Browsing named entities in Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War.. You can also browse the collection for July, 1862 AD or search for July, 1862 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 2 results in 2 document sections:

Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 22: operations in the Potomac.--destruction of Confederate batteries.--losses by shipwreck, in battle, etc. (search)
Naval commanders had to take whatever would carry a gun,no matter how frail or vulnerable, and attempt impossible things with, at times, deplorable consequences to themselves, their officers and crews, from bursting steam pipes and boilers, which added new horrors to the ordinary havoc of war. The work performed by Foote and Davis and their officers and men on the Western rivers, with the so-called iron-clads, was herculean from the time the first gun-boats got afloat in January, until July 1862. They had captured, or assisted to capture, seven heavy forts armed with one hundred and ninety-eight guns, and manned or supported by over fifty thousand men, besides destroying thirteen or more of the enemy's vessels armed with forty guns and a floating battery of sixteen guns; and all this without the enemy's capturing a single vessel. In the Navy Department list, the Western iron-clads ale put down as twenty-six armored vessels, a formidable force on paper, but in this number are i
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., chapter 48 (search)
ond their most sanguine expectations, having got their vessel to sea in spite of the watchful care of the American minister in London and the apparent zeal of the British Government to prevent it. How far Her Majesty's Government were sincere in their intentions can be seen from the following extract, which we give from the work of a clever naval writer, Professor J. Russell Soley, U. S. N.: The second cruiser built in England for the Confederates was the Alabama, whose career began in July, 1862. The attention of the Foreign Office had been first called to this vessel by a note from Mr. Adams on the 23d of June. The evidence then submitted as to her character was confined to a statement made by the Consul at Liverpool, of suspicious circumstances connected with the vessel. The communication was referred to the law officers of the Crown, who gave the opinion that, if the allegations were true, the building and equipment of the vessel were a Manifest violation of the Foreign Enli