The history of our Navy from its origin to the present day, 1775-1897, vol. 3 (of 4)Spears, John Randolph
History
The history of our Navy from its origin to the present day, 1775-1897, vol. 3 (of 4)
Spears, John Randolph
United States. Navy -- History; United States. Navy -- History -- Spanish-American War, 1898
Another tale of the battle says that after the British captains were in
the _Constitution’s_ cabin a midshipman came in to ask Captain Stewart
if the men could have their evening grog. As the time for serving it
had passed before the battle began, Captain Stewart asked if they had
not had it already, and the midshipman replied, to the astonishment of
the Englishmen:
“No, sir. It was mixed ready for serving just before the battle began,
but the older sailors of the crew said they didn’t want any ‘Dutch
courage’ on board and capsized the grog-tub in the lee scuppers.”
Later still the two Englishmen, according to Gilder, got into a heated
dispute, each blaming the other for making manœuvres that lost the
battle, but Stewart stopped the quarrel. He said:
“Gentlemen, there is no use in getting warm about it; it would have
been all the same whatever you might have done. If you doubt that, I
will put you all on board again and you can try it over.”
As to the relative force, Allen says that the _Cyane_ was of a class
known as “donkey frigates,” and that she carried twenty-two short
thirty-twos on the main deck and eight short eighteens and two nines
on quarter-deck and forecastle. Lieutenant Hoffman, who took charge
of her, says she had two more short eighteens. This is no doubt the
truth of the matter. It is agreed that the _Levant_ carried eighteen
short thirty-twos, two long nines, and a short twelve that could be
worked on either side. The two together carried a crew of three hundred
and twenty, of whom thirty-nine were boys, according to Allen. The
combined crews could fire a broadside of seven hundred and fifty-four
pounds to the _Constitution’s_ six hundred and forty-four pounds net
weight. Without mentioning the _Constitution’s_ number of men, which
was at most four hundred and fifty-six, we can concede what Allen
claims, the “immense superiority” of the Yankee. For not only were the
long twenty-fours of the _Constitution_ far and away better than the
short thirty-twos of the British ships, just as the long guns of the
_Phœbe_ and _Cherub_ were superior to the short guns of the _Essex_
at Valparaiso: the crew of the _Constitution_ had been trained very
much better than any ordinary British crew. More important still, the
force of the _Constitution_ was concentrated in a single ship under
the command of one able man. The force of the British was divided
between two ships and could not be so well handled. When the British
Court of Inquiry at Halifax “applauded” the British officers “for the
gallant defence each had made,” it did something which an American
writer finds pleasure in placing before American readers. But when,
as Allen relates, “the Court also expressed to the remaining crew of
the _Cyane_, in the strongest terms, the sense entertained of their
determined loyalty in resisting the temptations held out by the enemy
to draw them from their allegiance, which they retained also under
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