WELCOME
TO THE HUNLEY NEWSLETTER
This is the final newsletter for the year
2006. I started writing and publishing
newsletters January 1st, 2002, starting with two
subscribers, me being one of them - we jumped to over
100,000 newsletters being e-mailed out a year and read
online by another estimated 500,000 visitors and as
much as 1000 people a day from all over the world. It was an
incredible amount of fun for my staff of one.
The
emails alone went from the hilarious to absurd. Many
with praise along with a spattering of disgust and hate. I was
diligent in answering as many as possible and apologize for
many I probably missed.
In the eleven years that I have
managed and maintained
www.thehunley.com.
the website and the newsletters, I have been threatened with
lawsuits by greedy over zealous attorneys who's clients
considered the Hunley their personal toy, receiving
apologies from those responsible and even a high point
honor, after being blacked out of press releases, from
President George Bush's staff assuring me that activity
would stop. The President is an avid reader and fan of
the Hunley Newsletters- Thanks GWB.
Subscriptions started waning and slowly declining after the
burial of the crew including donations. With the increase in
spammers and scammers, the over abundance of junk mail and
the expenses involved in sending out the newsletter, I've
decided to go to a quarterly newsletter depending on the
number of subscribers and donators and of course any
breaking news. I am hoping that the Hunley's
counterpart, the USS Alligator, is soon discovered
which will increase the interest in this period of Naval
History. I will continue to aid and support this
effort as much as possible
One of the primary highlights of this
newsletter is solving the mysteries surrounding
the Hunley and the discussion of facts as they are released.
The Confederate
States Submarine sank during its final battle with the USS
Housatonic in Charleston Harbor February 17, 1864 . that
lasted less than thirty minutes. I have reported on the
numerous claims by individuals professing to have seen the
'Hunley' years after she sank that fateful day.
A true
Civil Battle arose in 1970 after the discovery of the sunken
submarine by the infamous Dr E. Lee Spence. A civil war of
sorts continues thirty seven years later in a not so civil
court involving politicians, pirates and claim jumpers and
an outcome that may never surface in truth and fairness and
may remain as the endless mystery much like the true cause
of the sinking of the CSS H L Hunley. GWP
Back to the
Table of Contents
Many Thanks to Andrew English for sending this article in
just under the Gun
Machinery
of Every Description
Three years ago, I was researching facets of
commercial life in Civil War Mobile and happened upon
a wartime advertisement for a foundry in Alabama's
port city. Flickering on the projector screen, the
microfilm image revealed one and then another
advertisement from the firm where the Hunley had been
constructed. The company known as the "Southern Iron
Works" listed Lyons, Park and another partner,
Keyland, as the proprietors. The ads proclaimed that
the foundry would manufacture "Machinery of every
description" and "Any Description of Heavy
Blacksmithing." In bold type, was a marketing pitch
announcing that the firm had erected a splendid steam
trip hammer, a crucial component needed by any machine
manufacturer eager for government contracts from
Richmond. These advertisements were listed in the
June 1864 edition of Lloyd's Railroad Guide.
A review of the 1861 Mobile City Directory reveals no
reference to Thomas Park but does list Thomas Lyons as
a laborer. The 1866 Mobile City Directory lists Park
as a tinner and continues to list Thomas Lyons as a
laborer. At this time, William Keyland resided on
Conception Street.
The Lyons and Keyland Foundry was listed in the 1866 Mobile City
Directory and located at the corner of
State and Water Street. Upon the surrender of the Confederacy, the
iron works (referred to as "Park,
Lyons & Co." machine shop) were taken over by the Union Army. (see;
The War of the Rebellion: A compilation of the official records of
the Union and Confederate Armies, Series 1 Volume 49 (Part II) page
421 Government Printing Office, Washington D. C.(1897)
The archives of the Naval Historical Foundation, in Washington D. C,
lists a photograph of the Mobile works that had once been Lyons and
Park's shop. This 1950s era photo shows the building occupied by
Gill Welding and Boiler Works, of 250 Water Street.
|
EDITOR'S NOTE: This is where the Confederate
submarine H.L. Hunley was constructed in
1863. Located at the corner of Water and State
Streets, in Mobile, this old building housed the
Gill Welding and Boiler Works when photographed in
late 1950's. The Building was demolished after 1960.
U.S. Naval
Historical Center Photograph.
NEWSLETTER 39 |
|
 |
In September 1863, the submarine was raised following
a tragic accidental sinking in Charleston harbor.
Commanded by Horace Hunley, the refurbished
submersible was manned by another volunteer crew.
Five of the complement were foreign born employees of
the Lyons and Park Foundry. According to the Mobile
City Directory of 1861, two of those men, Charles
McHugh and Joseph Patterson (Richard Bak, The C.S.S
Hunley, Cooper Square Press, New York, 2003, page
86--97), were then residing in Mobile. The Mobile
County Census of 1860 lists Charles McHugh, who was 58
years old and born in Ireland, as a carpenter and
Joseph Patterson, a 37 year old man from Scotland, as
a painter.
A review of Mobile census records and city directories
have disclosed that McHugh and Patterson were part of
a trend. They, along with Lieutenant Charles Hasker
and Lieutenant William A. Alexander (Bak, The C.S.S
Hunley, 2003, page 43, 82.), were British immigrants,
proving that the Hunley was built and crewed by some
of Britannia's best.
By Andrew R. English
Hunley may
reveal secrets in year's time
By BRUCE SMITH, Associated Press Writer
Tue Nov 21, 8:14 PM ET
NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. -
In a year's time, scientists hope to
solve the mystery of why the Confederate submarine H.L.
Hunley sank, the chairman of the South Carolina Hunley
Commission said Tuesday.
"Between the science of archaeology
and the science of conservation in that laboratory, they
will solve the ultimate mystery," state Sen. Glenn
McConnell said after a commission meeting. "I think it's
reasonable to say we're probably within a year of
solving that."
The hand-cranked Hunley sank the
Union blockade ship Housatonic in 1864, becoming the
first submarine in history to sink an enemy warship.
The vessel has been slow revealing its secrets.
There are generally two theories why
it sank shortly after sending the Housatonic to the
bottom. One is that it was damaged and took on water
after the attack. The other is that the crew suffocated
when they ran out of air.
Scientists are removing the sediment
that hardened on the inside of the sub. Next spring,
they will begin removing the hardened sediment from the
hull.
"The exterior will be the real key
to the thing," said Randy Burbage, a commission member.
"You will be able to tell if another ship rammed it,
which is a possibility, or if any other event may have
happened."
McConnell said that includes the
possibility the Hunley's hull may have been damaged by
rifle fire or debris from the explosion on the
Housatonic.
Removing the sediment from the
inside will reveal the positions of valves used to run
the pumps which will provide a clue whether the sub was
taking on water, McConnell said.
THE CHRISTMAS WATCH -
Another artifact will soon be displayed at the Hunley lab
Another
artifact will soon be displayed at the Hunley lab — a
watch once owned by Queenie Bennett, the sweetheart of
the sub's commander, Lt. George Dixon.
The watch, as ornate as one owned by
Dixon and which was found on the sub four years ago, is
inscribed with the words "Queenie Bennett Dec. 25,
1862."
Photo by George W. Penington
A press conference was held March 7, 2003 at the Warren
Lasch Laboratory where the Confederate Submarine H L
Hunley is being studied. Sub Commander Lt. George E.
Dixon’s watch, recovered earlier this year, was being
presented and opened for the first time.
Photo by George W. Penington
Photo by George W. Penington
"It's not known whether the Bennett watch was
a Christmas gift from Dixon but we think that it was the
last Christmas he spent with her,"
Clemson University's plans to build a campus
in North Charleston Delayed
Last week the state Budget and
Control Board put off approval of Clemson University's
plans to build a campus in North Charleston focusing on
environmental science, materials technology and urban
redevelopment.
As part of the project, Clemson
would assume the conservation of the Hunley.
McConnell said Tuesday conservation
will continue with or without Clemson. Income from
donations, tours, merchandise sales, grants and other
sources "will allow us to go to the finish line" with
restoration work, he said.
Figures released by The Friends of
the Hunley, which has been raising money for the
conservation, show that as of Nov. 5, $1.1 million has
been raised this year for the work. That compares with
$1.2 million for all of last year.
Last year, the Hunley received
$205,000 in government funds. This year that figure was
almost $93,000.
General fundraising this year was
$529,000, compared to $426,000 last year. The Hunley
also gets revenue from tours of the sub and the sale of
Hunley merchandise.
Hunley is 'unstable' but
conservators have a plan
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER
10, 2006 7:23 AM
BY BRIAN HICKS The Post and Courier
The corrosive salt and underwater currents of the Atlantic Ocean
inflicted more damage on the H.L. Hunley than the Yankees ever could
have hoped to.
According to the Hunley Conservation Plan recently approved by the
Navy, the 143-year-old Civil War submarine is unstable, its
cast-iron hatches,
bow and stern dangerously fragile. Its wrought-iron hull was forged
from "poor quality" materials, a confirmation of how perilously
short on
resources the South was by 1863 - even secret weapons got short
shrift.
Today, the Hunley's bow is damaged and might not even be the same
shape it was when the sub sank the USS Housatonic in February of
1864.
The 171-page conservation document, which conservators call a
"textbook" to restoring the Hunley, paints a dire portrait of the
first successful combat submarine's current condition. But it also
offers what scientists call a conservative plan to restore it to
museum quality, while Hunley and Clemson officials continue tests on
a new method they hope could
speed their timeline.
Paul Mardikian, senior conservator on the Hunley project and an
author of the document, says the plan, which calls for soaking the
submarine in a chemical bath for three to five years, is not
supposition but science. They aren't guessing what the coming work
will do for the sub, they know.
"It's very unstable, but it's not fragile," Mardikian said. "It can
handle scientists working in it. She's been very kind to us, we've
never
had any problem with it. But cast iron is my big fear."
The plans call for the submarine to be restored and ready for
display by
the end of 2013, a deadline the scientists say they set themselves
without any input from politicians. What good is a museum, Mardikian
says, if there is nothing to put in it?
Until then, the submarine will undergo a lengthy series of work:
--First, engineers must do a hull analysis to determine whether the
submarine, partially on its side in a hammock for six years, can
stand
up on its own keel, which will make work easier.
After that analysis, conservators will remove both ballast tank
pumps,
which the report says are made of iron, rubber, copper and other
materials. Such a collection would not hold up well under the
alkaline
solution that will leech the salt out of the Hunley's hull.
--Next year, scientists will remove all the concretion - hardened
sand,
shell and mud - that currently protects the iron. That will afford
them
a view of the Hunley's skin.
Recently, Hunley experts have concluded that strong underwater
currents
whipping around the sub could have caused one or more of the three
holes
in the sub's hull. Two of the holes lie along a line on the hull
that
has been sanded smooth, eroding away some of the porthole rings and
conning tower hinges.
Even the sub's bow, originally considered to have been molded like
an
icebreaker, could just be the ocean's sculpting work.
"There is evidence of scouring that leads us to believe the sub has
been
sanded by the currents," said Sen. Glenn McConnell, chairman of the
Hunley Commission. "If you look at the sub from the bow, it seems
that
one side is slightly thicker than the other."
Because of the sub's condition, and other historical considerations,
the
report makes it clear scientists will not take the submarine apart
to
conserve it.
"If we start disassembling it, we lose the craftsmanship of the
work,"
McConnell said. "They used the best materials they had to work with
at
the time, but when you look at the construction, you can tell they
did
it well. That has to be preserved."
The conservation plan says "disassembly of an iron hull or artifact
held
together with thousands of rivets, highly graphitized case iron
elements, and fused components raises ethical and technical issues."
Keeping the submarine in one piece narrowed the choices for
conservation. Some traditional methods for preserving one iron
actually
can harm the other.
The conservation plan outlines several methods tested on rivets from
the
hull plates removed to gain access to the sub's interior. Mardikian
said
using actual metal from the sub was the best way to test various
methods.
The report spends much time detailing Hunley and Clemson scientists'
experiments with "sub critical water" as an alternative conservation
method, and the Navy approved plans to continue tests.
Mardikian calls the alkaline solution bath ultimately the safest,
and
least expensive, method of conserving the Hunley. The sub will
remain on
public view during the treatment and need little more than a daily
check
from scientists as chemicals are recycled through the tank.
The state is poised to decide on a plan for Clemson University to
take
over conservation of the submarine in exchange for its laboratory,
which
would later become the center of a materials science research
campus.
McConnell said with or without the deal, the Hunley Commission will
be
able to finish conservation on the scientists' schedule.
Reach Brian Hicks at 937-5561 or
bhicks@postandcouri er.com
<mailto:bhicks@postandcourier.com> .
This article was printed via the web on 11/11/2006 9:51:30 AM . This
article
appeared in The Post and Courier and updated online at
Charleston.net on
Friday, November 10, 2006.
EBAY PICTURE CAUSES MAJOR STIR
----- Original Message -----
From:
MICHELE ELLISON
Sent: Friday,
October 20, 2006 12:20 PM
Subject: George
Dixon
Dear Sir, Could you tell me where the picture of George
Dixon that is on your website came from and has it been
identified as him. Are there any other pictures of George
Dixon that have been identified? I have a tintype of a
Confederate Naval Sailor that I believe to be George Dixon.
Thank you for your time, Greg Ellison
|
There appears to be
quite a stir about this picture, It was listed on Ebay
twice ....the second one ended with this notation
" The seller ended this listing early
because the item is no longer available for sale."
The seller contacted me but I didn't have time to respond
before his impatience took control and he listed the picture
on Ebay with a $2,500.00
"Buy It Now"
instead of
pursuing further documentation. I tend to agree with the
following comment. Had the picture been submitted to
Dr. Doug Owsley, the Smithsonian Institution and put through
their forensic analysis, compared to the Dixon facial reconstructions,
and genealogical research then the picture could be certified
real and have a true value. GWP
"One of the best I have seen as far as composition,
clarity and depth. Just think, if this actually was a photo
of "He who we do not speak of" what it would have sold
for!!! $35-50K the sky is the limit I think!
MLC "
The following was the first listing that also ended early. I
have no opinion about the authenticity of this picture, but it
would be very interesting if it was George E. (middle name
unknown) Dixon.
NOTICE: If you are a bidder
and receive unsolicited emails about this item please
contact me so I can file a interference report. Please check
my 100% feedback for references.When I first purchased this tintype I thought it was very
unique in itself. I noticed that it had a name faintly
scratched in the back, G. Dixon, which meant nothing to me.
I began doing searches for different version of the name and
came across Lt. George E. Dixon. Lt. Dixon was the Captain
of the H.L. Hunley Confederate Submarine that sank the
Housatonic off the coast of South Carolina in 1864. Dixon
and his crew died that night when the sub sank before
returning to shore. Dixon's one time girlfriend Queenie
Bennett had given him a gold coin that saved his life at
Gettysburg when it stop a bullet. The coin was found when
the sub was raised and excavated. It was engraved "My Life
Preserver" with the date. Dixon was known to be a wealthy
man who loved jewelry and had a jeweled pocket watch that
was also found on the sub. He also had given a locket to
Queenie that was made of gold and had jewels on the outside
of it. In the locket was a photo that is believed to be
Dixon.
I have shown it below with an enhanced version of it
that was aged he would look more mature next to it. There is
also a younger photo thought to be him that was in Queenie
Bennett's photo album. After comparing these photos to my
tintype I have come to the conclusion that this is indeed
George E. Dixon. His uniform is a Confederate Engineers
uniform as they carried two strips on the sleeves.
I believe
this tintype was taken in 1863 while he was an Engineer
before he became the Captain of the sub. I contacted a Civil
War uniform specialist and he said that it was impossible to
tell Union from Confederate Navy uniforms as they were
almost identical and varied in different areas.
The fouled
anchor badge that he is wearing was adopted by the
Confederate Navy instead of the eagle and anchor surmounted
by a five pointed star that was used by the U.S. Navy.
The
researchers at the Hunley created a clay bust from the skull
of Lt. Dixon which is the last picture that I have posted. I
believe that the resemblance is astounding. The similarities
between the known photos with the clay bust and my tintype
are the light colored hair, scared dimpled chin, ear shape
and the large Adam's Apple that is easily seen in the locket
photo and the clay bust. You can also see that in my tintype
Lt. Dixon is wearing a ring on his pinky finger that has
at least three stones in it. Queenie Bennett later married
and moved to Mississippi. This tintype was originally
purchased in Mississippi. The tintype is in very good
condition.
I have included several
pictures for you to view of the photo for sale in this
auction. I have also included pictures of known images
of these persons that are in the public domain for you to
view. These are at the bottom of the picture column and
are NOT part of this auction. This item may be viewed
personally at my bank safe deposit box in Springfield,
Missouri.
ABOUT ME; I have
identified several historical photographs that had been lost
to history over the years such as ambrotypes of the James
and Younger Gangs, a daguerreotype of great American artist
Albert Bierstadt and Josiah Farrington author of Civil War
Letters. I spend hours upon hours doing research on all the
photos that I sell to make sure that I am giving an honest
assessment as to that photo. I recently sold a photo that I
recovered of Sarah Bush Lincoln that was verified by the
buyer who's Lincoln collection has hung in the Lincoln
Memorial in Washington D. C. If
you do not believe as I do, that this is who I have
identified it as being, please do not bid.
Not part of this listing,
pictures or text, may be used without the sellers written
permission. The identity of the bidder is hidden at the
request of a prospective buyer. On Nov-10-06 at 18:03:06 PST, seller
added the following information:
;
NOTICE: If you Google HUNLEY
KENTUCKY COLONEL you can read a very interesting story about
the gold and diamond pinky ring that was found on Dixon in
the Hunley. Also Google HUNLEY USN BUTTON and you can see
the Goodyear USN buttons that were found on the sub. These
were often used on the Confederate Uniforms as supplies were
scarce. There is also a picture of the ring on page five of
that site.
Back to the Table of Contents
ALL issues are dedicated to the brave and
honorable Men of the Hunley and to the Subscribers and
Contributors to each issue, particularly to the CSS H L
HUNLEY CLUB and The Post and Courier, and The State Paper,
and lots of individuals. |
Tours of the Hunley
are available 10 a.m.-5 p.m. Saturdays and noon-5
p.m. Sundays. Tours are not available on weekdays so
that the archaeologists can continue their
preservation work.
Tickets are $12 plus a service
charge and can be purchased by either calling
1-877-448-6539 or on the Internet at
www.etix.com. Children under 5 are free. Tickets
can be purchased in advance, and walk-up tickets are
also available on a first-come, first-served basis.
Copyright © 1997-2006 by The HUNLEY.COM. All rights reserved.
You are Free to use anything you want just let us know.
Individual copyrights are included separately and reserved
Comments and questions may be directed to webmaster:
mistergwp thanks
|
PHOTO COMPARISONS OF DIXON
|
|
|
| A)
Facial
reconstruction of George E.
Dixon, whose likeness was
previously unknown.
|
B)Head shot
from picture offered on Ebay.
Could this be a younger Dixon?
|
|
 |
 |
|
C) Enhanced
George E. Dixon,
the man in the photo inside Queenie's pocket
watch |
D)
First picture
thought to be George E. Dixon,
it has never been proven otherwise. |
Regarding
photo D Archaeologist believe the photo was post-war: the man's tie, the lapels on his coat, his
boots - even the furniture and the draperies in the room
- all indicate the tintype photograph was taken after
1870 - six years after the Hunley sank - and perhaps
even as late as 1890 Sally Necessary in Virginia, owns
the original print.
The
mystery comes from a single picture,
thought to be of Lt. George Dixon.
the photo shows a man in his mid
20s, and was found tucked behind
another picture in Queenie Bennett's
photo album. Bennett was the woman
who gave Dixon the famous gold coin
which saved his life at the Battle
of Shiloh.
|
Queenie Bennett's descendants
believed this photo is of Lt. Dixon
because it matches his
description.
 
Enhanced Believed to be Dixon at one time |
Some
say that the lapels of the jacket in
the picture, and the design of the
cravat, or tie, suggest a later
period than in the mid 1860s. One
historian has suggested the tie was
fashionable in England at the time,
and perhaps Lt. Dixon was a little
ahead of his time...12/20/02
|
QUEEN
BENNETT POCKET WATCH
ABOVE PHOTO PROVIDED BY GEORGE
BENNETT WALKER
|
Queen Bennett's great-grandchildren
can't identify the man in the photo inside her pocket
watch, but are convinced he's not a member of the
family. Hunley scientists will attempt to overlay the
face on an image of Dixon's skull to see if this could
be the Hunley commander.
|
Enhanced by GWP
|
Watch's connection to Hunley commander
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006
10:18:31
AM
Subject:
[CSS H L
HUNLEY]
Watch's
connection
to
Hunley
commander
still
unclear
By BRIAN
HICKS
Sunday,
November
26, 2006
CHARLESTON,
S.C. -
Gold,
bejeweled
and
ornately
inscribed,
the old
pocket
watch
just
plain
looks
like
something
George
Dixon
would
have
bought.
But
did he?
The
watch
may have
been a
Christmas
present
from the
Hunley
captain
to Queen
Bennett
_ the
girl,
legend
has it,
was
Dixon's
Mobile,
Ala.,
sweetheart.
Now, her
descendants
are
donating
the
family
heirloom,
and the
mystery
of its
provenance,
to the
Hunley's
eventual
museum.
The
watch,
along
with a
pistol
that
once
belonged
to
Bennett's
father,
will
soon be
on the
Hunley
lab
tour.
But
don't
expect
the
mystery
of the
watch to
be
solved
anytime
soon.
After
all, it
has been
more
than a
century
in the
making.
George
Dixon
was a
riverboat
man,
perhaps
from the
Midwest,
who
found
himself
in
Mobile
in the
early
days of
the
Civil
War.
There he
most
likely
met
Robert
Bennett,
a
steamboat
pilot
who
worked
the same
rivers
and
perhaps
the same
ships.
Bennett
may have
even
introduced
Dixon
to his
eldest
daughter,
a
teenager
everyone
called
Queenie.
Mobile
historians
say the
two were
involved
in
serious
courtship
by
October
1861,
when
Dixon
joined
the 21st
Alabama
and
marched
off to
war with
a gold
$20
piece in
his
pocket.
The
coin,
according
to
legend,
was a
gift
from
Queenie.
Months
later,
in April
of 1862,
Dixon
was shot
in the
leg as
his
company
stormed
the
battlefield
at
Shiloh.
But the
coin
deflected
the
bullet
and
probably
saved
his
life.
Dixon
returned
to
Mobile
to
convalesce.
It was
there
that he
began
work on
Horace
Hunley's
submarine
project
and
spent
the
Christmas
1862.
Within a
year, he
would be
in
Charleston,
in
command
of the
Hunley.
But
what of
the
watch?
Did he
buy it,
give it
to
Queenie?
George
Bennett
Walker
Jr. and
Sally
Necessary,
Bennett's
great-grandchildren,
say the
watch
had been
in the
family
for
years.
Family
lore
claimed
it was
Queenie's,
but they
had no
proof.
Then
a few
years
ago,
they
discovered
a door
in the
back of
the
watch
that
opened
and,
inside
it, this
inscription:
Queen
Bennett,
December
25th,
1862. As
if it
were a
Christmas
present.
"I
thought,
'Oh my
gosh.
She and
Dixon
were
very
close.
He
probably
gave her
that
watch,'
" Walker
told The
(Charleston)
Post and
Courier
at the
time.
The
family
says the
watch is
too
ornate
to have
been a
present
from
Queenie's
father.
The
inscription
suggests
it was a
gift,
and the
lettering
is
similar
to the
engraving
on
Dixon's
lucky
$20 gold
coin,
which
reads
"My life
Preserver"
along
with his
name.
The
fancy
watch
also
seems to
match
the
taste of
Dixon,
who
apparently
liked
very
fine
things.
When he
was
found
aboard
the
Hunley,
he was
carrying
a nice
pocket
watch
and
several
pieces
of
jewelry.
The
question
is, did
he have
Bennett's
watch
inscribed
when he
got the
coin
inscribed?
Or did
he even
give her
the
watch?
"It's
a key
part of
the
story _
a watch
that
Dixon
could
have
possibly
given
her on
the last
Christmas
they
were
together,"
said
Randy
Burbage,
a member
of the
Hunley
Commission.
"It just
looks
like
him."
The
family
donated
the
watch to
make
sure it
will be
preserved
and
protected.
Now,
alongside
the
Hunley,
it will
carry
its own
mystery.
Information
from:
The Post
and
Courier,
http://www.charlest
on.net
Another
Eyewitness
claims
to have
seen the
Hunley
"I am
one of
the few
persons,
if not
the only
one now
living,
who saw
that
epoch
making
craft."
"I was present at the raising of the Housatonic
wreck...summer
of 1872"
FIRST SUBMARINE TO SINK SHIP
THE
WASHINGTON
POST
SUNDAY,
AUGUST
29, 1915
PLAN OF FIRST UNDERSEA BOAT TO DESTROY WARSHIP
A
HAND-PROPELLED
"DAVID"
HYDROPLANES
SHOWN AT
X
IT WAS LOST IN ACT OF TORPEDOING THE U.S.S.
HOUSATONIC
ON
BLOCKADE
DUTY OFF
CHARLESTON
(NEW YORK WORLD)
On the night of February 17,1864
the United States steamship -of-war Housatonic, on blockade duty off Charleston,
SC. was sunk by the first submarine successfully used in offensive effort. I am
one of the few persons, if not the only one now living, who saw that epoch
making craft.The
submarine boat was designed by Horace L. Hundley and built under his supervision
at Mobile, in 1863, by a man named McClintock. While much has been written
about it in a general way, the most detailed and apparently accurate
description, printed originally in the Houston (Texas) Telegraph, was recently
discovered in an old scrapbook.
"She was built of boiler iron
and impervious to water or air," says the writer. "Her extreme length was
about 30 feet, with a five or six foot beam, and about six feet depth of hold.
In general contour she resembled a cigar, sharp at both ends. She was
propelled by a screw, the shaft of which ran horizontally along her hold, almost
from stem to stern, and was turned by the manual force of eight men seated along
it on either side.
"The only hatchway was
circular, about two feet in diameter, with a low combing around it, which was
placed well forward, and when desired could be closed by an iron cap working on
hinges and made airtight. In the forward part of the cap was inserted a
clear glass bull's eye, through which the pilot could see. She was
provided with watertight compartments , by filling or emptying which she could
sink or rise, and to enable her to rise instantly her ballasting of railroad
bars was placed o n her bottom, outside of the hull, and, by means of keys
accessible to her crew, could be detached in a moment so that she could rise
quickly to the surface. Besides her rudder, which was of the usual form,
she was equipped with side paddles or fins which like those of a fish, served to
guide her up or down with reference to the surface of the water .
"To prepare for action, a
floating torpedo was secured to her stern by a 1line more than 100 feet long,
and, her crew embarked, the water tanks were filled till the boat was in
equilibrium and almost submerged. The hatchway was closed, the men
revolved the shaft; the Captain or the pilot, standing under the hatch,
steered the boat, regulating at the same time, by the action of the fins, the
depth at which she would move.
"She could remain submerged for
half an hour or an hour without any great inconvenience to the crew, and on one
occasion had been known to remain under water two hours without actual injury to
them. although no means were provided for procuring fresh air, and from the
moment the hatch was closed the men, thus fastened in their living tomb, inhaled
and exhaled continually the atmosphere enclosed with them.
"The plan of attack proposed by
the inventor was to dive beneath an enemy's ship, hauling the torpedo after her.
Its triggers would thus press against the ship's bottom, explode the torpedo and
inevitably sink the ship.
"Not anticipating an early
opportunity of using the dangerous vessel against the fleet of Farragut, General
Maury sent her by rail to General Beauregard, at Charleston. believing the
waters of that harbor better suited to her peculiar construction.
Beauregard changed the position of the torpedo by fastening it to the bow.
Its front was terminated by a sharp and barbed lance, so that when the boat was
driven against a ship's side the lance would be thrust deep into the hull below
the water line and thus fasten the torpedo firmly. Then the boat could
back off and explode it from a distance.
"General Beauregard's call for
volunteers to man this dangerous craft was promptly answered by Lieutenant
Payne, a Virginian and eight sailors. The evening set for the expedition
the torpedo boat was lying alongside the steamer, from which the crew had
embarked. She was submerged till the combing of her hatch alone was
visible above the water. Her commander, Payne. was standing in the
hatchway in the act of ordering her to be cast off, when the swell of a passing
steamer rolled her over and sunk her instantly, with her eight men, in several
fathoms of water. Lieutenant Payne sprang out of the hatchway as the boat
sank from under him, and he alone was left alive.
"In the course of a few days
she was raised and again made ready for action. Again Payne volunteered
and eight men with him.
"The embarkation for their
second attempt was made from Ft. Sumter, and, as before, all having been made
ready, Payne, standing at his post in the hatchway, ordered the hawser to be
cast off, when the boat careened and sank instantly. Payne sprang out, two of
the men following him; the other six went down in the boat and
perished.
"Again the boat was raised and
made ready for action, and her owner, Captain Hundley, took her for an
experimental trip into Stono River, where, after going through her usual
evolution, she dived in deep water. For days the return of Hundley and her
crew was watched for in vain. After a week's search she was found inclining at
an angle of 40 degrees, her nozzle driven deep into the soft mud of the bottom.
Hundley was standing, dead, at his post, a candle in one hand, the other stiff,
in a vain effort to unclamp the hatch. Lieutenant George E. Dixon, of the
twenty-first Alabama Volunteers, finally essayed, with eight men, to take her
against the Housatonic."
The fate of the warship was
plain, but the fate of the submarine remained a mystery until the wreck of the
former was raised, more than eight years later, in the summer of 1872.
Then she was found hanging to the rudder chains of the hulk. It was made
plain, therefore, that she had not carried the torpedo in front, as Beauregard
suggested, but had towed it astern, as Hundley originally devised. She had
actually passed under the Housatonic and was making her way aft to safety when
her upper works caught in the rudder chains of the victim.
By invitation of the
contractor, a man named Maillefert, who had done Government work in Hell Gate, I
was present at the raising of the Housatonic wreck, and saw the submarine in the
position above described. The torpedo exploded under the mainmast of the
ship and blew a great hole in her hull.
ARE WE
REALLY WITHIN A YEAR OF SOLVING THE HUNLEY SINKING MYSTERY?
"Sharing
some trivia!"
Sir,
Thanks' to Michael's heads-up back in September on Mark
Ragan's new book about the Hunley, I pre-ordered it and
received it the other day. The Hunley is an engaging story,
and like previous works by Ragan, he tells it well.
For the
serious researcher as well as anyone only casually
interested in the Hunley, I feel this is the book to have.
However, if you have a previous edition and are not a
die-hard Hunley enthusiast, then earlier editions probably
will meet your needs.
I didn't find much earth-shaking new
material in this most recent book, but Ragan did clean up a
lot of inconsistencies or inaccuracies in earlier works.
For
example, he no longer mentions calcium lights in connection
with the signal supposedly given by the Hunley. And he
refers to the spar-mounted torpedo as being 135 lbs (see
pages 171 & 201), not 90 lbs as in previous books.
As I read
the book, a few thoughts resurfaced that I had when I first
read the 1999 edition of The Hunley: Submarines,
Sacrifice, and Success in the Civil War. As there doesn't
seem to be much else new to discuss these days, thought I'd
share some of these bits of trivia with you.
"At about 7:00, well over an hour after the sun disappeared
over the winter horizon, ...the submarine glided away from
the crowded dock..." (page 196). I've never questioned that
time, 7pm, because it seems so logical for Dixon to leave
the dock no sooner than sunset, consistent with the tide
schedule. And this departure time seems consistent with an
arrival at the Housatonic a few hours later, as reported in
the Court of Inquiry records. Also, Ragan quotes Corporal
Daniel McLaurin, a spectator to the Hunley's departure, as
saying years later, "about sundown the crew went aboard (the
submarine) and put out to sea..." (p. 206). But that got me
thinking, just when was official sunset on the night of 17
Feb 1864? I went back to the U.S. Naval Observatory,
Astronomical Applications Department website (http://aa.usno. navy.mil/ data/docs/ RS_OneDay. html) for the answer. The U.S. Navy says sunset that day in
Charleston was 6:07pm (6:06pm in Mount Pleasant) and "end
civil
twilight" was 6:32pm.
 The website defines "civil
twilight" in
part as "the limit at which twilight is sufficient, under
good weather conditions, for terrestrial objects to be
clearly distinguished. " (The website also says, as we
already know, that the phase of the moon that night was
"waxing gibbous with 79% of the Moon's visible disk
illuminated" ).
Harry Pecorelli wrote an interesting article
entitled "The Equalization of Time" in The Blue Light
newsletter, Vol. 9, Aug 2003, p. 8 (click on "September 2003
Newsletter" on the FOTH website) that sheds further light on
the subject. In the article he says that during the Civil
War, U.S. Navy vessel's chronometers were calibrated to the
"Mean Solar Time" of Washington, D.C. while Charleston's
clocks would show a difference of 26 minutes earlier. In
short, I can live with Ragan's statement that the Hunley
left the dock about 7pm -- close enough.
Three officers were in the Hunley. Ragan, on pages 259 and
260, questions the command structure of the Hunley crew and
suggests that while underway, the first officer might have
sat behind the captain, and thus perhaps there were three
officers on board. He bases that suggestion in part on the
fact that on the Hunley crew captained by Lt Payne, Lt
Hasker sat behind Lt Payne (both were Navy officers), and
says this arrangement suggests that Lt Hasker was the first
officer.
Ragan also says that on 21 Aug 1863, Horace Hunley
requisitioned "nine gray jackets, three to be trimmed with
gold braid" (pp. 59, 259). He offers this as further proof
that the crew consisted of three officers. Probably the
Confederate uniforms were intended to firmly establish all
the crew member's identities as official combatants if
captured. I think that at some point late in 1863, very
possibly there were at least three officers (or civilian
equivalents) assigned to the Hunley project. But
that doesn't suggest to me that the procedure was for three
officers to be in the boat at the same time on every outing,
or that if three officers were on board at the same time,
the first officer sat behind the captain.
As an aside, no
doubt Dixon wore a waist-length shell jacket as part of his
"war suit" while on the boat. But as a man of some financial
means, I'll bet he also had a well-tailored frock coat for
more formal or ceremonial military occasions and for the
balls or social life in Charleston. Colonel Lawrence M. Keitt, mentioned by Ragan as the commander of Sullivan's
Island on 17 Feb 1864 (p. 210), had one of the best looking
Confederate officer frock coats I have ever seen. This
Charleston-made coat is now in the Museum of the Confederacy
in Richmond.
Dixon had a support boat he used when necessary to tow the
Hunley back to Breach Inlet. Ragan says "this support boat
may have been used to retrieve the submarine on those
mornings when Dixon was unable to reach Breach Inlet and had
been forced to run aground somewhere along Sullivan's Island
or Long Island (now Isle of Palms)" (p. 174). I can't
disagree with Ragan's suggested use of the boat, but I have
an additional suggestion for its use. Alexander mention's
that after the Hunley was reassigned to Breach Inlet from
Mount Pleasant, that the entire crew remained quartered at
Mount Pleasant (p. 162).
Alexander goes on to say that the
daily routine between January 14 and 20 was for the crew to
hike up the beach seven miles from Mount Pleasant (or at
least from Sullivan's Island adjacent to The Cove) to
Battery Marshall (p.163). Looking at the backwaters behind
Sullivan's Island depicted on the period map on page 193,
and other period maps, I find it hard to believe
that once the crew acquired a support boat, they would not
have used it routinely to travel back and forth from Mount
Pleasant to Breach Inlet.
If the 40-foot Hunley could
navigate these waters on its reassignment from Mount
Pleasant to Breach Inlet (p. 157), then surely a support
boat could too. Perhaps darkness prohibited such use of this
boat but I wouldn't think so. However, Ragan says that
"sometime during the final days of January or early days of
February Dixon was able to secure quarters at Battery
Marshall and move his crew from Mount Pleasant to Sullivan's
Island" (pp. 162, 178). Ragan's reference source is
"Lieutenant Dixon's Last Letter" written 5 Feb 1864 (pp.
180,181), the day Alexander left for Mobile (p. 182).
I see
nothing in this "last letter" to suggest Dixon and his crew
"secured quarters at Battery Marshall." Dixon in this letter
says "I have been here over three months, have worked very
hard, in fact I am working all the time. My headquarters
are on Sullivan's Island...." But headquarters is a very
different thing than "living quarters." As late as 31 Jan
1864, Dixon wrote his only other letter from the Charleston
area known to survive to this day, and that letter is
addressed from Mount Pleasant (p. 332). In this letter Dixon
says he has "very good quarters in sight of all the Yankee
and Confederate batteries... "
Of course none of this has anything to do with probably the
foremost question concerning the Hunley. That question is,
how did the Hunley meet its end? I noticed in a recent
posting on the board that the Hunley Commission thinks the
"Hunley may reveal secrets in a year's time" (23 Nov 06).
Specifically, Senator McConnell said, "between the science
of archaeology and the science of conservation in that
laboratory, they will solve the ultimate mystery. I think
it's reasonable to say we're probably within a year of
solving that."
There they go again, getting my hopes up by
suggesting that at last the secret will be revealed. But if
they do definitively solve the mystery, in a way it's gonna
be kinda sad. I've thoroughly enjoyed the speculation and
the challenge of trying to find and put the pieces of the
puzzle together, realizing all the while that some of the
pieces are probably lost forever. And I'll miss the
interaction with other group members, whose knowledge
of the Hunley far exceeds mine. But my worst fear is that
the official Hunley team will come out with an inconclusive
theory, or range of theories, and, except for final
conservation work and display of the Hunley, move on to
other projects. In that case, I think I'll stick around.
Kim Johnson
E-MAIL SELECTIONS
"Does anyone know George E. Dixon's middle name?"
e-mail response to the question
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 3:29 PM
Subject: I know something better
I do not know his middle name, but
did you know he had at least one
boy? Also did you know that he was a
direct decent from the Dixon side
of the Mason-Dixon line? I know this
because I am his direct decent. I
am his great, great, great, great
granddaughter and I am a Direct
decent of Both sides of
the Mason-Dixon Line. My Great great
grandma was a Mason on my dad's side
and she married my great, great
grandfather was a Dixon.
From: ira shaffer [mailto:irashaffer@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October
04, 2006 7:59 AM
Subject: CSS HUNLEY
replica
Do you have any idea what the full scale working
replica of the Hunley cost - an
estimate would be most helpful...
Thank you. Best, Ira Shaffer
"Friends of the USS Alligator"
----- Original Message ----- -----
Original Message -----
From: "Francis DuCoin"
fjducoin@bellsouth.net
To: <george@thehunley.com>
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006
9:37 AM
Subject: The Ericsson Devil
Raft
George,
I am doing a presentation on
the Ericsson anti-torpedo raft
for the Battle of the Ironclads
weekend next March at the
Mariners' Museum. I
will be sharing the time with
Mike Kochan.
I have photos taken of the
Ericsson raft that ended up in
Bermuda and have seen the photos
you have posted of the one in
Bass Creek. Is there
anyone who could take me out to
see and photograph the Bass
Creek raft in person?
It's not too difficult for me to
get to Charleston on a weekend,
but I imagine we'd have to plan
the trip so it would coincide
with low tide.
Thanks for your help. This
website is as fantastic as
always.
Francis DuCoin
Sent: Monday, October 23,
2006 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: The Ericsson
Devil Raft
Hello Francis...yes I can make
arrangements to take you out
there..just about anytime...or you
are welcome to use the pictures that
I have..You can
give me a call at 843
Aerial View of the
"Devil" and the "Swamp Angel"
|
|
$2,500.00
(
) 
