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) 52 0 Browse Search
France (France) 32 0 Browse Search
Gideon Welles 19 1 Browse Search
Slidell 12 0 Browse Search
Port Royal (South Carolina, United States) 12 0 Browse Search
James O'Connor 12 0 Browse Search
Maryland (Maryland, United States) 10 0 Browse Search
Nat 10 0 Browse Search
W. H. Jenifer 9 1 Browse Search
Hanover County (Virginia, United States) 8 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: February 4, 1862., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 46 total hits in 11 results.

1 2
Cronstadt (Russia) (search for this): article 1
en disciplined and practiced to the skillful performance of their duties. If the application of steam to ships of war and other naval improvements accounts for the success of the enemy in his two assaults upon inconsiderable earthworks, how is it that the great naval squadrons of England and France were unable to assail Sebastopol and other Russian seacoast fortifications with any success, but came off worsted in every encounter, whilst Admiral Napier did not even attempt to cope with Cronstadt? There was scarcely a sailing vessel in either of these magnificent fleets, the equal of which in numbers, guns, and all the equipments and appliances of war, had never before floated upon the waves. The single ship which bore the broad pennant of Admiral Napier, the largest and most powerful war ship in the world, would be more than a match for three of the best ships in the Yankee navy. Every one recollects the impression produced upon the public mind of England by the magnificent nav
Haiti (Haiti) (search for this): article 1
the fifty ships-of-war which comprise the Yankee navy, and their fleet of old merchantmen, patched up for fighting purposes, with the grand English squadron of Napier in any one particular that gives efficiency to a ship in these times; in machinery, guns, armament and missiles, crews or gunners; and yet it came back to England without having reduced or even engaged a single Russian fortification. We must evidently look to some other cause than naval improvements for the Yankee successes at Haiti Port Royal, and that cause is to be fo the weakness of the fortifications, rather than in the strength of the ships. If Hatteras and Port Royal had been provided with proper defences against the shell and-shot of the enemy, the result would have been different, as it will be hereafter, if we do not neglect the common provisions against naval assault which have elsewhere rendered shore batteries invulnerable. We do not recollect but one single success which the combined fleets of Englan
Sebastopol (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): article 1
d floating batteries if the former are properly built, provided with bomb-proofs, and guns of equal range with the enemy, and manned by experienced gunners, who have been disciplined and practiced to the skillful performance of their duties. If the application of steam to ships of war and other naval improvements accounts for the success of the enemy in his two assaults upon inconsiderable earthworks, how is it that the great naval squadrons of England and France were unable to assail Sebastopol and other Russian seacoast fortifications with any success, but came off worsted in every encounter, whilst Admiral Napier did not even attempt to cope with Cronstadt? There was scarcely a sailing vessel in either of these magnificent fleets, the equal of which in numbers, guns, and all the equipments and appliances of war, had never before floated upon the waves. The single ship which bore the broad pennant of Admiral Napier, the largest and most powerful war ship in the world, would be
France (France) (search for this): article 1
mance of their duties. If the application of steam to ships of war and other naval improvements accounts for the success of the enemy in his two assaults upon inconsiderable earthworks, how is it that the great naval squadrons of England and France were unable to assail Sebastopol and other Russian seacoast fortifications with any success, but came off worsted in every encounter, whilst Admiral Napier did not even attempt to cope with Cronstadt? There was scarcely a sailing vessel in eitheferent, as it will be hereafter, if we do not neglect the common provisions against naval assault which have elsewhere rendered shore batteries invulnerable. We do not recollect but one single success which the combined fleets of England and France, both in the Baltic and the Black Seas, achieved during the Russian war. That was the reduction of the fortification of Kinburn by the iron-plated vessels introduced by Louis Napoleon. That experiment served to demonstrate the capacity of vessel
United States (United States) (search for this): article 1
perience of the present war, is attributed by some to the introduction of steam, and the greater perfection in the mechanical agencies both of the ship and armament, and the more powerful and destructive character of the materials of war. This is an important subject in a country so assailable by sea as our own, which has no navy, and can only rely upon its shore defences to meet the numerous fleets of an enemy who has the whole navy and the whole mercantile marine, now armed, of the all United States at his command. We confess that we have seen nothing of the experiences of this war to change our conviction of the superiority of land fortifications, when properly constructed and efficiently armed, to ships-of-war. The introduction of steam and other naval improvements has not reversed the relative strength of fortifications and vessels, though it undoubtedly requires the former, in order to maintain their old superiority, to be something more than mere earth works, without bom
Port Royal (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): article 1
be something more than mere earth works, without bomb-proof coverings, which, at Hatteras and Port Royal, were easily reduced by the vigorous shelling of the ships. The conflict at Pensacola was thet evidently look to some other cause than naval improvements for the Yankee successes at Haiti Port Royal, and that cause is to be fo the weakness of the fortifications, rather than in the strength of the ships. If Hatteras and Port Royal had been provided with proper defences against the shell and-shot of the enemy, the result would have been different, as it will be hereafter, if we do not neglill give this subject their prompt and serious attention. We have our choice of Pensacola and Port Royal in future conflicts between fortifications and ships. It is hardly worth while to construct cy may be taken, and involve in their destruction the loss of both life and prestige, let us construct them upon proper principles, and we shall have no future repetitions of Hatteras and Port Royal.
Russian River (Alaska, United States) (search for this): article 1
team to ships of war and other naval improvements accounts for the success of the enemy in his two assaults upon inconsiderable earthworks, how is it that the great naval squadrons of England and France were unable to assail Sebastopol and other Russian seacoast fortifications with any success, but came off worsted in every encounter, whilst Admiral Napier did not even attempt to cope with Cronstadt? There was scarcely a sailing vessel in either of these magnificent fleets, the equal of which e grand English squadron of Napier in any one particular that gives efficiency to a ship in these times; in machinery, guns, armament and missiles, crews or gunners; and yet it came back to England without having reduced or even engaged a single Russian fortification. We must evidently look to some other cause than naval improvements for the Yankee successes at Haiti Port Royal, and that cause is to be fo the weakness of the fortifications, rather than in the strength of the ships. If Hattera
Louis Napoleon (search for this): article 1
gainst the shell and-shot of the enemy, the result would have been different, as it will be hereafter, if we do not neglect the common provisions against naval assault which have elsewhere rendered shore batteries invulnerable. We do not recollect but one single success which the combined fleets of England and France, both in the Baltic and the Black Seas, achieved during the Russian war. That was the reduction of the fortification of Kinburn by the iron-plated vessels introduced by Louis Napoleon. That experiment served to demonstrate the capacity of vessels sheltered with that metal to resist the fire of the forts. But it is, of course, clear that fortifications sheltered in the same armor would be equally invulnerable by ships of war, and an English periodical has lately argued that this defence can be provided as readily and even more economically for fortifications than ships. We earnestly hope that our Government and engineers will give this subject their prompt and serio
h the grand English squadron of Napier in any one particular that gives efficiency to a ship in these times; in machinery, guns, armament and missiles, crews or gunners; and yet it came back to England without having reduced or even engaged a single Russian fortification. We must evidently look to some other cause than naval improvements for the Yankee successes at Haiti Port Royal, and that cause is to be fo the weakness of the fortifications, rather than in the strength of the ships. If Hatteras and Port Royal had been provided with proper defences against the shell and-shot of the enemy, the result would have been different, as it will be hereafter, if we do not neglect the common provisions against naval assault which have elsewhere rendered shore batteries invulnerable. We do not recollect but one single success which the combined fleets of England and France, both in the Baltic and the Black Seas, achieved during the Russian war. That was the reduction of the fortification
ebastopol and other Russian seacoast fortifications with any success, but came off worsted in every encounter, whilst Admiral Napier did not even attempt to cope with Cronstadt? There was scarcely a sailing vessel in either of these magnificent fleeents and appliances of war, had never before floated upon the waves. The single ship which bore the broad pennant of Admiral Napier, the largest and most powerful war ship in the world, would be more than a match for three of the best ships in the Ylects the impression produced upon the public mind of England by the magnificent naval review which took place before Admiral Napier sailed for the Baltic, and never did Old England seem more completely mistress of the seas than when that vast squadrthe Yankee navy, and their fleet of old merchantmen, patched up for fighting purposes, with the grand English squadron of Napier in any one particular that gives efficiency to a ship in these times; in machinery, guns, armament and missiles, crews or
1 2