hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
View all matching documents...

Your search returned 1,382 results in 124 document sections:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ...
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. Volume 4., Land operations against Mobile. (search)
Gordon Granger General Granger relinquished the command of the Fourth Corps, Army of the Cumuberland, April 10th, 1864, and, on June 21st, was ordered to report to General Canby.--editors. with 1800 men from New Orleans to cooperate with Admiral Farragut. On August 3d Granger landed on Dauphine Island, and the next morning, the appointed time, was in position before Fort Gaines. At once crossing the bay, now held by Farragut's fleet, Granger landed in the rear of Fort Morgan and began a Farragut's fleet, Granger landed in the rear of Fort Morgan and began a siege. A siege train was sent from New Orleans, and three more regiments of infantry. On the 22d of August, twenty-five guns and sixteen mortars being in position, Manned by the 1st Indiana Heavy Artillery, 38th Iowa, Rawles's battery, 5th U. S., and a naval detachment under Lieutenant Tyson, of the Hartford. General Richard Arnold was the chief-of-artillery.--R. B. I. a general bombardment by the army and the fleet began at daylight. At 6 o'clock the next morning, the 23d, the white flag
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. Volume 4., Closing operations in the Gulf and western rivers. (search)
Closing operations in the Gulf and western rivers. by Professor James Russell Soley, U. S. N. In the operations against Mobile, in March and April, 1865, the navy bore its full share of the work, and met with heavy losses. The West Gulf squadron, after Farragut's retirement from the command in September, 1864, had been under the direction of Commodore James S. Palmer, who was in turn relieved at the end of February by Acting Rear-Admiral Henry K. Thatcher. Palmer, however, an officer of great energy and skill, continued to serve with the squadron. Admiral Thatcher took personal direction of the closing operations against Mobile in cooperation with General Canby. His force included among other vessels the iron-clads Cincinnati, Winnebago, Chickasaw, Milwaukee, Osage, and Kickapoo. Among the wooden vessels were the double-enders Genesee, Sebago, Octorara, and Metacomet, the gun-boats Itasca and Sciota, the tin-clads Rodolph, Elk, Meteor, Tallahatchie, Nyanza, and Stockdale (fl
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. Volume 4., chapter 12.92 (search)
chain armor the result would have been nearly the same, notwithstanding the common opinion at the time that the Kearsarge was an iron-clad contending with a wooden ship. The chains were fastened to the ship's sides more than a year previous to the fight, while at the Azores. It was the suggestion of the executive officer, Lieutenant-Commander James S. Thornton, to hang the sheet-chain (or spare anchor-cable) over the sides, so as to protect. the midship section, he having served with Admiral Farragut in passing the forts to reach New Orleans, and having observed its benefit on that occasion. The work was done in three days, at a cost for mateerial not exceeding seventy-five dollars. In our visit to European ports, the use of sheet-chains for protective purposes had attracted notice and caused comment. It is strange that Captain Semmes did not know of the chain armor; supposed spies had been on board and had been shown through the ship, as there was no attempt at concealment; the s
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. Volume 4., The Navy at Fort Fisher. (search)
ln to direct a cooperation of the army, General Grant was requested to supply the necessary force from the troops about Richmond. As Fort Fisher lay within the territorial jurisdiction of General Butler, commanding the Department of Virginia and North Carolina, the troops were detailed from his command, and in the first attack Butler, with General Weitzel in immediate command of the troops, had control of the land operations. The naval command of the expedition having been declined by Admiral Farragut, on account of ill-health, Rear-Admiral Porter, who had so successfully cooperated with the army in opening the Mississippi, was selected, and was allowed to bring with him five of his officers, of whom the writer was one, being detailed for the command of the gun-boat Huron. The Atlantic and Gulf coasts being almost entirely in our possession, the Navy Department was able to concentrate before Fort Fisher a larger force than had ever before assembled under one command in the history of
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 18: capture of forts Jackson and St. Philip, and the surrender of New Orleans. (search)
g Squadron. The original and best plan of Farragut was that the heavier vessels of the squadron ickon, 0 Hartford, Centre Division. Flag-Officer Farragut. 0 Brooklyn, 0 Richmond, 0 Sckept on steadily in the Cayuga and ran the Farragut's fleet proceeding up the Mississippi River pwith the gun-boats and Fort St. Philip. As Farragut engaged Fort St. Philip at close quarters,theive the men back from the guns. Seeing this, Farragut called out, Don't flinch from that fire, boyshinery in a defective condition. Meanwhile Farragut had passed on up the river, leaving one or twants of the Confederate Navy at the place, as Farragut had passed up the river with little loss, andkes of the fleet above. In any case, whether Farragut had succeeded or failed in his operations abo. The prisoners were sent up river to Flag-officer Farragut for his disposition, but though afterwne on smiling faces, even among the wounded. Farragut received the congratulations of his officers,[7 more...]
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 19: battle of the forts and capture of New Orleans. (search)
ary of the Navy, Washington, D. C. Flag-officer Farragut's detailed report of the battles of thont of the city, bearing a demand from Flag officer Farragut for the unconditional surrender of the, and one or two changes of programme, Flag-officer Farragut formed the ships into two columns, lin Phillips Lee, Commanding. Flag-officer D. G Farragut, U. S. N., Commanding Western Blockading Squarrived that morning. I was ordered by Flag-officer Farragut to proceed to Southwest Pass. which Ieldom fired at. On the 23d, I urged Flag-officer Farragut to commence the attack with the ships portunity occurring to send it through Flag-officer Farragut, without loss of time. The officers ln the United States Navy. By order of Flag-officer Farragut I send them home in the Rhode Island, r able assistance with the flotilla is Flag-officer Farragut much indebted for the successful resulrendered to the fleet under command of Flag-officer Farragut, United States Navy, and to the mortar[16 more...]
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 20: a brave officer's mortification.--history set right. (search)
r's mortification.--history set right. Admiral Farragut says in a communication made in April, 18entic form. there was no braver officer in Farragut's fleet than Captain Theodorus Bailey, who letime Secretary Welles was employed in reading Farragut's report. It was not a long one, but did nott him at once detected the difference between Farragut's report and Bailey's recital of the passage tter set right, that he consented to draw Admiral Farragut's attention to the subject. Farragut hwever, as convinced by Bailey of his mistake, Farragut rectified it, and placed the (then) Rear-Admi most concerns. Rear-Admiral Bailey to Admiral Farragut. Washington, D. C., April 1, 1869. o Admiral D. G. Farragut, U. S. Navy. Admiral Farragut's reply. New York, April 3, 1869. . Farragut, U. S. Navy. Correction by Admiral Farragut. New York, May 19, 1869. My dearepartment. The object of my addressing Admiral Farragut is now gained by the admission on his par[14 more...]
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 21: capture of New Orleans.--first attack on Vicksburg by Farragut's fleet and mortar flotilla.--junction of flag-officers Farragut and Davis above Vicksburg.--ram Arkansas. (search)
ry respectfully, your obedient servant, D. G. Farragut, Commanding Western Gulf Squadron. Hon. Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy, Washington, D. C. Flag-officer Farragut's report of the action of June 28, 1862, at Vicksburg. United States Flag-Ship Hartford, above Vicksburg, Mississippi, July 2, 1862. Sir — In obedctfully, your obedient servant, John Decamp, Commanding. Flag-officer D. G. Farragut, U. S. N. Commanding Western Gulf Squadron, near Vicksburg, Miss. Flag-officer Farragut's report of affairs above Vicksburg, July 6, 1862. United States Flag-Ship, Hartford, above Vicksburg, July 6, 1862. Sir — I have to inform you th of the river, but its accomplishment will be certain in a few weeks. Allow me to congratulate you on your great success. H. W. Halleck, Major General. Flag-officer Farragut, Commanding United States flotilla in the Mississippi. Commander D. D. Porter's report of the operations of the mortar fleet at Vicksburg. United
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 23: destruction of the ram Arkansas.--capture of Galveston.--capture of the Harriet Lane.--sinking of the Hatteras.--attack on Baton Rouge.--Miscellaneous engagements of the gun-boats. (search)
pi. casualties. the effect of the return of Farragut's fleet before Vicksburg. capture of Baton Rcould sleep comfortably while she was about. Farragut could now go to the Gulf and arrange for blocber 6th, Commander Renshaw reported to Rear-Admiral Farragut that with the above named vessels he h In January, 1863, another disaster befell Farragut's fleet. As soon as he heard of the capture or to and during the passage of the fleet. Farragut seldom undertook to make a passage by a fort works, and the mortar boats were in position, Farragut made his final preparations and at about 11 Pw Port Hudson. The effect of the return of Farragut's squadron from before Vicksburg was bad for e being doubtless stimulated by the fact that Farragut and his officers did not seem disposed to molksburg at first mildly then defiantly treated Farragut's demand for the surrender of the city, and tthey fired upon the transport St. Charles. Farragut, in consequence of these wanton and useless a[22 more...]
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 44: battle of Mobile Bay. (search)
gton to Chart showing the fleet, under Admiral Farragut, passing Fort Morgan, and the position of fact that he had only wooden ships at first, Farragut was wise to delay his attack until the arrivasiderably damaged by the bombardment. When Farragut had forced his way into the Bay of Mobile, anen so near completion since the war began. Farragut knew Buchanan well, and was aware that in poi New Orleans. When the latter should arrive, Farragut would be quite ready to commence operations aal Banks left crossing the Atchafalaya River, Farragut communicated with him and requested that two hip was, in fact, the middle of the line, but Farragut would only yield so far as to have one ship ie fight their vessels to more effect than did Farragut and his officers on this occasion. The battldisplay of bravery, as the end proved. Admiral Farragut reported that after the assembling of the. As soon as Fort Morgan had surrendered, Farragut ordered the channel raked for torpedoes. T[45 more...]
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ...