Author Topic: Maybe the Seacoast boys can answer this? Civil War ship's armament (Read 1386 times)

cannonmn · « **on:** December 13, 2008, 09:36:42 PM »

A friend of mine is doing some research at the National Archives and asked for help in answering this question regarding an unusual U.S. Revenue Marine semi-submersible steamer. I have no idea myself, all I could think of was that maybe there were no 12-inch "battering projectiles" available at the time this ship needed its armament installed:

Question: E.A. STEVENS aka IRONSIDE aka NAUGATUCK aka STEVENS' BATTERY of the US Revenue Marine was originally to be armed with one 12-inch Columbiad, pattern 1844 of which the US Army had exactly one specimen. The Columbiad was test-fired extensively in Boston by Bomford and Wade and the test reports are available. I found a manuscript report by Wade where he mentions that somehow Bomford, at the gun, forgot Wade was in the target area measuring the fall of shot and fired the gun, incurring Wade's displeasure at being made an unwilling target. Nothing more was heard of this unique weapon, until it was ordered to be sent to NAUGATUCK, care of the Collector of Baltimore in 1862, along with 100 "battering projectiles." The weapon was then at Watertown (MA) Arsenal. One telegram states that the carriage for the weapon was not required.

I've found no confirmation of its arrival at Baltimore, no any information regarding the substitution of the Parrott rifle for the 12-inch Columbiad.

NAUGATUCK was eventually armed (for main battery) with one 100-pounder Parrott rifle, which exploded while firing during an attack on Richmond, VA, on the James River.

There is extensive correspondence in the National Archives RG156 Entry 6 vol. 22, and entry 3, vol. 54 and 55 regarding the armament to be provided to the vessel and shipment status, however nothing mentions receipt of the 12-inch Columbiad, nor anything about the 100 pounder Parrott.

The many telegrams/letters on file, all dated 22-26 March 1862, include items from Rodman to Ripley, Ripley to Rodman, and Ripley to the Collector at Baltimore.

The last-dated item found is a telegram from Ripley to Rodman dated March 26, 1862: "Where is the 12-inch gun now? By what route has it been or will it be shipped to Baltimore, and when will it reach there?"

Where can I find any telegrams or letters sent by the Collector at Baltimore during this brief period? I think that would answer the question of what happened to the 12-inch Columbiad and why the 100-pounder Parrott was substituted for it.

seacoastartillery · « **Reply #1 on:** December 14, 2008, 04:48:42 AM »

95% of our research is photo-based, John. We never heard of this one and have never run across any historical photo identified as such. At this time of year we don't have time to spit, much less take on a project as extensive as this one. Perhaps another member who lives in the Boston area can help out. As you know, sometimes it takes someone to visit the smaller archives which don't have websites to find this type of information.

M&T

Double D · « **Reply #2 on:** December 14, 2008, 05:17:10 AM »

To help in your research here are some histroical terms that may help.

Revenue Marine may be Customs Revenue Cutter or Customs Revenue Vessel.

Collector of Balitimore should be Collector of Customs, Baltimore or Baltimore Collector of Customs.

Customs and Border Protection is the current version of the old Customs Service. Their historical archives are wanting.

The Old Revenue Marine Service evolved into the U.S. Coast Guard.

leesecw · « **Reply #3 on:** December 14, 2008, 01:47:08 PM »

I am very interested in this thread! I know someone that had an ancester that served on the naugatuck aka stevens battery. I have some info from the danfs site if I remember correctly. Ive also visited drewry's bluff outside of Richmond and viewed the river where the naugatuck was engaged. I'll forward the info on to her. Thanks!

leesecw · « **Reply #4 on:** December 14, 2008, 02:05:57 PM »

PS. If youve ever seen a pic of a drawing of the naugautuck it was a very different ship.

GGaskill · « **Reply #5 on:** December 14, 2008, 07:34:42 PM »

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-n/naugatck.htm

cannonmn · « **Reply #6 on:** December 14, 2008, 09:21:07 PM »

Thanks for the info. I saw the NHC pages' mention of a Harper's Weekly article 4/26/1862 and found that online.

The same site has most of the CW Harpers' editions online now, so I'm sure there's tons of other cannon info in them.

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1862/april/naugatuck.htm

navygunner · « **Reply #7 on:** December 15, 2008, 02:58:04 AM »

Warships of the Civil War Navies by Paul H Silverstone makes mention of Nagatuck's 12 inch gun and her other armaments including the 100 pounder parrott that burts in an action off Drewy's Bluff,Va on 15 May 1862. There are entries in the ORN's confirming this also including the man wounded by the explosion.

cannonmn · « **Reply #8 on:** December 15, 2008, 01:03:01 PM »

Quote

makes mention of Nagatuck's 12 inch gun

Thanks very much NG. Since I dont' have that book, wouild you mind paraphrasing or quoting here what it says about the 12-inch gun? As far as I can tell that ship never got the 12-inch gun installed, but I'd sure like to know what the author says about the matter. Looking forward to the info!

navygunner · « **Reply #9 on:** December 16, 2008, 02:35:08 AM »

Pg. 105 Warships of the Civil War Navies by Paul H. Silverstone.

Naugatuck built 1844 aquired 1862
Tonnage: 192 B
dimensions 110'x21'6"x6'
machinery: 2 screws, 2 inclined engines (16'x2') 1 boiler
complement:22
armaments: 1 100pound rifle,2 12 pdr R, 2 12 pdr H Nov. 62 total: 1 6pdr R 1 42pdr R

Notes: Loaned to government by John Stevens, taken into Revenue Service and loaned to Navy. Originally built with single screw,used by Stevens as experimental vessel. Fitted out as twin-screw ironclad to demonstrate plans for "Stevens Battery" including plan of protection in which forward and aft compartments were flooded to submerge hull partially, increasing draft to m9'10". As a result of the gun explosion 15 May 1862, the protection plan was never tested. 12 inch gun was loaded from below by depressing barrell.

service record; North Atlantic Blocking Squadron 1862 Engaged batteries at Sewells Point,Va 8 May 1862 and at Drewry's Bluff, Va 15 May 62 when the 100 dr exploded. Returned to USRCS as E A Stevens.

There are many entries in the Official records of the union and confederate navies which mention the Naugatuck .

geo

navygunner · « **Reply #10 on:** December 16, 2008, 03:48:10 AM »

Cannon.
There seems to be alot of confusion over the use by various ships' skippers in addressing, Naugatuck, E.A. Stevens, Stevens and Stevens Battery. looking thru the ORN's all names were used. There were two "Steven's Batteries" built as experimens by the Stevens brothers to proof their shell proof design (didn't work) sometime between 1854-1860 see DANFS under Stevens Battery. The third ship was the E.A Stevens which went to the Revenue Service then the Navy and served with the North Atlantic Blockading Squadron and exchanged shots with the CSS Virginia a time or two before bursting the 100 pdr. Outside of the one entry I listed and the other that you mentioned I can find nothing on a 12 inch columbiad being installed.http://library5.library.cornell.edu/moa/browse.monographs/ofre.html see series 1 vol 7 North Atlantic Blocking Squadron. pg. 363 mentions the exploded 100 pdr parrott. The Civil War Artillery Encylopedia makes mention of only 8, 10 and 15 inch columbiads actually seeing combat during the Civil War. I also recall a 12 inch gun on the USS Princeton(?) having exploded.

hope this helps.

geo dailey: U S Naval Landing Party
www.usnlp.org

cannonmn · « **Reply #11 on:** December 16, 2008, 03:52:53 AM »

Thanks George, at least we've eliminated another possible source of info on what happened to the 12-inch gun.

That excerpt gave me a little burst of inspiration where it says the gun was loaded from below by depressing the gun. The only ammo that was ever made for the single 12-inch Columbiad, as far as I know, was round shell or possibly cored shot, but it was all round as far as I know.

The round ammo has one obvious disadvantage, it will roll out of the bore when the weapon is depressed. That wouldn't work very well with NAUGATUCK's system of loading, would it? The 100 pdr. Parrott used elongated ammo which would stay in place with considerable depression.

cannonmn · « **Reply #12 on:** December 16, 2008, 03:56:50 AM »

Thanks again, George. The original correspondence I have copies makes it clear that orders were actually given to ship the only 12-inch Columbiad in existance to the vessel which was in Baltimore in March 1862, apparently "fitting out." It seems that either the weapon's shipment was aborted at some point, and we don't know for sure when or why that happened.

navygunner · « **Reply #13 on:** December 16, 2008, 04:14:47 AM »

Cannon,
Most of the round shot used a selvagee (sp) wad to take up windage and keep the round from moving off the charge. Also as you mentioned the only available 12" sg would have been the remaining 12" on the USS Princeton which was in use at the time as a receiving ship.

geo

cannonmn · « **Reply #14 on:** December 16, 2008, 05:09:36 AM »

Thanks Geo., no was not referring to any PRINCETON armament, since the spectacular failure of one of those 12 in. W.I. guns you can be sure none were fired aboard USN ships after that.

Here's a nice article showing one of the two remaining "Stockton" 12-in. wrought iron guns, at the Washington Navy Yard. The other is at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD., at the main gate.

http://markerhunter.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/the-stockton-gun/

The 12-inch I'm sure the Army Ordnance Dept. was planning on shipping was the sole 12-in. pattern 1844 cast-iron Columbiad ever made, by Alger, in 1844, registry no. 1. Since it was made and tested in Boston, it would make sense that in 1862 it was still at Watertown Arsenal, just outside Boston.

Another reason that weapon may not have made it aboard NAUGATUCK is that it was pretty hefty at some 26,000 lbs approx. That's a lot of weight for a relatively small ship.

navygunner · « **Reply #15 on:** December 16, 2008, 05:17:10 AM »

Yup!!! Both of those guns were in battery on the Princeton see the DANFS.

Thanks for that reference.
geo

cannonmn · « **Reply #16 on:** December 16, 2008, 05:25:26 AM »

Quote

the only available 12" sg would have been the remaining 12" on the USS Princeton which was in use at the time as a receiving ship.

Thanks for the info. There may be some confusion as often occurs about the Navy's re-use of ship names. "PRINCETON 1" as DANFS calls it, was broken up in 1849, that's the one that had the two 12-inch W.I. guns.

The ship which was the receiving ship at Phila. during the CW was "PRINCETON 2" which had a battery consisting of 6-32 pounder carronades. That ship was commissioned I think in 1851 and was laid up "in ordinary" in 1866.

navygunner · « **Reply #17 on:** December 16, 2008, 07:43:53 AM »

Cannon,
Correct and to make things even more confusing the Army Quartermaster Corps often labeled their ships with the USS designation which only applies to commissioned naval vessels. Alot gets lost when army gunboats/transports were taken over by the Navy as in the Mississippi Squadron. Makes for interesting digging however.
geo

cannonmn · « **Reply #18 on:** December 16, 2008, 11:49:30 AM »

Quote

Army Quartermaster Corps often labeled their ships with the USS designation which only applies to commissioned naval vessels

Thanks again. Do think modern authors have confused things by adding the "USS" when at the time there was none? I saw somewhere that even US Navy warships were not called "USS ___" until 1911. Before that, they'd just be "CONSTITUTION" for example.

navygunner · « **Reply #19 on:** December 16, 2008, 02:48:25 PM »

Yes I do believe the USS designator was officially adopted in 1907 and before that in Official Records the ship would have been referred to by her name only as in your post. I think later researchers are responsible for placing the USS before then. I always referred to my ships by their name seldom as USS anything LOL

cannonmn · « **Reply #20 on:** January 11, 2009, 05:44:07 AM »

My friend who lives in Baltimore and is researching this went to the National Archives again recently and found more info. What he found was a letter from the Collector at Baltimore to Gen. Ripley stating that the cannon had been received. This must be the lone 12 inch Columbiad that existed at that time.

Since apparently that weapon never was installed aboard the ship, I wonder what happened to it? Maybe it is buried somewhere in Baltimore; interesting thought, get out those metal detectors!

KABAR2 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 11, 2009, 07:17:11 AM »

Quote from: cannonmn on January 11, 2009, 05:44:07 AM

My friend who lives in Baltimore and is researching this went to the National Archives again recently and found more info. What he found was a letter from the Collector at Baltimore to Gen. Ripley stating that the cannon had been received. This must be the lone 12 inch Columbiad that existed at that time.

Since apparently that weapon never was installed aboard the ship, I wonder what happened to it? Maybe it is buried somewhere in Baltimore; interesting thought, get out those metal detectors!

It probably went in one of the WWII scrap drives..............