History of the United States of America, Volume 8 (of 9) : $b During the second administration of James MadisonAdams, Henry
History
History of the United States of America, Volume 8 (of 9) : $b During the second administration of James Madison
Adams, Henry
United States -- History -- 1801-1809; United States -- History -- 1809-1817
The wind did not allow of a return to port, and the “Essex” was run
into a small bay three miles from Valparaiso, and anchored within
pistol-shot of the shore. There Hillyar had her wholly at his mercy. At
first he attacked somewhat timidly. Although Porter could bring only
three long twelve-pounders to bear, he damaged the “Phœbe’s” rigging
until Hillyar, in half an hour, hauled off to repair the injury,--or,
according to Hillyar’s account, the “Phœbe” was prevented by the
freshness of the wind from holding a position.[289] Finally the “Phœbe”
anchored, and began firing her broadsides of long eighteen-pounders
into the “Essex’s” quarter. The “Cherub” kept under way, using only
her bow guns. Reply was impossible. The crew of the “Essex” fired what
guns would bear, and got the ship under way; but the “Phœbe” kept her
distance, throwing thirteen eighteen-pound shot into the “Essex” every
five or ten minutes, until the “Essex” was cut to pieces and her decks
were shambles.
The last attack continued, according to Captain Hillyar, from 5.35 till
6.20 P. M., when the “Essex” struck. The entire battle lasted
from four o’clock until the surrender. The carnage was frightful and
useless. Porter declared that fifty-eight of his crew were killed.
Hillyar claimed one hundred and nineteen unwounded prisoners, while
Porter declared the number of unwounded prisoners to be seventy-five.
The British ships, with five hundred men, lost only fifteen killed and
wounded.
The loss of the “Essex,” like the loss of the “Chesapeake” and “Argus,”
was unnecessary. Porter need not have gone to Valparaiso, or might have
tried to run out at night, or might have fought, even after the loss
of his maintopmast, under less disadvantage. The disaster completed
the unfortunate record of the frigates for the year. They made some
sixteen prizes and busied many British cruisers, but won no victories
and suffered one bloody defeat.
The sloops told a different story. Early in 1814 three of the new
sloops-of-war were ready for sea,--the “Frolic,” the “Peacock,”
and the “Wasp.” They were heavy vessels of their class, about one
hundred and twenty feet long on the main-deck, and thirty-two feet
in extreme breadth; carrying crews of about one hundred and sixty
men, with an armament of twenty thirty-two-pound carronades and two
long eighteen-pounders. Although only one third the tonnage of the
forty-four-gun frigates, and carrying only one third the crew, the
new sloops-of-war threw nearly half the weight of metal,--for the
broadside of the “Constitution” commonly exceeded but little the
weight of seven hundred pounds, while the sloops threw three hundred
and thirty-eight. The difference was due not to the weight, but to
the range. The frigates carried thirty long twenty-four-pounders; the
sloops carried only two long eighteen-pounders. The sloops were rigged
as ships, and built with the usual solidity of war-vessels, costing
about seventy-five thousand dollars each.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account