previous next
“ [22] tested in action. Strong in faith, receiving but a negative support from the Navy Department, they completed the “Monitor” at their own cost.”

These misstatements, repeated and exaggerated by others, in newspaper paragraphs and sensational lectures, to miscellaneous crowds, as well by extreme partisans in Congress and out, found listeners and readers. They served to create false impressions and to make false history. Truth and justice to others demand correction.

The project of attempting in this country the construction of iron-clad vessels and heavy ordnance originated in the Navy Department in 1861, and the “Monitor” plan, invented by Ericsson, was adopted by naval officers, with the approval of the Navy Department, within three months after the first recommendation of the Department was made. This was before the iron-master and capitalists who contracted for the battery were known to the Department that awarded the contract.

Instead of advancing the money and paying the entire expense out of his own funds, as stated by General Butler, payments were promptly made by the Navy Department to Mr. Griswold and his associates, as rapidly, at least, as the work progressed, and was certified to by the supervising agent of the Department; there being an interval of only fifteen or twenty days between each payment, as will be seen by the following from the official record:

1861.-November 15, first payment, $50,000, less 25 per cent$37,500
December 3, second payment, $50,000, less 25 per cent37,500
December 17, third payment, $50,000, less 25 per cent37,500
1862.-January 3, fourth payment, $50,000, less 25 per cent37,500
February 6, fifth payment, $50,000, less 25 cent37,500
March 3, sixth payment, $25,000, less 25 per cent18,750
March 14, last payment, reservations68,750

Save reservations, which were made in all cases of vessels built by contract, the last payment, on the completion of the battery, was on the 3d of March, and, as time was precious and pressing, she was hastily commissioned, officered, manned, supplied, and left New York for Hampton Roads three days after, on the 6th of March.

Intense anxiety was naturally felt by the officials in the Navy Department, who knew and appreciated the importance of the occasion, and the responsibility depending on them for the success of this vessel in her voyage, and in her power and fighting qualities after she should reach her destination. Many naval officers hesitated to give the experiment their indorsement. Some of the best engineers and

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Places (automatically extracted)

View a map of the most frequently mentioned places in this document.

Sort places alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a place to search for it in this document.
Hampton Roads (Virginia, United States) (1)

Download Pleiades ancient places geospacial dataset for this text.

hide People (automatically extracted)
Sort people alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a person to search for him/her in this document.
John A. Griswold (1)
John Ericsson (1)
Benjamin F. Butler (1)
hide Dates (automatically extracted)
Sort dates alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a date to search for it in this document.
1861 AD (2)
December 3rd (2)
March 6th (2)
March 3rd (2)
1862 AD (1)
December 17th (1)
December 2nd (1)
November 15th (1)
November 1st (1)
March 14th (1)
February 6th (1)
February 5th (1)
January 4th (1)
January 3rd (1)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: