The Navy of the American Revolution : $b Its administration, its policy, and its achievementsPaullin, Charles Oscar
History
The Navy of the American Revolution : $b Its administration, its policy, and its achievements
Paullin, Charles Oscar
United States -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783 -- Naval operations; United States. Navy -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783
In June, 1781, Morris wrote to the President of Congress recommending
the appointment of a captain for the 74-gun ship “America,” and
explaining how money for completing her might be obtained. He says
that he is aware that John Jay has liberty to sell this ship at
the Court of Madrid; that he thinks and hopes that Jay will not
succeed, for the sale of the “America” would be injurious to the
United States; and that it would be “more consistent with Oeconomy
and with the dignity of Congress to have her finished than to let
her Perish.” On the receipt of this letter, Congress authorized
Morris to take measures for launching the “America” and fitting her
for sea.[274] Morris now hinted to the Board of Admiralty that the
frigate “Trumbull” could perform an essential public service if put
under his direction, and pursuing his plan, he obtained a resolution
of Congress giving him control of this vessel.[275] During the summer
of 1781, while the reorganization of the Naval Department was in
suspense, Morris, on his own initiative, directed the fitting out
of the “Alliance” and “Deane,” and ordered them to proceed to sea,
“being convinced that while they lay in port, an useless Expence must
necessarily be incurred.”[276]
Meanwhile, a movement to place the Naval Department under the control
of Morris had been set on foot in Congress. On June 26 Meriwether
Smith of Virginia reported a series of resolutions providing for the
reorganization of the Naval Department, a work which he considered
necessary because the present naval system was “inefficient and
expensive.”[277] The most important of these resolutions was one
which dissolved the offices of the Board of Admiralty, the navy
boards, and the naval agents; and another, which empowered the
Superintendant of Finance to appoint some discreet agent to manage
the navy under the order and inspection of the said superintendant,
until a Secretary of Marine should be appointed, or until the
further pleasure of Congress. On the day of their introduction these
resolutions were referred to a committee, consisting of Meriwether
Smith of Virginia, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, and Daniel of St.
Thomas Jenifer, of Maryland. On July 2, having made a slight change
in the phraseology of the resolutions, this committee reported them
to Congress;[278] and on July 6 it again reported them, having
now added a few additional resolutions. One of the latter was to
the effect that the election of a Secretary of Marine should be
postponed until the first Monday in November. On the putting of
this resolution, it passed in the negative. The states divided
sectionally; the four New England states and Delaware voted in the
negative; Pennsylvania and the five Southern states, except South
Carolina which was divided, voted in the affirmative; delegates from
New York and New Jersey were not present in Congress. The vote seems
to indicate the defeat of those who were in favor of placing the navy
under the control of Morris.
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