THE CONFEDERATE NAVALHISTORICAL SOCIETY NEWSLETTER

Issue Number Eleven ~ October 1992

Navy Wins Ala-bama Bell CaseIn Higher Court

Aiother round in the legal battle'or the alleged bell of the CSSAlabama has been won by the

U.S. Navy, this time in the 3rd Cir-cuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Phil-adelphia. The August decision isthe second to go against New Jer-sey relics dealer Richard Stein-metz, who bought the bell from anantiques dealer in Hastings, Eng-land, allegedly for about $14,000.

In reaffirming the Navy's claimof ownership to this and by exten-sion all other Union and Confeder-ate naval wrecks and their artifacts,the court decision paraphrasedBritish poet John Donne: "Ourfunction is to decide law and thusdecide for whom the Alabama'sbell tolls after 128 years. It tollsfor the United States."

The 55-year-old Steinmetzfumed at the decision. "The gov-ernment has been very arbitraryand unkind, like a child that stolesomething. Somewhere down theroad there has got to be justice inAmerica. This isn't a Third Worldbanana republic," he told the Ber-gen, New Jersey Record. "TheNavy is greedy, and they figuredthey could get something for noth-ing," complained Steinmetz's law-yer, Peter Hess.

The court decision kindly ex-plained, however, that Steinmetzcould get his money back by act ofCongress if he could get the sup-port of his local congressman.

Considering our report last issuethat the bell is definitely a fake tobegin with, good luck, Dick...

Alabama and her bell are still on the bottom, despite court rulings(illustration by Louis Dodd from The Confederate Raiders, see p. 2)

FT. FISHER VARIANCEDENIED IN CAROLINA

POLITICAL SNAFU

I n a decision feared by thoselooking to protect Fort Fisherfrom destruction by beach ero-

sion, the North Carolina CoastalResources Commission in Augustdenied a variance to permit con-struction of a protective seawall re-vetment. The narrow vote of 7-6reflected not a decision to abandonthe historic fort to inevitable de-struction by the elements but a po-litical attempt to use the fort'splight to force a loosening of strictenvironmental rules preventing al-teration and development of thecoastline.

North Carolina's environmentalrules do not allow any alteration ofthe coastline except in the most ex-

traordinary circumstances, thushindering many commercial devel-opment projects that require envi-ronmental interference with thenatural evolution of the coastline.

If these rule were loosened, itwould greatly enhance prospects ofcommercial projects along theshore, and it is apparently these in-terests, as represented by the politi-cal appointees of the Commission,which have overridden what every-one has agreed is the essential andimmediate need to preserve the ir-replaceable historic monument.

Meanwhile, the waves continueto break, and one hurricane is allthat it will take to entirely eradicatethe Confederacy's largest fort.

'" ty; jcxvier; ithie; jsitks; pii; til 12;.6i;: not; ijo;:;: jp&rt; of; N

sifeieii iisi j jariptjiesr.; jtrjiiitifjji; iojf;: jfljid:; j ; i2^i;i^sid^;a^:^0r4;^ii^:i^:iicit:^;

ttieiyI jliyiiig ;Fj?pfif; tHejt ;$$ ipspi&y:; i; #sfc; iwsf tey&g; j i j £; r&tiioin^j; j jie^ j

^dfi^iiaitfOHealJyj ijaipioiiiaijt: ijssiieis; •; • :thi^iis^i;vissf-:; 3ff jtjiis; jsq^hxifcsiiiiie;;ffi tiifcir; bdrd&s; is fla:wied; • i i: • i • i • i • i&jei drbblei

: Sand; sijeici^l; iihteif^;;: fehg^ b^^ ;a; bblidy :6f thiS rrtatijoitii

e's:eJry:a<;iqii •; pf; i ;tli?i; JfpiFf; i iatieil:;;! pfJUpifjS: <?f ishiift:^^ SsesIft-iJaJCetie^;jdiii&t jltij ;iyiJV^eid[f^ :0iii^! .^iifbiijf;; •; JJije j!; 6; idieSir^ ;aiiii;li8iy;e; &^; jjiibilicj jgj: jtli^:; istiijet:; intiE^s; jfti^y; 3^aji; ;to; \; • tjiargei jsiifijej: jaiicijpay |f<Jr;it:iii;tHei:

' :istsi

y:pVtt:. . . . . . . _ _ . ...aiJij i;

[£ ;bi<ie(ij IcfcJaeiiteid; 'ujp; isq :.j*i altH}f i :- j i jal: igtiVeiiiiiii^itt ^WPy-e; jM^HeeiiiJiteify:

5? j: :^0?J?ffil3SSiG!i?^C: jO. P' • ' • - 5 : 44^Pj4?: hpl 5^5: tQ: A^: PP?"i:

: Bcsse^:^ ;st4Uifcfi; i&iiyitoiirnfctrtalijst:;:; ttaity;^ ;<3o :ttoi£ :h3jvi8: ih: iili flid; thfei ijos ijattd;: ;f06; :pf:; jscsarWiillks,;: iii? d:: other;:;: terests: oil tfw^i £oft'- or JG& Jibe- :peipp.le:

;cjf: ;f wj; y^rj^n??^: f^tH^r; iH*A ^ w?H: ^ : ' : 44^ ;! I?:D; -ftpip • Jt ??i; s^^ 'ws ;tQ;&iif"

efe:fc:fe6J:;:j

;;fiil;tti&tUt;^j ;as;>:)

richijeyeict j fefef!6i:e; jsit j St; iihcitlieif: • j • tjhilcj; ;itiisa^sei$: ;at; JxJ^i $cjti • fedcfe: ;it" *L" '^:' • ij i^iij jiji-i; i; j 'q&jey\ jiijtitij: Jije; eir; sjtte; fesifiis; Iji3 iy! j tfj

;!:; J^?Hfiy!^: r^pjerjy;; •; • ;V^ei j '&£$ t; jjt>

;:: • j Sftc^UJjd;: thj Si j p feViS j ft$piti£&£ i j | j: j • jSfj^Ct; iftit: SJtatfe jt* j irigh|tS ; jth^t i ifOlit

ress;:and:pusfting;:;:;ii0i

Review:Confederate RaidersBook Replete With

17 Color IllustrationsThe Confederate Raiders, by ThomasJ. Coughlin, assisted by Lt. SeanCoughlin, USMC, Illustrated by LouisDodd. American Merchant MarineMuseum Foundation, 1991, $65.

With all there is out about individualraiders and the recent wrap on them re-viewed earlier, you would think thereis nothing left to say. Not so. Here isa lavish picture book with seventeenbig, fold-out color illustrations of theexploits of the most famous raiders,done in a rather dark, stylized mannerthat suggests the period more thanmodern recreations generally do. Areal coffee-table piece. We have re-produced two (in black and white, sor-ry), one on the cover and one on pageseven to induce you to buy it, as it'sworth it's cover price of $65.

What makes it perhaps most worthhaving is its wonderful, quirky text,not seen anywhere else on this subject.Coughlin has a unique view of life thatis very conservative Yankee, but quiteperceptive at times. More than that, itis obviously and unashamedly personalopinion. Rather than rehash what'sbeen written before, he looks into thecorners — the participants' biogra-phies, technical details of the ships,possible motivations for action.

He rates the Alabama's chief engi-neer as being more important to theship than Semmes (as only an engineercould — what if he had been a cook?),and compliments Collins for taking theFlorida at neutral Bahia, except that"his only mistake was not sinking theFlorida on the way home to the UnitedStates." And, presumably, disposingof the witnesses. But Coughlin alsoshows little patience with the UnionNavy when it didn't do what seemedobvious to him, and in many cases heis probably correct. All in all, a verymodern view of the first supposedlymodern war before anybody had itreally together to do it the modernway. Lots of engineering details, abrusque, new, personal approach.

The Confederate Naval Historical Society -- 2 -- Newsletter Number Eleven, October 1992

National Park Service HelpsSave Mobile Bay Battle Sites

n September, the National ParkI" Service of the Department of the[^Interior announced that it had

signed cooperative agreementsfor three projects to help preservethe site of the Battle of MobileBay, Alabama. These agreementswill provide a large amount offunds for naval battlefield preser-vation. They are a welcome addi-tion to the preservation efforts ofthose interested in northern andsouthern navies in the Civil War.

The cooperative agreements arepart of the National Park Service'sAmerican Battlefield ProtectionProgram (ABPP). The ABPP is apartnership-based initiative begunby Secretary of the Interior Ma-nuel Lujan, Jr., in July 1990. Theprogram has targeted twenty-fivesites in fifteen states for immediateattention. These priority sites areboth highly significant and immi-nently threatened. Several of thepriority sites have naval compo-nents: Fort Morgan, AL; PortHudson, LA; Fort Fisher, NC; andRichmond, VA.

In 1992, the ABPP's budget in-cluded funding for technical assis-tance, earthworks rehabilitation,and archeological site stabiliza-tion. Those funds were made

This newsletter is published quarterly byThe Confederate Naval Historical Society,Inc., the non-profit corporation for the pres-ervation of the maritime history of the Con-federacy, for distribution to its Associates.All material ©copyright 1992 by The Con-federate Naval Historical Society, Inc. Backissues are $3 ppd to Associates only. Asso-ciate membership in the CNHS is availableat the following ranks: Lieutenant ($20),Captain ($50), Commodore ($1000+), andRear Admiral ($10,000+). All associates re-ceive a 15"xl8" CSN Commission for theirranks; Capt and above receive special pres-entations commensurate with their stations.All contributions are U.S. tax deductible.CNHS, 710 Ocran Road, White Stone, VA22578, U.S.A. Phone: (804) 435-0014.Editor John Townley.

available to battlefield preservationorganizations working to protectone of the twenty-five prioritysites. The cooperative agreementsfor Fiscal Year 1992 totaled almost$300,000 for groups working toprotect these sites. It is expectedthat similar assistance funding willbe available in Fiscal Year 1993.

The ABPP entered into a coop-erative agreement for $19,312 withEast Carolina University (ECU).The University's Program in Mari-time History and Underwater Ar-chaeology will conduct underwaterarchaeological work on three ship-wrecks near Fort Morgan. ECUwill undertake the project with theU.S. Navy, the Alabama HistoricalCommission, Fort Morgan StatePark, and several local historicaland archaeological organizations.

The ABPP also entered into acooperative agreement with the Al-abama Historical Commission.The agreement includes two pro-jects which total $5,500. The firstis a conference which will bringtogether preservation professionalsfrom a number of Federal, stateand local preservation agenciesand groups to discuss preservationoptions and planning for the CivilWar shipwrecks in Mobile Bay.The second is an archaeologicalsurvey using ground-penetratingradar to locate the remains oftrenches and siegeworks near FortMorgan.

Secretary Lujan has mountedthis ambitious preservation plan-ning effort to save Civil War bat-tlefields. The plan calls for coop-erative efforts between national,state and local governments andprivate preservation efforts. Con-gress responded to his initiative bypassing the Civil War Sites StudyAct of 1990. The Act mandated astudy of all sites and structures as-sociated with the Civil War whichwould be overseen by the Civil

War Sites Advisory Commissionand staffed by the National ParkService. The Commission is legis-lated for two years, with the draftstudy to be completed in early1993. The Commission staff sur-veyed more than 300 sites ofarmed conflict. The study will re-port on the integrity of sites andthreats to their preservation. It willalso recommend preservation alter-natives and solutions.

The private sector likewise re-sponded to the Secretary's Ameri-can Battlefield Preservation Pro-gram. Mr. J. Roderick Heller, aboard member of the NationalTrust for Historic Preservation, in-stigated the Civil War Trust (for-merly the American BattlefieldProtection Foundation and the Civ-il War Foundation). This not-for-profit group is trying to raise $200million to protect Civil War battle-fields. The Civil War Trust recent-ly received a guarantee of reachingat least part of its goal when Con-gress passed the Civil War Com-memorative Coin Bill. Similar tothe Statue of Liberty coin, theseCivil War coins will be minted aslegal tender and sold. The expect-ed revenue is $20 million.

Cooperative efforts have beensuccessful in saving a number ofimportant battlefield sites and offerthe most promise for such work inthe future. The funding given tothe Alabama Historical Commis-sion and the East Carolina Univer-sity emphasizes cooperative effortsbetween government agencies andpreservation organizations. Forfurther information on the Ameri-can Battlefield Protection Program,contact the National Park Serviceat American Battlefield ProtectionProgram, Interagency ResourcesDivision (413), P.O. Box 37127,Washington, D.C. 20013-7127;202-343-9549. The Civil WarSites Advisory Commission maybe contacted at the above addressor by telephone at 202-343-3936.The Civil War Trust is located at12251 Street #400, NW; Washing-ton, D.C. 20005; 202-326-8420.

The Confederate Naval Historical Society -• 3 -- Newsletter Number Eleven, October 1992

CNHS Report:

MOBILE BAY SITE SURVEYREVEALS LOOTING, NEGLECT

This is the second of threeCNHS survey reports.

By Kevin J. Fosterr~|[""lhe Battle of Mobile Bay was

one of the largest naval engage-ments of the Civil War. It was

also one of the handful of navalbattles studied among over threehundred sites considered by theCivil War Sites Advisory Commis-sion. The CNHS is proud to havebeen a partner in the study of theMobile Bay battle "field" to deter-mine what remains of the site andthe threats to its continued exis-tence.

I spent five days visiting all sur-viving Civil War sites around Mo-bile Bay with CNHS member JackFriend of Mobile. For a number ofyears Mr. Friend has dedicatedmuch of his time and efforts tostudying and preserving the rema-nents of the battle.

Mobile, in addition to being oneof the great cities of the South, wasalso the most active Confederateport on the coast of the Gulf ofMexico. Blockade runners broughtin supplies for many of the militaryand civilian needs of the Army ofTennessee and the western theater.Cotton and naval stores (turpentine,pitch, and pine tar) exported fromMobile paid for the needed sup-plies, as well as the ships to carrythem.

Blockade runners were able toenter Mobile Bay through fourchannels leading through two open-ings into the Bay. The deepestchannel was protected by Fort Mor-gan, a powerful masonry and sandfort perched on the eastern edge ofthe entrance to the Bay. Two shal-lower channels approached this en-trance parallel to the shore. The

eastern channel ran into the mainchannel just outside the Bay fromFort Morgan. The very shallowwestern channel, usable only bysmall vessels, passed in to the westside of the Bay off a second sandand masonry defensive work, FortGaines. About four miles of waterseparated Fort Gaines from FortMorgan. Pilings obstructed all butselect parts of the main and westernchannels. A minefield protected themain channel leaving only a verynarrow passage near the fort fordeep draft vessels to pass safely.

The fourth entrance to the bay

through Grant's Pass (named for alighthouse keeper - not the UnionGeneral) was protected by a smallsand and piling work called FortPowell. The fort guarded piling ob-structions and a minefield that nar-rowed the usable portion of thechannel. Grant's Pass led from Mo-bile Bay into Mississippi Sound, awaterway passing behind coastalbarrier islands and ultimately con-necting to the Mississippi River.

In addition to the fixed militarydefenses, Mobile Bay was protectedby a fleet of steam gunboats andironclads. Admiral Franklin Bucha-

RAM S TRUCK By FLAG SHIP

RUCK BY LACKAWANNA

RUCK BY MtwdN^AHFIA

,

»'** * SWASH CHANNfL

stI7tllh

1 Tecumseh2 Manhattan3 Winnebaga4 CMckasawi trookli/n6 Octorara7 Hurt/Tint. Flag Shipa Metacomet9 TUchmona

to Tart RoyalH Lackawannan semtnole11 Admirals barge Lei/all

Mommgahtlaa KennebecK Ossipieiris Onfida19 Qalena

'Battle ofMobile'BayAugust 1S64-

Ship movements during Battle of Mobile Bay.

The Confederate Naval Historical Society -- 4 - Newsletter Number Eleven, October 1992

I t

{7.5.5. Tecumseh founders on mine in a Mobile Bay attack (from an 1886 painting by J. O. Davidson)nan, the first admiral of the Con-federate States Navy, commandedthese naval forces. He had com-manded Confederate naval forcesin the Battle of Hampton Roads,aboard the CSS Virginia, where hewas wounded on the first day ofthe battle. Buchanan was chosenfor the Mobile command becauseof his experience and demonstratedknowledge of fleet tactics. Hisflagship was the new ironclad Ten-nessee. The flagship and the gun-boats Selma, Morgan and Gainespatrolled the lower Bay. Twomore ironclads, the Huntsville andthe Tuscaloosa, guarded the upperreaches of the Bay.

The commander of the Federalforces ordered to capture MobileBay was Admiral David GlasgowFarragut, the first admiral of theUnited States Navy. He was prob-ably the north's greatest naval lead-er of the war. He had led US forc-es in the passing of Forts St. Philipand Jackson on the Mississippi,which forced the capitulation ofNew Orleans: the naval actionsthat followed on the great WesternRivers system split the Confedera-

cy in two.Admiral Farragut planned a bold

fleet movement, steaming his heavi-est ships past the deadly batteries ofFort Morgan and into Mobile Bay -over the minefield known to beguarding the channel. He assem-bled his forces outside Mobile untilhe had fourteen heavy frigates andsloops and four ironclad monitors,the minimum he considered feasiblefor his plan. All light vessels andtransports were left anchored out-side the bay, until the heavy war-ships could make it safe to pass.

The heavy wooden steam vesselswere lashed together in pairs so thatif the machinery of one was dam-aged the other would carry themboth into the bay. All unnecessaryspars and gear were removed fromthe ships and all spare anchor chainwas hung over the sides of the shipsexposed to the fire of the fort.

Early on the morning of August5, 1864, the powerful Federal fleetentered the channel leading pastFort Morgan. All ships fired as rap-idly as possible to suppress the fireof the Confederate gunners. Thefour monitors steamed close to Fort

Morgan to shield the main battle-line. The lead monitor, USS Te-cumseh, hit a Confederate mine(or torpedo, as they were thencalled) and sank quickly beforethe eyes of the entire Union andConfederate fleets. A great cheerrose up from the southern forcesand the leading pair of ships in theFederal line backed their engines.Admiral Farragut prevented a routwhen he gave the now famous or-der "Damn the torpedoes, fullspeed ahead." The Union battlefleet entered the Bay to engage theConfederate fleet waiting inside.

As the Federal fleet had movedinto the Bay, one light Union gun-boat, the wooden sidewheeler Phi-lippi, observed the successful pas-sage of the main fleet into Mobilebay. Her captain was perhaps im-patient to be into the Bay and alsopossibly jealous of the glory beingearned by the officers on the largerships. Although the rest of thefleet was well out of range of FortMorgan, he ordered the little Phi-lippi to follow the path taken byher larger fleetmates. Fort Mor-gan was able to bring every gun to

The Confederate Naval Historical Society -- 5 — Newsletter Number Eleven, October 1992

bear on the hapless little craft and shewas sunk before coming closeenough to even fire back.

CSS Tennessee, and the woodengunboats CSS Morgan, Selma andGaines, met the approaching Unionfleet from behind the minefield, forc-ing Farragut to turn his lightly armedbows toward the southern broadsides.The Federal fleet advanced into theBay, undeterred by the raking fire ofthe rebel flotilla. Once clear of theheavy fire of Fort Morgan, the Unionships unlashed from one another andconcentrated on the rebel ships. CSSGaines engaged several Yankee ves-sels before receiving damage thatforced her to retreat to the protectionof Fort Morgan and run aground toprevent sinking. Selma retreated upthe Bay where she was captured.Morgan engaged in a running gun-fight with one of the swifter Federalvessels and then retreated to nearFort Morgan. She escaped up theBay that night. Tennessee was left tofight alone.

As the most powerful Confederatevessel, the Tennessee received themain attention of Farragut's fleet.The powerful ironclad used her sixBrooke rifles to good effect and wasthe center of attention for some time.When observing the loss of his othervessels, Buchanan broke off actionand moved under the protection ofFort Morgan's guns. The Federalvessels began to anchor within thebay, tending to their wounded and re-pairing damages.

After about a half hour to repairdamages, Buchanan ordered Tennes-see against the Union fleet single-handed. This attack stands highamong the glorious deeds of the Con-federate Navy although it resulted inthe loss of its most powerful vessel.Tennessee, repeatedly attempted toram Union vessels and poured can-non fire into any that came near. Af-ter her rudder chain and smoke stackwere shot away, Tennessee, beset bymost of the Union fleet, was rammedand pounded by artillery until immo-bile. The heavy 15-inch shot fromthe monitors finally began to break

through the ironclad's armor; Bu-chanan was forced to surrender tosave useless slaughter of his men.

The destruction of Admiral Bu-chanan's fleet proved the undoingof the forts as well. Amphibiousforces and heavy artillery landedon Dauphin Island, forcing the ca-pitulation of Forts Gaines andPowell. Their loss allowed allforces to be concentrated on cap-turing Fort Morgan, which wascut off from all supply when Fed-eral forces landed on the peninsu-la. Brigadier General Richard L.Page, its commander, continued tofight until the fort had been sopounded by artillery that he had"no means of defense" remaining.He surrendered August 23, 1864.

The loss of the forts and Bucha-nan's fleet did not cause the imme-diate surrender of Mobile at thehead of the bay. That would takean assault by an army force mov-ing overland. The only way to thecity by water led a tortuous paththrough several rivers protectedby obstructions, fortifications, andmine fields.

In an attempt to follow up thesuccess in the lower Bay, Farragutsent light draft vessels to theupper Bay to chart a path throughthe dangerous waters. Wheremines could be located they wereto be cleared. The attempt provedto be a failure: six more Unionvessels, including the monitorsMilwaukee and Osage were sunkby mines in the Bay and BlakelyRiver. Union forces laid siege toSpanish Fort on March 17, andtook it on April 8. Fort Blakelyfell on April 9. With the river-front forts taken, and the mine-fields cleared, the city fell to theFederals on April 12th.

Today the Battle of Mobile Bayand the battles surrounding Span-ish Fort and Fort Blakely, whichprotected the water approaches toMobile, are remembered by manyresidents of the area. Forts Mor-gan, Gaines and Blakely are stateand local historical sites and reen-

actments at each battlefield drawhuge crowds. Unfortunately, in-terest in Civil War sites extends tolooters; every land site that wevisited had been recently looted.Holes dug by looters using metaldetectors were concentrated onstate lands where such activity isprohibited. The state lands underthe water just offshore from sever-al sites have been looted by div-ers.

Four days were spent surveyingin the field in each area to allowtime for consulting with local ex-perts, visiting local libraries andhistorical societies, searching forall suspected sites, and writing upnotes. The field work was fol-lowed up by several days of mapand report preparation for presen-tation to the Commission. Herefollows a brief description of thecondition of the sites we visited:

There were no visible holes onthe lands of Fort Morgan statepark but we observed scatteredholes paralleling a line of Unionentrenchments just outside of thepark. State employees report thatartifacts probably removed fromthe fort have occasionally shownup in other places. Two artifactshows and a prominent Civil Warartifact collecting magazine havealso displayed artifacts identifiedas dug from Fort Morgan in thelast three years. Residents andstate employees reported havingattempted to stop looting by diversin waters just off the fort.

We observed several weatheredholes in park areas around FortGaines as well as several outsidethe park boundaries. Residentsand park employees report seeingdivers hunting for artifacts just offshore on underwater state lands.

Fort Powell — This sand andlog fort built atop pilings is visibletoday only during extremely lowtides when some remains of thepilings are visible. Residents re-ported that recent extensive sal-vage efforts had recovered hugeamounts of material from the area

The Confederate Naval Historical Society -- 6 -- Newsletter Number Eleven, October 1992

of the fort. Objects recovered in-cluded artifacts as large as heavyartillery pieces. So many were re-covered by the looters that they re-portedly offered one heavy artil-lery tube to a local historical siteas a gift.

USS Tecumseh — The Tecum-seh wreck site has long been thetarget of legitimate and illegiti-mate salvage attempts. TheSmithsonian Institution undertookan excavation in the 1960s thatwas cut short by a disagreementwith the salvage contractor. Own-ership was uncertain for a timeleading to jurisdictional disputesbetween the navy, the state and theSmithsonian. On one occasionconfusion over jurisdiction be-tween the state and the CoastGuard led to a refusal to stop div-ers from visiting the site withoutauthorization. This may havebeen the cause of the openings re-ported in the hull by a recent pri-vate diving expedition.

USSPhilippi — The exact lo-cation of Philippi is unknown tomost local divers and the site hasthus been protected from lootingby any unscrupulous individualsamong them.

CSS Gaines — The wreck ofthe Gaines lies just offshore fromFort Morgan. We heard that div-ers had visited the site withoutpermission but were not known tohave recovered any artifacts.

The battlefields and shipwrecksmentioned above are all protectedfrom looting by the Archaeologi-cal Resources Protection Act(ARPA). ARPA is particularlynoteworthy because it includesprovision for the confiscation ofvehicles and equipment used inthe commission of the crime. Thisconfiscation provision has led togovernment seizure of a numberof pickup trucks and four-wheel-drive vehicles as well as at leastone dive boat.

Kevin Foster is Director of theDepartment of Interior's NationalMaritime Initiative and foundingvice-president ofCNHS.

Letters:Shenandoah Cannon Ball In Doubt, MoreStuff And Where It Is, Ukranian Inquiry...

CSS Shenandoah attacking the Northern Pacific whaling fleet, fromThe Confederate Raiders, see review on page 2

Our mention of the "alleged"(we have to say now) can-non ball from the CSS She-

nandoah brought in several lettersto CNHS and the Confederate Re-search Center decrying the arti-fact's probable legitimacy. Theyare too lengthy to print here, butthey center on the existence of an acannon on Churchill Island, West-ernport Bay, to the Southeast ofMelbourne. It was a six-poundersaid to have been presented to aCouncilor Samuel Amess in 1865in thanks for his assistance to theship's crew. It was claimed thathe was mayor of Melbourne at thetime and that he later boughtChurchill Island and moved thecannon there. The American CivilWar Round Table of Australia re-searched the claims and foundmany discrepancies, among them:

1. Amess was not Mayor ofMelbourne until well after theWar. Others gave more prominenthelp and did not receive gifts.

2. Because the press covered theship's visit heavily and because ofthe neutrality laws, it would havebeen unlikely to give or acceptsuch a gift of munitions.

3. The ship was never armedwith a six-pounder, nor did shecapture any. She was short onguns and would not likely havegiven one away under any condi-tion.

4. The gun in question was aniron smoothbore of an unusual cal-iber, similar to a six-pounder, notconforming to any known Europe-an or American pattern or mark-ings, and its carriage is homemade,not like any know military design.

5. There is no documentary evi-dence in the family concerning theorigin of the gun.

As the gun had been somethingof a tourist attraction, a govern-ment scholar was set to the task ofproving its legitimacy, but his evi-dence turned out to be less thanconvincing to other local histori-

The Confederate Naval Historical Society -- 7 -- Newsletter Number Eleven, October 1992

ans. Apparently quite a number ofsupposed pieces of wood from theship, cannonballs, and other arti-facts have turned up and beensold, given away, and otherwisedisseminated with no documenta-tion whatsoever, so it is entirelypossible that the cannonball inquestion is one of these. It was agift of Tony Dunlap to the Con-federate Research Center, whichhas written to the donor for moredetailed information but as of themoment has not gotten any.

More when it materializes...

From John S. Sims, of the Ander-sonville Guild, Andersonville,Georgia:

You requested informationabout "Where The Stuff Is." Atthe Andersonville Welcome Cen-ter Museum, we have as one of

our relics on display the strokerfrom the gun-running schoonerScottish Chief which lies in theocean near Tampa, Florida. Ourmuseum focuses primarily onWirz and Camp Sumter, but this isone of our miscellaneous relics, asis a Britten shot for three-inch can-non (made in England) salvagedfrom the blockade runnerGeorgianna.

Dear CNHS,For the last two years I have at-

tempted to find data about asteamer, named Mazeppa, built inCincinnati during the Civil War.It was burned and sunk by Con-federate troops of General Forrestnear Ft. Henry on its maiden voy-age. I believe it is near the Ft. Do-naldson National Park area.

Being of Ukranian origin, Ihope to publish the findings about

this ship, which I believe was namedfor the famous 18th century Ukrani-an Hetman Ivan Mazeppa. He wasdefeated with Charles XII of Swedenby Peter the Great of Russia at theBattle of Poltavia in 1709. As a re-sult many poems, symphonies, etc.were written about him in the 1810-1860 period.

Any details about its building,construction, officers, sketches, andthe like would be greatly appreciat-ed.

- Lt. Col. Stephen P. Hallick, Jr.POB 5351Norman, OK 73070

Keep that "Where The Stuff Is" stuffcoming in! In coming issues we willhave some notes on John TaylorWood artifacts in Nova Scotia and apicture of Alabama surgeon Llewel-lyn's memorial chapel in England,and more...

THE CONFEDERATE NAVAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY, INC.710 Ocran Road, White Stone, Virginia, U.S.A. 22578 BULK RATE

U.S. POSTAGE PAIDWHITE STONE, VA

PERMIT No. 6