad, according to Secretary Mallory's report, contemplated the building of water tight tanks on them to regulate her draft of water, and Mr. Porter shows that, had she been ent down in con- formity with Mr. Brooke's idea she would have been cut down much lower than was actually the case, for all of the water which was over her ends would not have affected her draft three inches if contined in tanks. Therefore she could not have been ent down to snit Mr. Brooke's idea.
Messrs. Porter and Williamson were very explicit as to the part Mr. Brooke performed, namely, that his connection with the plan of the ship consisted in superintending a portion of her bat- tery; and it will be remembered there were only three members of the board, and no one but those three gentlemen were compe- tent to speak of what took place at their meeting.
But Mr. Porter completed the plans for the hull, took them to Richmond and submitted them to Secretary Mallory on the 11th of July, 1861, just sixteen days after the meeting of the board. Lientenant Brooke's rough drawings, such as they were, and the plan proposed therein, whatever it was, must have been fresh in the Secretary's mind. If they made any impression upon him there had not been time for it to have been eradicated, especially as he and Mr. Brooke had been talking the matter over between themselves from the 10th to the 25th of June, but while every- thing was fresh in his mind, if it had been Mr. Brooke's plan which he approved, would he have written his order to Commo- dore Forrest "to make the changes in the Merrimac, and to build, equip and fit her in all respects, according to the designs and plans of the Constructor and Engineer, Messrs. Porter and Wil- liamson ? "
There is no mention in this order of Lieutenant Brooke or his plans, nor was there in Mr. Mallory's report to Congress of July 18th, 1861, nor in his order to Commodore Forrest of Aug. 19th, declaring his purpose of holding Messrs. Porter and Williamson personally responsible for the success of their plans. Charity to Mr. Mallory would say his report of March 29th, 1862, was the result of a defective memory.
Had it been practicable Mr. Porter would not have submerged
356
NORFOLK COUNTY, 1861-5.
the ends of the Merrimac at all, but would have raised them ont of the water like the ends of his Pittsburg model, and like he did the iron-clads which were subsequently built for the Confederate navy, but too much of her had been burned off for that, and, on account of the manner of the construction of the hulk, it would have been impossible to have built up and protected her ends above the water withont the expenditure of a great deal of time and money, even if there had been enough of her left for that purpose, hence he was compelled to arrange her after the plans of his model, which was submerged all around, caves and ends, the model he took to Richmond, and which, according to Messrs. Williamson and himself, he was directed to apply to the Merri- mac. The Merrimac was not selected as the result of any plan, but simply because she had an engine in her which could be utilized where it was, and the Confederates lacked the facilities for building a new engine for a new boat. The burned portion of her was cut away and the weight of her armor, armament, &c., submerged the remainder so that only her shield was out of water. It is not probable that. Constructor Porter would have built a new vessel with her ends extending out under water be- yond her shield. He converted the Merrimac into an iron-clad after that style through necessity, and not from choice. They were the weak points of the ship, the crew had no place for re- creation and were kept in the casemate, the ends were liable to spring aleak, and being hidden from sight, confused the pilot in steering, besides retarding the vessel. The shield was extended as far forward and aft as the sharpness of her ends would permit.
It was a well known fact that pig iron was put on the Virginia to sink her deeper in the water, and varions writers have endeav- ored to account for this. Lieutenant Brooke, in his testimony be- fore the Congressional investigating committee, which has gone forth to the world as history, says: "After the vessel was launched Mr. Porter stated to me that he had accidentally omitted in his caleulations some weights which were on board the ship, in con- sequence of which she did not draw as much water when launched as he anticipated." Mr. Brooke evidently made a mistake here. Mr. Porter could hardly have told him that, for if he had omitted in his calculations any of the weights in the ship she would have drawn more instead of lexx water than he calculated. The facts are, Mr. Porter had to give her more draft than was necessary to prevent entting into her propeller, which was already in the ship, and this was the displacement which had to be overcome by the pig iron. Mr. Porter could hardly have told Mr. Brooke that the ship was launched. She was built in the dry-dock, and when finished the water was turned in and she was simply floated off the blocks. She was not launched.
The cuts which are published of the Virginia, and also of the vessel contemplated in Mr. Porter's model which he carried with
357
THE "VIRGINIA" (MERRIMAC.)
him to Richmond and submitted to the board, are very positive evidence that they were identical in plan, and Mr. Brooke ad- mitted in his testimony before the Congressional investigating committee that this shield was adopted by the board before his own rough drawings were submitted to it."The converting of the vessel into an iron clad consisted in putting the shot proof shield on her. That is all of an iron-clad nature there was about her, all there was of a plan. All of the rest of her was the result of accident, and not design, and if any one is entitled to the credit of submerging her ends beyond her shield, it was Commodore Paulding of the United States Navy, who ordered the Gosport Navy Yard to be burned, in consequence of which the Merrimac was burned to the water's edge. The deck plan of the Virginia shows for itself, that the shield was extended fore and aft as far as the conformation of the ship would permit, and was there stopped from necessity. When Constructor Porter drew the plans by which she was converted into an iron-clad he followed precisely the plan which he had mapped out in his model, submerged her caves and ends two feet all around, and woukl have extended her shield her entire length had she not been too sharp at the bow and stern, and therefore he stopped it where the vessel became too narrow to admit its being built any further. He did not de- sire any assistance from Mr. Brooke's undeveloped idea or unmna- tured plans. The plans upon which he converted the Merrimac into an iron-elad were his own, and were fully matured, deline- ated and calenlated before he ever saw Mr. Brooke. No better proof can be adduced of this than the original drawings of the three boats, which are still in existence.
Subsequent to the publication of the report of Secretary Mal- lory Lieutenant Brooke applied to the Confederate Patent Office and obtained a patent for "an iron-clad with submerged ends, projecting beyond her shield," and it has been claimed for him that this is an evidence that he was the author of the plans upon which the Virginia was built into an iron-clad. There might be some grounds for this claim if the matter had been contested and judicially decided when the patent was granted, but Naval Con- structor Porter had no knowledge that the patent was being ap- plied for, and therefore no opposition was made to it, and it was issued as a matter of course. After it was granted it was not worth contesting. No naval architect would construct a vessel in that manner from choice. The Virginia grew out of the necessi- ties of the Confederacy and the want of facilities to build a new engine for a new vessel. No iron-clads were subsequently built with submerged projecting ends. Mr. Porter did not then fore- see that this patent would, in future years, be appealed to as evidence to deprive him of the eredit of his invention. The claim set forth in the patent seems to be solely for submerged ends, and not for the iron-plated shield.
CHAPTER XLVIII.
THE BATTLE OF HAMPTON ROADS.
When the water was turned into the dry-dock and the Merri- mac was floated, her name was changed by order of the Secretary of the Navy to "The Virginia," and though not really completed, Captain Buchanan, who had been assigned to her as her comman- der, decided to proceed with her to attack the Federal vessels in Hampton Roads, and on the Sth of March. 1862, a little before noon, she steamed slowly away from the Navy Yard. Both banks of the river were lined with spectators, and the troops sta- tioned at the various batteries around the harbor cheered her as she passed. She appeared on the water like a sunken house with nothing but the roof above the tide. Her officers were:
Captain, Franklin Buchanan, of Maryland.
Lieutenants, Catesby ApR. Jones, of Virginia ; Chas. C. Simms, of Virginia ; Robert D. Minor, of Virginia ; Hunter Davidson, of Virginia; John Taylor Wood, of Louisiana; J. R. Eggleston, of Mississippi, and Walter R. Butt, of Virginia.
Midshipmen, R. C. Foote, of Tennessee ; H. H. Marmaduke, of Missouri; II. B. Littlepage, of Virginia; W. J. Craig, of Ken- tucky ; J. C. Long, of Tennessee, and L. M. Roots, of Virginia.
Paymaster, James Semple, of Virginia.
Surgeon, D. B. Phillips, and assistant. A. S. Garnett, both of Virginia.
Captain of Marines, R. T. Thom, of Alabama.
Enginees-Chief, H. Ashton Ramsay, of Virginia ; assistants, John W. Tynan, of Virginia ; Loudon Campbell, of Virginia; Benjamin Herring, of North Carolina ; E. V. White, of Georgia; E. A. Jack, of Virginia, and Robert Wright, of Virginia.
Boatswain, Charles H. Hasker; Gunner, Charles B. Oliver ; Carpenter, Hugh Lindsay ; Clerk, Arthur Sinclair, Jr .; Volunteer Aide, Douglas F. Forrest ; Commandant United Artillery, Cap- tain Thomas Kevill, all of Virginia.
Pilots, Win. Parrish, Wm. Clarke, Hezekiah Williams and George Wright, all of the Virginia Pilots' Association.
Her crew was made up of about three hundred men, some of whom were seamen, but the larger portion were landsmen, who volunteered from the army, but for such service as was expected on the Virginia, landsmen were as good as seamen. No record has been kept of the names of the crew. Some of the men were obtained from General Magruder's army on the Peninsula, some were from Norfolk county and Portsmouth, and thirty-one men from the United Artillery Company of Norfolk, under Captain
358
359
THE BATTLE OF HAMPTON ROADS.
Kevill, volunteered to make up her complement. Sixteen of that number manned the forward gun on the starboard side and the rest were distributed among the other guns' crews.
In order to guard against any accident to her machinery, her engines were worked very slowly until she reached Hampton Roads. Chief Engineer Ramsey is reported as having said "he had little confidence in it," but it worked very well during the engagement. After passing Seawell's Point the pilot took the south channel for Newport News, where the frigate Congress and sloop-of-war Cumberland were lying at anchor. While the Vir- ginia was heading for Newport News the United States steam frigate Minnesota started from Old Point by the north channel to the assistance of her consorts, and was soon followed by the steam frigate Roanoke and the sailing frigate St. Lawrence. The Minnesota grounded abont a mile and a half from Newport News, and the Roanoke and St. Lawrence, seeing the result of the bat- tle with the Congress and Cumberland, retired to Fortress Mon- roe, not, however, before the latter had received a 7-inch shell from the Virginia.
While the Minnesota was moving up from Fortress Monroe she passed within range of the rifle guns in the Confederate batteries at Seawell's Point, manned by the Jackson Grays, Captain Wm. H. Stewart, of Norfolk county, Company A, 61st Virginia Regi- ment, and they opened fire upon her. She returned the fire, but without effect. Several shots from the battery struck the ship, and one of them lodged in her mainmast. The officers of the Minnesota took this for a shell from a six-inch Armstrong gun.
The Virginia was accompanied by the gunboats Raleigh, Lieu- tenant J. W. Alexander, mounting one rifle 32-pounder gun, and Beaufort, Lieutenant Win. H. Parker, mounting one rifle 32- pounder and one 24-pounder. The lookouts on the Congress and Cumberland sighted the Virginia as soon as she passed Cra- ney Island and both ships prepared for action. Moving slowly towards the enemy, Captain Buchanan gave the order to fire the bow gun at the Cumberland when about a thousand yards from her. The gun was a seven-inch rifle, and it was so well aimed that the shell passed through the Cumberland, raking her fore and aft and doing fearful execution. The captain of the gun was named Cahill. He was from New Orleans, and volunteered from one of the Louisiana regiments at Yorktown to serve on the Virginia. Mr. Richard Curtis, formerly of Portsmouth, but now of Norfolk, was also at this gun. He entered the Confederate service in one of the Hampton companies which was attached to General Magruder's command, and, like Cahill, volunteered to serve on the Virginia. The course the Virginia pursued brought her abreast of the Congress before reaching the Cumberland, but passing the former vessel with a broadside, Captain Buchanan
360
NORFOLK COUNTY, 1861-5.
stood for the Cumberland and passed word down to his crew to stand fast, that he was going to ram her. True to his purpose, he struck her on the starboard side, knocking in her a large hole, from which she filled and sank in abont fifteen minutes. The Congress and Cumberland both opened their guns npon the Vir- ginia, but the shots glanced harmlessly from her shield. As the Cumberland careened over from the blow of the Virginia the men on the Virginia saw her bulwarks lined with sailors and ma- rines armed with cutlasses and muskets to repel an attack of boarders, her commander thinking that was the purpose of the Virginia in coming so near without firing upon her. Almost im- mediately after the impact the bow gun of the Virginia was fired a second time into the Cumberland, and the sponger, in his en- thusiasnı, leaped into the port hole to sponge ont the gun. As he did so he was killed by a musket ball from the Cumberland, which entered his forehead. His name was Dunbar, and he, too, was from New Orleans. Passing beyond the Cumberland, which soon went down bow foremost, with her colors flying and guns firing, the Virginia kept on until she found room to turn around, when she returned to engage the Congress. This vessel was run ashore by her commander to escape the ramming power of the Virginia, but was soon disabled, her decks strewn with dead and wounded and the vessel on fire in three or four places. After about an hour's firing she hoisted a white flag in token of surrender. The Beaufort and Raleigh steamed alongside of her and took posses- sion. Two of her officers, Lieutenants Smith and Pendergrast, went on board the Beaufort and surrendered their swords, after which they asked permission to return to the Congress to assist in removing the wounded to the Beaufort, as the Congress was on fire. The permission was granted, but they availed of it to make their escape to the shore and never returned to the Beaufort The enemy kept up a constant fire of musketry and artillery from the shore to prevent the Confederates from taking possession of the vessel, and a number of men on the Raleigh and Beaufort were killed and wounded, among them some of the Federal prisoners from the Congress. Lieutenant Minor, of the Virginia, while rowing to the Congress in the Virginia's launch was also wounded. This determined Captain Buchanan to destroy her. He accord- ingly set her on fire with hot shot from the Virginia. She burned until about midnight, when, the fire having reached her powder magazine, she was blown up. During the engagement Captain Buchanan stood in one of the hatchways in the top of the Vir- ginia's shield, and, from that position, directed the movements of the vessel, but desiring to return the fire from the shore, he called for a musket, and getting above the shield, so that he could take better aim, he exposed nearly his whole body, and his thigh bone was broken by a inusket ball from the shore. The wound disa-
361
THE BATTLE OF HAMPTON ROADS.
bled him, and the command of the vessel devolved upon Lieuten- ant Jones. Captain Buchanan's leg was subsequently amputated. Lieutenant Jones now directed his attention to the Minnesota, which was still aground, and separated from the Virginia by the "middle ground," or shoal. Before the Congress surrendered the Confederate vessels had been reinforced by the James river squadron, composed of the Patrick Henry, twelve guns, under Captain John R. Tueker, the Thomas Jefferson, two guns, under Lieutenant J. M. Barney, and the Teazer, two guns, under Lieu- tenant W. C. Webb. These vessels ran past the shore batteries at Newport News without suffering any material injury, except that the Patrick Henry received a shot through her boiler, which disabled her temporarily. The escaping steam sealded four men to death. The Thomas Jefferson towed her out of action, and, after a delay of about two hours repairing damages, she returned and played a prominent part in the battle. These vessels being of lighter draft than the Virginia, succeeded in getting mueh nearer to the Minnesota than the iron-clad could. The Minnesota was very badly eut up, and Captain Van Brunt, her commander, says it was more from the fire of the gunboats than from the Vir- ginia. The engagement was kept up until darkness prevented a proper aim, when the Confederate vessels retired to Seawell's Point, with the intention of renewing the battle in the morning.
During the night efforts were made to get the Minnesota afloat, but they were unsuccessful, and in the morning she was lying al- most exactly where she grounded the day before. About 7 a. m. on the 9th the Confederate flotilla again advanced against her for the purpose of completing her destruction. A new antagonist, however, appeared upon the scene and offered battle. This was a Federal iron-clad which had arrived during the night, and proved to be the Ericsson Monitor. It consisted of a hull, sharp at both ends, standing about eighteen Inches out of the water, and amidships on the deck was a round turret of iron, nine inches thick, in which were two eleven-inch Dahlgren guns. When the Monitor first made her appearance from behind the Minnesota she looked like a raft to the people on the Virginia, and Lieuten- ant Davidson remarked, "The Minnesota's crew are leaving her on a raft," but the raft started towards the Virginia and showed fight. The details of this combat are very interesting in marking a new era in naval warfare. For the first time in the history of the world two iron-elads were contending for the mastery. They were made upon different plans-that of the Virginia, with in- elined sides, was the better plan of the two, and has since been adopted by the United States Government in the construction of its later war vessels, but the greater mechanical facilities at the disposal of the United States enabled that Government to build the better war vessel upon an inferior plan. The Virginia's great
24
362
NORFOLK COUNTY, 1861-5.
length, deep draft of water and inferior machinery were disad- vantages as compared with her antagonist's greater speed, lighter draft and ability to turn in a shorter space. The armor of the Monitor was five inches thicker than that of the Virginia, and was made in large plates without the wooden backing, but, being perpendicular, had to resist the shots of the Virginia by main strength, while the inclined sides of the Virginia caused the shots of the Monitor to glance off without imparting their full momentum.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.