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

Your search returned 151 results in 21 document sections:

1 2 3
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)
he Confederates in conse-quence of the stringent blockade of the coast. The Federal Navy had been so far strengthened with a class of vessels superior to anything of which the powers of Europe could boast, that it was no longer anticipated that England or France would interfere in our domestic affairs. The battle of Gettysburg, which caused General Lee to fall back upon Richmond, and the surrender of Port Hudson and Vicksburg, which opened the Mississippi to the sea, were the severest blowsthe 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 quantities through the blockade-runners, particularly great guns and small arms manufactured in England. Every port, from Virginia to Texas, was watched with a zeal that had never before been exerted on such an occasion; for it was felt by the officers of the Navy that this watchfulness would be well rewarded, and the information gained from the
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 45: the cruise of the Sumter and the havoc she committed. (search)
Granting belligerent rights. the policy of England and France. Semmes' reputation. the commisitish Government will be of any benefit to Great Britain in the end is doubtful, for, in case she s armies. In recognizing these cruisers, Great Britain and France were encouraging a kind of predhorities towards the Confederacy. France and England had issued proclamations forbidding the introby all the leading powers of Europe, viz.: Great Britain, France, Spain, etc., as your Excellency me to be just, in the face of the truckling of England and of France. Semmes had been in the Caridetained to prevent their doing mischief. Great Britain would not condone such an offence as givinmade a target of her prizes. What would Great Britain have thought had Ireland thrown off her alish Government. It might be advisable for Great Britain to proclaim her neutrality, but there was and the idea doubtless suggested itself that England was establishing a precedent which might give[7 more...]
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., chapter 48 (search)
nd placed their ships under the protection of England, where they knew they would be safe from moleew York. Ships were constantly arriving from England with merchandise, great-guns, small-arms, ammformidable a vessel as the 290. She had left England unarmed, but with all the arrangements made t, which she had worn since her departure from England, was hauled down, and the Confederate ensign by all the Confederate cruisers fitted out in England. The result of that Commission was that GreaGreat Britain paid to the United States the sum of $15,000,000 as indemnification for the damage inflicke the real foundation of the case against Great Britain. * * * * * * * The inference is unavo be detroyed or transferred to the flag of Great Britain! The black clouds were mustering their styled privateers, which our kind friends in England are so willing should slip out of their portsor the great Navy it was proposed to build in England. The virtuous Briton at first demurred to th[15 more...]
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., chapter 51 (search)
committing such havoc upon Federal commerce. No one knew at what time the United States might be involved in war with England or France, particularly the former country, which had afforded the South so much assistance in fitting out cruisers, thanment to the contempt of all civilized Powers. Although the Confederate Government only managed to procure vessels from England through shifts and stratagems, yet it was very evident that the British Government was not taking vigorous steps to put her government. There was in the latter part of 1864 a growing feeling in the Federal States against the action of Great Britain, which, though the latter began to pay more attention to its neutral obligations (owing to the strong protests of Mr.with the powers of Europe; but by the end of 1864 they were quite in a condition to vindicate their rights and rebuke Great Britain and France for the unfair advantage they had taken in their hour of distress. Besides a number of single-turreted Mo
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 49: first attack on Fort Fisher.--destruction of the confederate ram Albemarle, etc. (search)
h those run by the blockading vessels. If one vessel in three succeeded in running into port, it remunerated the owners largely. They were paid for their ventures in Confederate cotton at eight cents a pound, worth at that time eighty cents in England and one dollar in the North. At first the blockade-runners were insured in England against capture, so many successful voyages were made, but towards the last the insurers charged very high premiums. Admiral Lee's squadron captured or destroyeEngland against capture, so many successful voyages were made, but towards the last the insurers charged very high premiums. Admiral Lee's squadron captured or destroyed a large number of blockade-running steamers, perhaps to the value of ten millions of dollars. The shores of North Carolina were strewn with the wrecks of these vessels, which were generally run aground and set on fire to prevent the Federal Navy from deriving any benefit from their capture. We do not know what were Admiral Lee's particular plans in regard to the blockade-runners, but it was determined, while the fleet was waiting for the Army to get ready, that a new system should be adop
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 50: Second attack on Fort Fisher. (search)
uring the war. Twenty-five hundred Confederates manned Fort Fisher: eighteen hundred were taken prisoners; the rest were killed or wounded. We visited Fort Fisher and the adjoining works, and found their strength greatly beyond what had been conceived. An engineer might be excused for saying, they could not be captured except by regular siege. We wonder even now how it was done. The work was really stronger than the Malakoff Tower, which defied so long the combined power of France and England, and yet it was captured by a handful of men under the fire of the guns of the fleet, and in seven hours after the attack began in earnest. We cannot say too much in praise of the conduct of the fleet during the time it had been engaged in these operations. We do not know an officer in command who did not perform his duty to the best of his ability. There may have been some who did better than others, but, after all, that may be a mere matter of opinion, or a matter of prejudice or par
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 52: operations about Charleston, 1865.--fall of Charleston, Savannah, etc. (search)
impossible for a blockade-runner to land her cargo inside the harbor, yet, even with the close watch constantly maintained, cotton could be sent out. When the city was taken this traffic was at an end, and the credit of the Confederate States in England sank to a low ebb. Henceforth the Confederate armies would be obliged to depend on the scanty supplies obtained at home, and their surrender was now considered only a matter of time. Owing to the fall of Charleston, the Navy Department was en A torpedo boiler ready to receive powder was found on the wharf, where the cast-iron torpedoes for the frames already mentioned were discovered, together with a large quantity of the wire rope. This was made in the best manner, probably in England. The copper wire was insulated by a tube of India-rubber, protected by a wrapper of hemp, and over that closely laid wire. In this connection I may also mention the torpedoes designed for the rains and torpedo-boats, samples of which were re
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 53: operations of the West Gulf Squadron in the latter part of 1864, and in 1865.--joint operations in Mobile Bay by Rear-Admiral Thatcher and General Canby. (search)
ales of cotton on board--one of those small ventures the Texans were in the habit of making to raise money, which, though small in quantity, was none the less valuable to the captors when it could be secured. This cargo would have been worth in England over one hundred thousand dollars. Every effort was made to get the Delphina afloat. The after-deck load was thrown overboard and her anchor carried out; but as the norther caused the water to fall rapidly, leaving in an hour only about a foot ng harm on Federal merchant-ships. It was not to be supposed that Union officers would let a vessel put to sea with a hundred thousand dollars' worth of cotton on board without using every effort to capture it, when they knew that if it reached England it would soon be converted into cash to buy arms with which to shoot Union people. There was really no greedy intent which induced officers to follow up vessels in port loaded with cotton, but simply a desire on their part to put an end to the
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 56: commerce-destroyers.-their inception, remarkable career, and ending. (search)
, in speed and armament, to repeat against Great Britain the tactics of the Confederate cruisers aghe United States to have declared war with Great Britain than to have submitted longer to open violhe same terms as were accorded to those of Great Britain; but the colonists placed so many restrictaid on American commerce. It is true that Great Britain made the amende honorable, after years of r against their regularity. The fact that Great Britain subsequently paid for allowing her laws todence against the Confederate cruisers. Great Britain, with propriety, might have sent out her stish Government cannot be doubted, for, if Great Britain had been mindful of her neutral obligationm all. There were a dozen ways in which Great Britain might have prevented her neutrality laws fre British vessels, subject to the laws of Great Britain, and were commissioned as ships-of-war on nd were acting in violation of the laws of Great Britain as well as those of the United States. [5 more...]
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War., Chapter 57: the ram Stonewall. (search)
on of the officers thus employed. The agents not only succeeded in eluding the supposed vigilance of the authorities in England, but were even able to contract for two powerful rams and four corvettes in France to carry the most formidable guns the the cleverest of these officers, and, as far as we know, the best, Captain James D. Bullock, was the principal agent in England for the purchase of vessels, and though the laws were violated in the transaction of building or purchasing, the violati confusion along the coast of the United States. The Emperor had failed about that time in securing joint action with England against Mexico, and, seeing that the Southern rebellion was fast collapsing, felt sure that the first step of the Federaot to sea January 28th, 1865, having received her stores and crew from another vessel dispatched by Captain Bullock from England, at Quiberon Bay, Belle Isle, France, but, owing to defects in the rudder casing, the Stonewall put in to Ferrol, Spain,
1 2 3