hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in descending order. Sort in ascending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
Stonewall Jackson 345 1 Browse Search
Joseph E. Johnston 292 10 Browse Search
John L. Porter 152 4 Browse Search
United States (United States) 138 0 Browse Search
Robert E. Lee 128 0 Browse Search
Robert Edward Lee 126 20 Browse Search
John M. Brooke 122 6 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 109 1 Browse Search
U. S. Grant 101 1 Browse Search
Sherman 100 4 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 19. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones).

Found 8,726 total hits in 3,208 results.

... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ...
Joseph Pearce (search for this): chapter 1.1
erce, then master ship-carpenter at the navy-yard here and a skilled mechanic, was sent to the Capital to assist him, but nothing came of the conference, and he reported that Lieutenant Brooke had no matured plan; that he had no practical ideas, and did not know what he wanted. Seeing the failure of Lieutenant Brooke's scheme, Constructor Porter then had another model made like the one he made at Pittsburg in 1847. [Italics mine.] Mr. Porter is mistaken as to the ship-carpenter. Mr. Joseph Pearce (Mr. Porter spells it Pierce) was a constructor competent to perform the work, but whose services were not available at that time. Mr. J. W. H. Porter's loquacious ship-carpenter had been warned not to give information to any one as to the plan which had been adopted. On reporting to Constructor Porter he probably thought that he fulfilled his instructions in using the language attributed to him by Mr. Porter. He gave no information as to the extension of the submerged ends of the s
F. Buchanan (search for this): chapter 1.1
though the odds were nearly seven to one against us in guns and in numbers. But the iron and the heavy guns did the work, handled by such a man as glorious old Buchanan, and with such officers and men as we had. The crash into the Cumberland was terrible in its effect, though hardly felt by us, and in thirty minutes after the ftoo hot; and as Alexander backed out in the Raleigh he was fired at from the ports of the Congress, though she had surrendered to us. A dastardly, cowardly act! Buchanan not getting Parker's report, and the frigate not being burnt, he accepted my volunteered services to burn her; and, taking eight men and our only remaining boat,as he is. He must tell you of his tussle with the Eric, a very devil of an iron battery, for he has just come in and said he had a letter from you. God bless old Buchanan for a true-hearted patriot and bold, dashing sailor, as brave as brave can be; but he exposed himself entirely too much, and was struck by a musket or minnie bal
Joseph Pierce (search for this): chapter 1.1
ions. Mr. J. W. H. Porter says: Lieutenant John M. Brooke, of the navy, was considering the question of an iron-clad. He was in a position where he could command the ear of Secretary Mallory, of the Confederate Navy, and at his request Mr. Joseph Pierce, then master ship-carpenter at the navy-yard here and a skilled mechanic, was sent to the Capital to assist him, but nothing came of the conference, and he reported that Lieutenant Brooke had no matured plan; that he had no practical ideas,ng the failure of Lieutenant Brooke's scheme, Constructor Porter then had another model made like the one he made at Pittsburg in 1847. [Italics mine.] Mr. Porter is mistaken as to the ship-carpenter. Mr. Joseph Pearce (Mr. Porter spells it Pierce) was a constructor competent to perform the work, but whose services were not available at that time. Mr. J. W. H. Porter's loquacious ship-carpenter had been warned not to give information to any one as to the plan which had been adopted. On r
opment of the principle in sea-going ships. Plates of sufficient thickness to afford protection when placed vertically could not be made; but in 1874 it was applied in England. The following description of the Inflexible is from Chief-Engineer J. W. King's War Ships and Navies of the World. The Inflexible, which was commenced at Portsmouth dock-yard in February, 1874, and launched April, 1876, is a twin-screw, double-turret ship, with a central armored citadel. She was designed by Mr. Barnaby, the Director of Naval Construction at the Admiralty, and at a meeting of the Institution of Naval Architects in London, he describes the vessel in the following language: Imagine a floating castle 110 feet long and 75 feet wide, rising 10 feet out of water, and having above that again two round turrets planted diagonally at its opposite corners. Imagine this castle and its turrets to be heavily plated with armor, and that each turret has two guns of about eighty tons each. Concei
Joseph Yates (search for this): chapter 1.1
if necessary, to diminish it. Extracts from these three letters of Mr. Porter will be found in J. Thomas Scharf's History of the Confederate States Navy, published in 1887, pp. 146-151. The last in order is the extract from a private letter, given above, which, Mr. Scharf says, was published in the Charleston Mercury of April 8th, 1862. Knowing that this extract, the first publication connecting Mr. Porter's name with the Merrimac, had appeared at an earlier date, I wrote to Colonel Joseph Yates, whom I had known as one of the gallant defenders of Charleston, and an accomplished artillerist, requesting him to ascertain the date of publication. He replied as follows: ten-mile Mill, S. C., August 10, 1887. I find that all the files of the Charleston Mercury are in the Charleston library, and not one paper missing. There is a great deal said about the Virginia and her fights, and I find the letter you refer to was published in the Mercury dated March 19th, 1862, no dat
February, 1874 AD (search for this): chapter 1.1
the principle of submerged ends became apparent. The means at command in the Confederacy were not adequate to the complete development of the principle in sea-going ships. Plates of sufficient thickness to afford protection when placed vertically could not be made; but in 1874 it was applied in England. The following description of the Inflexible is from Chief-Engineer J. W. King's War Ships and Navies of the World. The Inflexible, which was commenced at Portsmouth dock-yard in February, 1874, and launched April, 1876, is a twin-screw, double-turret ship, with a central armored citadel. She was designed by Mr. Barnaby, the Director of Naval Construction at the Admiralty, and at a meeting of the Institution of Naval Architects in London, he describes the vessel in the following language: Imagine a floating castle 110 feet long and 75 feet wide, rising 10 feet out of water, and having above that again two round turrets planted diagonally at its opposite corners. Imagine
Virginius Newton (search for this): chapter 1.1
y Mr J. W. H. Porter, under the supervision of Constructor John L. Porter, purporting to be a correct version of the converting of the Merrimac into an iron-clad. Mr Porter says: In your issue of Sunday last, in the communication of Mr. Virginius Newton, headed The Merrimac's men , there appears the following: Upon this hulk, according to plans furnished by Lieutenant John M. Brooke of the Confederate States Navy (though the merit of the design is also claimed for Naval Constructor John L. Porter), was built a house or shield, &c. This does a grave injustice to a gallant old Confederate and Virginian, who sacrificed his all upon the altar of his country; and had Mr. Newton known fully the facts it is believed that he would have published his article with the names above reversed. The following dispassionate statement of Colonel Brooke of the facts connected with the conversion of the Merrimac is conclusive: In October, 1887, I was requested by the editor of the
J. W. H. Porter (search for this): chapter 1.1
2, with some variations and additions. Mr. J. W. H. Porter says: Lieutenant John M. Brooke, of e failure of Lieutenant Brooke's scheme, Constructor Porter then had another model made like the ones to the ship-carpenter. Mr. Joseph Pearce (Mr. Porter spells it Pierce) was a constructor competenvices were not available at that time. Mr. J. W. H. Porter's loquacious ship-carpenter had been wawhich had been adopted. On reporting to Constructor Porter he probably thought that he fulfilled his in using the language attributed to him by Mr. Porter. He gave no information as to the extensionnts he is said to have made. Naturally, Constructor Porter was much surprised when, on presenting hst is put first, and the first last. Mr. J. W. H. Porter continues: And later still, when the red would be the last to forget its origin. Mr. Porter further says: Mr. Brooke, I believe, ther the Secretary nor myself had noticed Constructor Porter's published claims, I thought it advisab[4 more...]
ey rallied when I got them to the Teazer. Send the signal book! When I can be moved the doctors will send me to Richmond, where a spell of a few weeks will put me on my pins again. Make my kind regards to Mrs. Brooke; and with the hope that you are in better health, I am ever your friend, R. D. Minor. Remember me to Volcke, to McCorkle, and Upshur. The Commodore had the signal Sink before Surrender arranged before the action. Tell this to Mallory, for I hardly think that old Buch. will ever do so. N. B.—There will doubtless be an attempt made to transfer the great credit of planning the Virginia to other hands than your own. So look out for them, for to you it belongs, and the Secretary should say so in communicating his report of the victory to Congress. By no means must any captain or commodore or even flag-officer be put over Jones. In old Buch.'s sickness from his wound Jones must command the ship. In justice to Constructor Porter, and in order that hi
C. S. N. Consructor (search for this): chapter 1.1
angements for the working of this novel kind of ship that any one would attempt to rob me of my just merits; for, if there was any other man than myself who had any responsibility about her success or failure I never knew it, only so far as the working of the machinery was concerned, for which Engineer Williamson as alone responsible. I hope these plain statements of facts will satisfy the people of this government as to who is entitled to the plan of the Virginia. John L. Porter, C. S. N. Consructor. On the 3d of April, I wrote a private letter to Mr. Porter which, so far as I know, has never been published. [Copy.] Richmond, April 3, 1862. dear Sir: I have observed, with surprise and regret, certain articles in the newspapers relating to the Virginia and the origin of the plan upon which she is constructed. I shall leave to those qualified to judge the question of whose plan was adopted; for the facts are accessible. But meanwhile I beg leave to call your attenti
... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ...