Browsing named entities in Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War.. You can also browse the collection for Mobile, Ala. (Alabama, United States) or search for Mobile, Ala. (Alabama, United States) in all documents.

Your search returned 105 results in 15 document sections:

1 2
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 5: capture of the works at Hatteras Inlet by Flag officer Stringham.--destruction of the privateer Judah. (search)
with the Chowan, Neuse and Roanoke Rivers by which any amount of stores and munitions of war could be sent by blockade runners to supply the South. The numerous inlets are navigable for light draft vessels, but owing to their shallow water our vessels of war could not penetrate them. The main channel for entering the Sounds was Hatteras Inlet, and here the enemy had thrown up heavy earthworks to protect the most important smuggling route then in operation; for, although Charleston and Mobile were considered important ports for smuggling supplies to the South, Hatteras Inlet was none the less so. For the purpose of capturing the defences of Hatteras Inlet a squadron under command of Commodore Stringham was fitted out. It consisted of the Minnesota, Captain Van Brunt, Wabash, Captain Mercer, Monticello, Commander J. P. Gillis, Susquehanna, Captain Chauncey, Pawnee, Commander Rowan, Cumberland, Captain Marston, and the Revenue Steamer Harriet Lane, Captain Faunce. Three trans
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 6: naval expedition against Port Royal and capture of that place. (search)
h from the first rendered the Confederate gunners' aim very uncertain. The attack on the defences of Port Royal was ably planned and skilfully executed. No time was lost by vacillating movements. and although this cannot be considered a great naval engagement, yet it was undoubtedly one of the best exhibitions of naval tactics that occurred during the Civil War, and has stood the test of criticism both at home and abroad. It was not so momentous an affair as the battles of New Orleans, Mobile or Fort Fisher; but it was of greater importance to the country, for it was a gleam of sunshine bursting through the dark clouds which enveloped the Union horizon. The Union forces had met with little save misfortune from the day when the Confederates fired on Fort Sumter, and the battle of Bull Run had humiliated us before the world and incited France and England to meddle in our affairs. The victory at Port Royal put new life into Union hearts. The North had seen arsenals and fort a
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)
sels up and down the river. About the end of the year 1861, the United States Government began to realize the necessity of building vessels that would be able to contend with the heavy iron-clads which had been constructed by the Confederates. By May, 1862, the latter had finished the powerful Merrimac, together with the Louisiana and Arkansas, both equally powerful with the Merrimac, and had nearly completed the Mississippi at New Orleans, the Albemarle, the Atlanta, the Tennessee, at Mobile, and several other iron-clads on the tributaries of the Mississippi. Up to this time the United States Government had only Ericsson's little Monitor to show, but the success of that famous vessel stirred the Navy Department up to building iron-clads able to cope with anything in the way of ships or forts that the Confederates could devise. Previous to the memorable encounter between the Monitor and the Merrimac the Department had exhibited neither zeal nor intelligence in dealing with th
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 32: Navy Department.--energies displayed.--building of iron-clads (search)
e Quartermaster-general of the Army issued proposals for building the vessels. Great progress was made upon these quasi iron-clads when the work was once under full headway; but with all the remarkable services they performed, what were they when compared with the Virginia, the Louisiana, the Albemarle, Atlanta, Mobile, and three large vessels built or building at Yazoo City — the Mississippi, burnt at New Orleans — the Tennessee, that fought a whole squadron (including three iron-clads) in Mobile Bay — and the Arkansas, that passed through a fleet of vessels (carrying 150 guns), without receiving more serious injury than the wounding of some fifteen men and the slight derangement of part of her armor and machinery? Previous to the civil war it had been the aim of the United States Government to excel all other nations in the quality and size of its vessels-of-war. If a steam-frigate was built in Europe of large size and heavily armed, the U. S. Government at once laid down the li<
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 39: Miscellaneous operations, land and sea.--operations in the Nansemond, Cape Fear, Pamunky, Chucka Tuck and James Rivers.--destruction of blockade-runners.--adventures of Lieutenant Cushing, etc. (search)
hile the Confederates could not repair the rapid waste of their armies, notwithstanding their most vigorous efforts. In Washington the opinion prevailed that, before the year had elapsed, the authority of the Government would be everywhere restored. This opinion also prevailed in the Navy, which had been strongly reinforced by a class of vessels able to overhaul the swiftest blockade-runners built on the Clyde; so that hardly one out of three vessels succeeded in getting into Wilmington or Mobile — the two principal ports where these illicit traders congregated. The Southern coast was so closely invested by the Navy that it was with great difficulty the blockade-runners could get in or out, although a certain proportion of them managed to elude pursuit, and carry out cargoes of cotton, which served to keep up the financial credit of the Confederacy abroad. The Confederates, as a matter of course, felt the want of the munitions of war they had been accustomed to receive in such qu
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 41: the Red River expedition, under Major-General N. P. Banks, assisted by the Navy under Rear-Admiral David D. Porter. (search)
South, which Sherman afterwards so successfully accomplished without Banks' assistance. By looking at the map, it will be readily seen how valuable a position Mobile would have been at such a time if held by the Union troops, its railroad system connecting with all the Southern roads, by which Sherman could have been supplied , while the straggling forces of the enemy between him and the Gulf would have been cut off. It would strike the military observer that to insure complete success Mobile should have been captured at the time Sherman started on his raid, which would have placed the entire country between him and the sea at the disposal of the Federh he passed. At the time Sherman went to New Orleans to see General Banks, the latter had under his command at least 50,000 men, and could have easily captured Mobile, then garrisoned by only about 10,000 troops; but this place, so easy of access and so easily captured from the land side, was left unnoticed until the latter par
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 42: Red River expedition.--continued. (search)
. Smith's command to General Sherman, and that he should march upon Mobile with what forces he had. As Banks paid no attention to this command discipline, moved towards the coast apparently in the direction of Mobile. Yet at that time, when it was necessary to be on his guard againsbinations are good. I want to keep up the delusion of an attack on Mobile and the Alabama River, and therefore would be obliged to you if youm crossing the Mississippi from Texas, and occasionally threatening Mobile, until such time as Grant should direct him to march upon the lattehad the railroads open behind him, including the important one from Mobile to Montgomery, which, with a Union Army at Mobile, would have insurMobile, would have insured the pacification of Alabama and Mississippi, and would have prevented any attempt on the part of the Confederates to pursue Sherman's rear;fall of Vicksburg and Port Hudson, his whole aim was the capture of Mobile, which was of more importance to the Union than the capture of a do
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 43: operations of the Mississippi squadron, under Admiral Porter, after the Red River expedition. (search)
, by transports, to points accessible to the city, as White House or Brandon. Respectfully submitted, W. H. Stevens, Colonel Engineers. John A. Williams, Major Engineers. W. G. Turpin, Capt. Engineers. Colonel J. T. Gilmer, Chief Engineer. Official copy. A. L. Rives, Lieutenant-Colonel and Acting-Chief of Bureau. Letter of T. E. Courtenay to Col. H. E. Clark. Richmond, Virginia, Jan. 19, 1864. My Dear Colonel — I hope you have received all my letters. I wrote two to Mobile, one to Columbus, and two to Brandon. I now send this by a party who is going to Shreveport, and promised to learn your whereabouts so as to forward it to you. I have met with much delay and annoyance since you left. The castings have all been completed some time, and the coal is so perfect that the most critical eye could not detect it. The President thinks them perfect, but Mr. Seddon will do nothing Without congressional action, so I have been engaged for the past two weeks in gettin
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 44: battle of Mobile Bay. (search)
s; also, chart of Mobile Bay up to the city of Mobile, showing forts and obstructions. send Banks thich General Banks' measures had placed it. Mobile itself was poorly fortified against a land attlated. Two more rams were reported to be at Mobile, not yet plated, and one just completed at Seln-boats that may be attempting to escape up to Mobile. There are certain black buoys placed by the expected that the possession of the harbor of Mobile would be secured without disaster. The loss throughout the world. This battle rendered Mobile of no value to the Confederacy, for, although ennessee. The vessel had been built at Mobile, Alabama, under the superintendence of Messrs. Pieommander, L. A. Kimberly, executive officer at Mobile; Lieutenants, H. B. Tyson and J. C. Watson; Fl. Lieutenant-Commander, James E. Jouett, at Mobile; Acting-Masters, Henry J. Sleeper, N. M. Dyer mer Oneida Commanders, J. R. M. Mullany, at Mobile, and W. E. LeRoy; Lieutenant, C. L. Huntington[34 more...]
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., chapter 48 (search)
receives her armament at Grand Key. the Oreto (Florida) sails for Mobile. runs through blockading squadron. runs blockade a second time. ons imposed by the Spanish authorities, that he determined to go to Mobile and fit his ship out there. He therefore got underway for that pd, and for some reason no intimation had been sent to the fleet off Mobile that she was on a cruise. At that time English ships-of-war weremore energy or more bravery. The Florida remained four months in Mobile preparing for sea, and watching a chance to get out. The blockading the Florida if she attempted to run out. Maffitt came down from Mobile one afternoon in the Florida, and noted the number and positions ofer who knew Maffitt was certain that he would attempt to get out of Mobile, and we are forced to say that those who permitted his escape are rh him. The Florida had distanced the Cuyler, the fastest vessel off Mobile bar, and the Alabama was faster than the Florida. Under these condi
1 2