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 ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

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

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
United States (United States) 66 0 Browse Search
Murray 28 4 Browse Search
Roberts 28 0 Browse Search
Jonathan A. Jones 18 0 Browse Search
Harper's Ferry (West Virginia, United States) 14 0 Browse Search
Lincoln 13 3 Browse Search
Fortress Monroe (Virginia, United States) 10 0 Browse Search
August 19th 9 9 Browse Search
Benjamin McCulloch 8 0 Browse Search
Maryland (Maryland, United States) 8 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: August 21, 1861., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 19 total hits in 9 results.

Fort Moultrie (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): article 8
Cease defences — marine and water batteries. The Yankees are building, or intend building, a marine battery, which is to be clad in iron, and which, according to their usual Chinese clamor, is to demolish Fort Sumter, Fort Moultrie, and other Southern fortifications, with the greatest case. If they can construct a marine battery thus clad which can stand a sea voyage to Charleston, (which is doubtful,) why can we not construct a battery iron clad which can be used against Fortress Monroe? And, again, on the other hand, if a ship can be made ball proof against a land battery by being sheathed with iron, why cannot Forts Sumter, Moultrie, and other fortifications, be made equally invulnerable by being sheathed with the came material? That the South greatly needs a marine to act in conjunction with its harbor batteries, is evident enough; but, to supply this deficiency, is a work of time. The Charleston Mercury suggests that what we need now, for present emergencies, as a s
China (China) (search for this): article 8
Cease defences — marine and water batteries. The Yankees are building, or intend building, a marine battery, which is to be clad in iron, and which, according to their usual Chinese clamor, is to demolish Fort Sumter, Fort Moultrie, and other Southern fortifications, with the greatest case. If they can construct a marine battery thus clad which can stand a sea voyage to Charleston, (which is doubtful,) why can we not construct a battery iron clad which can be used against Fortress Monroe? And, again, on the other hand, if a ship can be made ball proof against a land battery by being sheathed with iron, why cannot Forts Sumter, Moultrie, and other fortifications, be made equally invulnerable by being sheathed with the came material? That the South greatly needs a marine to act in conjunction with its harbor batteries, is evident enough; but, to supply this deficiency, is a work of time. The Charleston Mercury suggests that what we need now, for present emergencies, as a s
Fortress Monroe (Virginia, United States) (search for this): article 8
Cease defences — marine and water batteries. The Yankees are building, or intend building, a marine battery, which is to be clad in iron, and which, according to their usual Chinese clamor, is to demolish Fort Sumter, Fort Moultrie, and other Southern fortifications, with the greatest case. If they can construct a marine battery thus clad which can stand a sea voyage to Charleston, (which is doubtful,) why can we not construct a battery iron clad which can be used against Fortress Monroe? And, again, on the other hand, if a ship can be made ball proof against a land battery by being sheathed with iron, why cannot Forts Sumter, Moultrie, and other fortifications, be made equally invulnerable by being sheathed with the came material? That the South greatly needs a marine to act in conjunction with its harbor batteries, is evident enough; but, to supply this deficiency, is a work of time. The Charleston Mercury suggests that what we need now, for present emergencies, as a s
Gen (search for this): article 8
, forts and floating batteries, that we need mostly to address our attention at the present juncture; and what we seek to do, in this respect, should be done quickly. We shall have little time to lose between this and the first of October. The Mercury also contains a communication of considerable length in relation to the late Gen. Gaines, and his views on the subject of national defences. Seeing that the introduction of steam power was destined to work a great change in the art of war, Gen, Gaines came to the conclusion that "the invasion and occupation of any inhabited portion of the interior sections of this country by a hostile army, is a thing so utterly impossible and preposterous that no war minister in Europe would like to be suspected of entertaining the idea." Hence, he inferred that "all the great battles that will ever be fought on our own soil in such wars, will be upon or near the entrances of our principal seaport towns and inlets." In accordance with this conclus
Jackson (search for this): article 8
is plan or independently of it) lying inside of the floating gate, are important adjuncts of the scheme, and would, with the heavy batteries of the forts, present a combination of force sufficient for the destruction of any hostile squadron." For more than thirty years Gen. Gaines urged his plans upon the attention of the Government at Washington, but without success. The distribution of the spoils of office was considered more important than the preservation of national safety and honored. Gen. Jackson assured Gen. Gaines of his approbation, and gave it as his opinion that "the reason why his system of defence, which he examined with attention, had been objected to by the officers in and about the War Department was, that it was decidedly superior to anything which he had ever seen proposed by any of them." It is obvious that the time is at hand when some plan for the defence of Southern harbors and fortifications against the contemplated engines of attack should be adopted.
Paixhan (search for this): article 8
his conclusion, he devised a magnificent scheme of national defence, the principal features of which were a system of railroads connecting the interior with the seaboard, and over which the whole available force of the country could be transported in a few days, and thus save from conflagration and utter destruction the cities of Charleston, New Orleans, Mobile, Norfolk, Baltimore and others. But "as a fleet of large war steamers, moving from twelve to fifteen miles an hour, and armed with Paixhan's guns and improved rockets, would not only be able to enter our harbors and return at all times, and with any change of wind or tide, with perfect facility, but would pass any battery or fortifications on shore with such rapidity as to be within the range of any gun but a few minutes — too short a time to incur any great or serious injury in open day, and much less by night."" In view of these facts he came to the conclusion, which we give in his own words, that "no works on land, no line
Gaines (search for this): article 8
The Mercury also contains a communication of considerable length in relation to the late Gen. Gaines, and his views on the subject of national defences. Seeing that the introduction of steam power was destined to work a great change in the art of war, Gen, Gaines came to the conclusion that "the invasion and occupation of any inhabited portion of the interior sections of this country by a hs" or moving forts, from the range of whose guns the enemy could not escape. The plan of Gen. Gaines had also a feature for closing harbors against an enemy, which he describes at length in a lerce sufficient for the destruction of any hostile squadron." For more than thirty years Gen. Gaines urged his plans upon the attention of the Government at Washington, but without success. Theed more important than the preservation of national safety and honored. Gen. Jackson assured Gen. Gaines of his approbation, and gave it as his opinion that "the reason why his system of defence, wh
October 1st (search for this): article 8
ould cover the main entrances, we might rationally expect that any demonstrations of the enemy through minor channels would be simply predatory, and easily met by the coast guard and local militia. It is to this feature, then, the joint use of marine and land batteries, forts and floating batteries, that we need mostly to address our attention at the present juncture; and what we seek to do, in this respect, should be done quickly. We shall have little time to lose between this and the first of October. The Mercury also contains a communication of considerable length in relation to the late Gen. Gaines, and his views on the subject of national defences. Seeing that the introduction of steam power was destined to work a great change in the art of war, Gen, Gaines came to the conclusion that "the invasion and occupation of any inhabited portion of the interior sections of this country by a hostile army, is a thing so utterly impossible and preposterous that no war minister in Euro
April, 10 AD (search for this): article 8
vent the entrance of a hostile fleet propelled by Steam power." To meet this change wrought by the application of steam power, he adopted, as a of his plan for the defence of our seaports, several novel contrivances, among which were "floating batteries" or moving forts, from the range of whose guns the enemy could not escape. The plan of Gen. Gaines had also a feature for closing harbors against an enemy, which he describes at length in a letter to the Common Council of New York, in October, 4 In that letter he say: "Could we always be certain of a competent force of war steamers at every such point of expected invasion, no other defence would be needed or asked. But the construction of the number of armed steamships which would be confessedly necessary for the defence of all our great seaports, in this mode, would involves an expenditure that must put it wholly out of the question. The only practicable means of defending the entrances of our harbors against war steamers