Dahlgren

CONTRIBUTIONS TO NAVAL HISTORY NO. 8

The Autobiography of

Rear Admiral

John A. Dahlgren

EDITED BY PETER C. LUEBKE
The Autobiography of

EDITED BY PETER C. LUEBKE

Rear Admiral

John A. Dahlgren
ii | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Published by 

Naval History and Heritage Command

805 Kidder Breese Street SE

Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5060

Book Design by Eleni Giannakopoulos

U.S. GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL EDITION NOTICE

Use of ISBN

This is an official U.S. Government edition of this publication and 

is herein identified to certify its authenticity. This title’s print edition is 

cataloged under ISBN 978-1-943604-18-0. A Section 508–compliant 

PDF is cataloged under ISBN 978-1-943604-19-7. The title’s e-book 

edition is catalogued under ISBN 978-1-943604-48-7.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in Publication Data

Dahlgren, John A.

The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren: Edited by Peter C. Luebke

Dahlgren. – U.S. Government official edition.

Pages cm. – (The U.S. Navy and the Civil War)

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-1-943604-18-0 (Softcover alk.paper) — ISBN 978-1-943604-19-7 (508-compliant pdf)

— ISBN 978-1-943604-48-7 (E-book)

For Sale by Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: Bookstore.gpo.gov; Phone: toll free 1-866-512-1800; DC area 202-512-1800; 

Fax: 201-512-2104

Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-001
Naval History and Heritage Command 

Department of the Navy

Washington, DC

2018

CONTRIBUTIONS TO NAVAL HISTORY NO. 8

The Autobiography of

EDITED BY PETER C. LUEBKE

Rear Admiral

John A. Dahlgren
iv | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren
Contents | v

CONTENTS

Foreword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

The Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiv

Editorial Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv

Short Title List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvi

Chapter 1: Early Years, 1809–1846 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Chapter 2: Ordnance Development to the Civil War, 

 1847–1860 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Chapter 3: Outbreak and Early Years of the Civil War, 

 1861–62 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Chapter 4: Promotion, Command of the South Atlantic Blockading

 Squadron, and the Siege of Charleston, 1863 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Chapter 5: Siege of Charleston, 1864 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

Chapter 6: The Capture of Charleston and the End of the

War, 1865 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Chapter 7: After the War, 1866 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

Appendix 1: Letter of William T. Sherman to 

 John A. Dahlgren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

Appendix 2: Description of Defenses of Charleston Harbor . . . . . . . 149

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
vi | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

FOREWORD

In the first years of the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln would occasionally get on his horse, ride over to the Washington Navy Yard and pass time with 

then–Captain John Dahlgren. Dahlgren would test-fire his latest developments 

in naval ordnance down the Anacostia River, which fascinated Lincoln. This pastime required some degree of courage on Lincoln’s part, given the disaster that 

occurred on the Potomac River aboard USS Princeton in 1844, when a new “long 

gun” exploded during a demonstration firing killing the Secretary of the Navy, 

Secretary of State, and several others, while President John Tyler was aboard. In 

this case, however, Lincoln had reason for confidence that Dahlgren knew what 

he was doing because he had been at the forefront of naval ordnance advances for 

more than a decade. Lincoln and Dahlgren shared an unlikely friendship, given 

their very different personalities. Dahlgren was not above using their friendship 

to his advantage. Lincoln upset standard protocol, intervening directly to get 

Dahlgren promoted to rear admiral and what Dahlgren coveted the most—a 

major sea-going command with the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron.

The period between the end of the Mexican War and the start of the Civil 

War was a low point for the U.S. Navy in terms of budgets, with few operational 

ships, many of which were undermanned with challenges finding enough qualified Sailors. It was, however, an era of profound technological changes in warfare 

at sea, which would be greatly accelerated by the Civil War. Chief among these 

was the beginning of a shift from sail to steam, the creation of armored warships 

(ironclads), and the invention of exploding shells for cannon. Although the Navy 

struggled to afford to put the new technologies to sea, Dahlgren in particular 

led the way in developing much of the technology, particularly in the realm of 

cannons, ammunition, and other naval ordnance.

Dahlgren began his naval career as a scientist. He concentrated on technological advances in Europe and how they might be brought to the U.S. Navy. 

This study led to the creation of a new boat howitzer for Navy use, new ideas 

about ship armament and design, and the invention of the ingenious Dahlgren 

gun, which became the Navy’s chief ordnance during the Civil War.

Dahlgren’s scientific activities began with his work on the U.S. Coast Survey 

and its effort to map the coastline of the country. Because of this and his study 

of ordnance, he was invited to join scientific societies, beginning his cultivation 

of a much wider range of business, press, academic, and political leaders. The 

resulting influence did not, however, lead initially to command at sea.

At the outbreak of the Civil War, as commandant of the Washington Navy 
Foreword | vii

Yard, Dahlgren quickly moved on his own initiative to improve the defenses of 

the river approaches to the capital city. He acted energetically to organize defensive details to protect the yard and its military stores from Confederate threat, at 

a time when many did not completely grasp the threat, because of the pervasive 

over-confidence that the war would be short.

Not surprisingly, most of Dahlgren’s autobiography concentrates on the Civil 

War period. He writes extensively about his own exploits and those of his sons. One 

of his sons, Ulric, served in the Union Army with distinction and was killed during 

a controversial cavalry raid on Richmond in 1864. Another of his sons, Charles, 

served with the Navy on the Mississippi River in operations against Vicksburg, 

where he gained experience putting his father’s inventions to practical use. In his 

autobiography, Dahlgren also takes time to recognize the heroism of Union officers 

and men during the war. For example, he mentions the valor of Commander James 

Ward, the first Union naval officer killed in the war, in action against Confederate 

batteries, as well as the bravery of Sailors during battles in and around Charleston 

Harbor.

As commander of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron, Dahlgren’s 

inability to bring about the fall of Charleston from the sea led a number of contemporary critics to suggest that his abilities as a technical officer significantly 

exceeded his abilities as a combat commander. Some of this was due to jealousy 

as to how he came to be in command of the squadron, but some was justified. Dahlgren also faced numerous obstacles, as the Confederates energetically 

adopted technologies such as mines, torpedo boats, and a submarine. Friction 

with U.S. Army commanders, which was not unique to Dahlgren, didn’t help 

either. Despite these challenges, the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron gradually cut the Confederacy off from foreign supplies. Charleston fell in 1865 with 

the approach of General William T. Sherman’s force, but Dahlgren and the Navy 

had contributed greatly to this victory.

Dahlgren’s legacy in the Navy was profound and lasting, primarily for his role 

in designing and developing the weapons and ammunition that enabled the Union 

Navy to emerge victorious at sea and on the inland waterways during the Civil 

War. Because of this, when the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren was established during World War I in 1918, and which to this day designs and tests most 

of the Navy’s shipboard weapons, it was named in honor of John A. Dahlgren.

RADM Samuel J. Cox, USN (Retired)

Director of Naval History

Curator of the Navy

Director, Naval History and Heritage Command
viii | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

INTRODUCTION

Among the naval heroes of the Civil War, Rear Admiral John Adolphus Bernard 

Dahlgren remains largely unknown. Part of this rests upon his sometimes difficult 

personality and self-promotion that aggravated his fellow officers; the other part 

of this lies upon his failure to take the Confederate city of Charleston by naval 

force. Dahlgren’s solid service during the siege of Charleston and in command 

of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron did much to assure Union victory 

during the war, but it contained no stirring episodes that became legendary, such 

as those of David Glasgow Farragut at the Battle of Mobile Bay. Yet Dahlgren, 

and his autobiography, remains important today.

This book presents a transcription of an autobiography that Dahlgren wrote 

shortly after the Civil War. In it, he gives an account of his entire career. He 

describes the multiple innovations he introduced into the U.S. Navy. His career 

coincided with the important transition from sail to steam propulsion and the 

change from solid shot to cannon that fired explosive shells. Dahlgren’s service 

demonstrates that naval officers have always confronted technological challenges 

and have attempted to overcome them, often against significant bureaucratic 

barriers from both within and without the Navy. During the Civil War, he also 

faced the shift in naval warfare from wooden-hulled ships to ironclad vessels. 

He assumed command at Charleston in 1863 after the ironclad squadron under 

Rear Admiral Samuel Francis Du Pont failed to live up to the impossible expectation that ironclads alone could capture the city. Indeed, Dahlgren grappled 

with how best to use the new technology in operations with the Army against 

an unparalleled concentration of Confederate fortifications. Beyond learning 

how to employ the new vessels, he confronted new kinds of asymmetric warfare 

used by the Confederate defenders. Dahlgren and the Navy dealt with underwater mines, known at the time as torpedoes, the first successful military submarine, and semi-submerged torpedo boats. Finally, he wrote frequently of his 

often-bitter relations with Major General Quincy A. Gillmore, who commanded 

the Union Army during much of the Charleston campaign. The difficulty of 

achieving cooperation between two forces without a unified command authority 

provided a negative example for joint operations.

In addition to his own experiences, Dahlgren wrote of the heroism, courage, 

and dedication of those under his command or those he knew. He discusses the 

early operations of Commodore James Ward, who lost his life in 1861 engaged 

against Confederate shore batteries. He also describes the heroism of his officers 

and men during the operations around Charleston, from those on his staff to the 
Introduction | ix

extraordinary actions of his Sailors.

Before the Civil War, Dahlgren stood out as one of the foremost innovators in the Navy. Born in Philadelphia on 13 November 1809, he began his 

career in the Navy as midshipman in 1826. After a cruise aboard Macedonian, he 

embarked upon a long period of fruitful devotion to science. He advocated for 

the use of steam power, served on the United States Coast Survey, designed new 

kinds of ordnance, and subsequently gained prominence within the Navy.1

The outbreak of the Civil War found Dahlgren in the Bureau of Ordnance 

at the Washington Navy Yard. With the resignation of Navy officers who went 

South, he soon found himself in charge of the Navy Yard and energetically 

embarked in securing it against secessionists. By virtue of his long service in 

Washington, DC, Dahlgren also cultivated relationships with politicians. Over 

the first few years of the war, he became close friends with President Abraham 

Lincoln. Because of this, Dahlgren was promoted to the head of the Ordnance 

Bureau, received promotion to rear admiral, and obtained a major sea command 

during the war.2

His rise sparked animosity with his fellow officers and politicians. They 

viewed him as a self-promoter who had capitalized upon his friendship with 

Lincoln. Gideon Welles, the Secretary of the Navy, confided in his diary of Dahlgren, that “He desires, beyond almost any one, the high honors of his profession, 

and has his appetite stimulated by the partiality of the President.”3

 Dahlgren had 

spent most of his career on shore, and thus ran afoul of those who had devoted 

their careers to long, hard service at sea. Welles wrote in 1863, when considering Dahlgren for command at Charleston, “older officers who have had vastly 

greater sea-service would feel aggrieved at his selection and find ready sympathizers among the juniors.”4

 These complaints centered on Dahlgren’s personality, 

rather than his courage. A senator from Iowa averred, “I have no affection for the 

man and not much respect. He is a courtier; he is doubtless brave; but he is, in 

my conviction, the most conceited man in the Navy.”5

 Despite the complaints 

1 Robert J. Schneller Jr., A Quest for Glory: A Biography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1996), 1–175.

2 Ibid., 176–247.

3 William E. Gienapp and Erica L. Gienapp, eds., The Civil War Diary of Gideon Welles, Lincoln’s 

Secretary of the Navy: The Original Manuscript Edition (Urbana: The Knox College Lincoln 

Studies Center and the University of Illinois Press, 2014), 140.

4 Ibid., 196–97.

5 James Grimes Wilson to Samuel Francis Du Pont, 1 July 1863, in Samuel Francis Du Pont, 

Samuel Francis Du Pont: A Selection from His Civil War Letters: Vol. 3, The Repulse: 1863-1865, 
x | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

from fellow officers and the skepticism of Welles, after much pleading, Dahlgren 

received command of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron in 1863. 

On 6 July 1863, Dahlgren took command of the South Atlantic Blockading 

Squadron, relieving Rear Admiral Samuel Francis Du Pont. Du Pont had led a 

failed attack on Charleston on 7 April 1863; it had been “supposed to showcase 

the strength of the monitors” and both “Welles and Lincoln were under political 

pressure for a victory. Feeling that the public needed to be satisfied, these two 

men pushed” for the attack.6

 As a result, Du Pont was ousted and Dahlgren 

replaced him.

With this appointment, Dahlgren received what he had always wanted, a sea 

command where he could gain greater glory for himself and the Navy. Charleston 

and the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron, though, proved a poor vehicle for 

realizing this ambition. As with Du Pont before him, Dahlgren was thwarted 

by the strong Confederate defenses, poor coordination with the Union Army, 

and conflicting imperatives from Washington. During the early months of his 

command, he enjoyed some success; his monitors damaged Fort Sumter and the 

Union took control of Morris Island on 7 September. After that, however, progress faltered because of the still-robust Confederate defenses. Dahlgren and his 

squadron turned their attention to the coastal blockade.7

With the failure to take Charleston, acrimony erupted between Dahlgren 

and the Union Army commander, Major General Quincy Gillmore. Accounts 

began appearing in newspapers that questioned Dahlgren’s leadership, which 

Dahlgren suspected originated from Gillmore’s headquarters. While Gillmore 

denied that he had the sympathetic articles published, they had indeed emanated 

from those around him. This affair poisoned relations between the two leaders and doomed Army-Navy cooperation at Charleston. The city fell only when 

Major General William T. Sherman’s march through the Carolinas rendered it 

indefensible from the land.8

After the war, Dahlgren wrote multiple accounts in an attempt to set the 

record straight. He most likely wrote this autobiography in 1866 at the behest of 

ed. John D. Hayes (Ithaca, NY: Published for the Eleutherian Mills Historical Library by 

Cornell University Press, 1969), 191.

6 Robert M. Browning Jr., Success Is All that Was Expected: The South Atlantic Blockading Squadron 

during the Civil War (Washington, DC: Brassey’s, 2002), 210.

7 Ibid., 215–359; Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 251–320.

8 Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 269–73.
Introduction | xi

Joel T. Headley.9 Headley, who had written earlier histories of George Washington, Napoleon Bonaparte, Ulysses S. Grant, and William T. Sherman, turned his 

attention to Union naval leaders. He desired to “bring out into distinct relief the 

important actions of our navy” as well as “to give a personal history of the brave 

officers who covered themselves and the nation with honor.” In preparing the 

book, Headley noted that “in almost every case, the facts and personal details in 

the biographical sketches have been furnished either by the commanders themselves, or their friends, with their approval.”10 His chapter on Dahlgren quotes 

from this autobiographical manuscript and at times lifts entire sentences without 

attribution. In addition, several other idiosyncrasies establish that Headley based 

his sketch of Dahlgren on this manuscript. Most prominently, Headley renders 

the name of the monitor Catskill as “Katskill,” just as Dahlgren did.

Exactly how or when Dahlgren met Headley remains unknown, but the two 

travelled in the same social circles. Dahlgren knew New York publishers such as 

David Van Nostrand.11 In addition, his activities in various scientific associations 

put him in contact with other scientists, historians, and writers. Either through 

one of these associates, or directly, Headley solicited biographical details from 

Dahlgren. The manuscript here represented Dahlgren’s response. It also stands 

as the longest sustained personal description of his life by himself, and as such is 

important in establishing what he thought was important about his career. 

In crafting his autobiographical sketch, Dahlgren relied not only on his own 

recollections, but also on contemporary primary source materials. Like modern 

historians, he used supporting sources to buttress his points. He enjoyed authority to comment on the events because he had been an eyewitness, but he also 

cited extensively from others’ accounts and contemporary records to corroborate 

his points.12 This corroboration remained central, because Dahlgren sought to 

counter Gillmore’s allegations that the Navy had been responsible for the Union 

9 In the Dahlgren manuscript, there is a pencil notation that reads “Oct 12 1866.” This might 

indicate when Dahlgren finished the manuscript or when Headley received it.

10 J[oel] T[aylor] Headley, Farragut and Our Naval Commanders (New York: E. B. Treat & Co., 

1867), vii, ix.

11 Van Nostrand published some of Dahlgren’s other writings. When Dahlgren and Andrew H. 

Foote met to discuss the replacement of Samuel Francis Du Pont at Charleston, they met at 

Van Nostrand’s house. Spencer C. Tucker, Andrew Foote: Civil War Admiral on Western Waters

(Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2000), 202.

12 For more on eyewitness authority and the practice of history in the 19th century, see: Ann Fabian, 

The Unvarnished Truth: Personal Narratives in Nineteenth-Century America (Berkeley: University of 

California Press, 2000); and Eileen Ka-May Cheng, The Plain and Noble Garb of Truth: Nationalism

and Impartiality in American Historical Writing, 1784–1860 (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2008).
xii | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

failure to take Charleston. Dahlgren sought to move the debate from one of conflicting personalities to one where careful consideration of evidence would reveal 

Gillmore was lying. 

In addition to his refutation of Gillmore, Dahlgren focuses on several other 

themes. He notes his friendship with Lincoln and movingly discusses their relationship. He also carefully notes the heroic performance of subordinates and 

other naval officers. Although at times his manuscript demonstrates the conceit 

that others identified in him, it also shows that he sought to give others their due. 

Besides commenting on the actions of naval officers, Dahlgren wrote with pride 

of the accomplishments of his son Ulric who served first as a volunteer aide and 

then received an officer’s commission in the Army and became an accomplished 

cavalryman. He died in early 1864 while leading a raid on Richmond, one that 

became controversial as orders were discovered on Ulric’s body that called for the 

assassination of Confederate President Jefferson Davis. Dahlgren describes these 

events in his autobiography and displays obvious pride that his children also 

served the Union during the war. 

This autobiography represents but one piece of Dahlgren’s postwar efforts to 

burnish his reputation and dispel falsehoods. He wrote at length to other authors, 

often drawing upon the same materials he used in his autobiography. Although 

he died before he completed them, he worked on a memoir of his son Ulric’s life 

as well as his own autobiography.13

Dahlgren corresponded extensively with historian John William Draper. 

Draper, who had written one volume of a multi-volume history of the Civil War, 

asked Dahlgren for an account of the siege of Charleston. Dahlgren responded 

with enthusiasm. Draper promised to “give this paper, as also any other you may 

send, all my attention writing that part of my volume to which they refer.”14

Dahlgren subsequently kept up a steady stream of material to Draper and also 

pointed him to published accounts. In these efforts, as in this autobiography, he 

sought to present his own point of view with as much impartiality as possible. As 

he told Draper, “It is very gratifying to know that what I have written has been 

13 [John A.] Dahlgren, Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1872) and 

Madeleine Vinton Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, Rear Admiral United States Navy

(Boston: James R. Osgood, 1882).

14 Quotation from John William Draper to John A. Dahlgren, 7 October 1868, John A. Dahlgren Papers, Library of Congress. See also: John William Draper to John A. Dahlgren, 14 

September 1868, John A. Dahlgren Papers, Library of Congress; John A. Dahlgren to John 

William Draper, 17 September 1868, Draper Family Papers, Library of Congress; and John 

William Draper to John A. Dahlgren, 22 September 1868, John A. Dahlgren Papers, Library of 

Congress. 
Introduction | xiii

so well considered in its Historic aspect—It has been my endeavor to follow fact, 

and I hope to a proper conclusion—I feel sure that time will confirm all I have 

written.”15 Ultimately, Dahlgren sent Draper an account of Charleston of several 

hundred pages, as well as shorter documents. Undoubtedly overwhelmed by this 

effusion, Draper pledged to include what he could but observed that “the limited 

space obliges me to condense very much, but I still hope to be able to present 

those facts sufficiently.”16

When Draper’s book appeared, Dahlgren was pleased with the results. He 

thanked the author for “the space you have allowed to the operations that concern myself . . . which will dispel much of the unjust impressions that have 

persisted in regard to the Naval operations off Charleston.” He wrote that “I 

congratulate you on the completion of this great work in the true spirit of the 

‘Philosophy of History,’” which was a reference to the historical method based on 

the comparison of source materials to establish the truth that Draper had used in 

his previous books.17

In another instance, Dahlgren engaged in an exchange with William W. H. 

Davis, who wrote an early history of the 104th Pennsylvania Infantry Regiment, 

a unit that had served at Charleston.18 Upon reading the book, Dahlgren wrote 

a letter to Davis, fulminating that “some statements . . . appear . . . which are 

highly unjust and derogatory to myself, and to the Naval force which I commanded in 1863 and subsequently.” These statements dealt with the issue of the 

supposed agreement between Gillmore and the Navy Department that if the 

Army could suppress Fort Sumter, the ironclads would enter the harbor and take 

Charleston. Dahlgren refuted the idea that he had received any such instructions, 

and buttressed his point with communications to the Navy Department, the 

Report on Armored Vessels, contemporary histories of the Civil War, and a letter 

he had received from Major General William T. Sherman. At the end of his 

lengthy letter, Dahlgren concluded “to remark on the injustice done generally 

to the Navy by the brief and imperfect mention which its hard service receives, 

15 John A. Dahlgren to John William Draper, 14 December 1868, in Draper Family Papers, 

Library of Congress.

16 John William Draper to John A. Dahlgren, 27 October 1868, John A. Dahlgren Papers, 

Library of Congress.

17 John A. Dahlgren to John William Draper, 14 March 1870, Draper Family Papers, Library of 

Congress.

18 W. W. H. Davis, History of the 104th Pennsylvania Regiment, from August 22nd, 1861, to 

September 20th, 1864 (Philadelphia: James B. Rodgers, 1866).
xiv | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

with small exception, in the various narrations of the events of the rebellion.”19 In 

this exchange, Dahlgren sought to demonstrate that he, and the men under his 

command, had done as well they could have. 

Although Dahlgren pressed his case with Davis, the former colonel remained 

unconvinced by the admiral’s arguments. Davis countered Dahlgren’s sources 

with one his own, claiming that “one in high authority, who heard what was 

said” informed him of the agreement between Gillmore and the Navy Department. Against Dahlgren’s allegations that Davis simply parroted Gillmore’s book, 

Davis stated, “I have never seen nor read [it].” Davis closed by pointing out that 

he had not commented on Dahlgren personally, only on the actions of the Navy 

Department. He thought “that General Gillmore and yourself were ordered on 

a most important enterprise without instruction” and “this proves the extremely 

loose manner in which the government conducted the war.”20 The correspondence with Davis indicates the struggle that Dahlgren faced in protecting his 

reputation. As one of Dahlgren’s biographers has noted, “Dahlgren would refight 

the siege of Charleston on paper over and over again . . . these efforts resolved 

nothing and served no useful purpose.”21

After the end of the war, Dahlgren continued his naval career. In 1866, he 

was placed in command of the South Pacific Squadron, where he remained until 

1868. After that, he returned to Washington as chief of the Bureau of Ordnance. 

In 1869 he took command of the Washington Navy Yard, and held that position 

until he died of heart failure on 12 July 1870.22

The Text

This volume provides Dahlgren’s autobiography. It has been annotated with 

explanatory footnotes that identify the sources Dahlgren used and direct the 

reader to further information. This book includes two additional documents as 

appendices. The first contains a letter from Sherman to Dahlgren written soon 

after the war. In it, Sherman offers a vindication of Dahlgren’s performance at 

19 John A. Dahlgren to W. W. H. Davis, 8 October 1869, John Dahlgren Letterbooks, John A. 

Dahlgren Papers, Library of Congress.

20 W. W. H. Davis to John A. Dahlgren, 10 December 1869, John A. Dahlgren Papers, Library 

of Congress. Gillmore’s book included printed versions of his correspondence with Dahlgren; 

see Q. A. Gillmore, Engineer and Artillery Operations Against the Defences of Charleston Harbor 

in 1863; Comprising the Descent Upon Morris Island, the Demolition of Fort Sumter, the Reduction 

of Forts Wagner and Gregg. With Observations on Heavy Ordnance, Fortifications, Etc. (New York: 

D. Van Nostrand, 1865), 317–49.

21 Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 324.

22 Ibid., 321–64.
Introduction | xv

Charleston, apparently solicited by Dahlgren as a way to counter Gillmore’s criticisms. Dahlgren references it in his autobiography several times and drew upon it 

in other postwar writings. The second appendix contains Dahlgren’s description 

of the Confederate defenses at Charleston Harbor. Written for Draper, it presents 

a more thorough description of the Confederate fortifications than appears in the 

autobiography. 

Editorial Method

So far as possible, this book provides an unaltered transcription of Dahlgren’s 

279-page autobiographical manuscript, now in the collections of the Navy 

Department Library at the Washington Navy Yard. Original punctuation and 

spelling have been retained. The following lists exceptions made. Ships’ names 

have been italicized. Cancelled passages have been deleted silently, though in 

cases where the deleted content has particular significance, it is mentioned in a 

note. Dahlgren frequently used asterisks to make his own footnotes or cite his 

sources; they have been included in the notes section, prefaced by his initials, 

“JAD:” with the content in quotation marks to differentiate them from the editor’s notes. Following the convention of the nineteenth century, when Dahlgren 

quoted long passages, he indicated so with quotation marks at the beginning 

of each line; these quotations have been rendered in modern style. Dahlgren’s 

running heads at the top of each page, which give the year, have been removed. 

Finally, the handful of editorial insertions made in-text are indicated with brackets. The use of “sic” has been avoided.

Acknowledgments

A book such as this requires many people to pull together. Many have helped. 

At the Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC), Dr. Gregory Bereiter 

checked my transcriptions and offered comments on annotation. Also at NHHC, 

Christopher B. Havern Sr. and Dr. Richard Hulver reviewed the annotations and 

gave their suggestions. Thomas Biggs helped with research of the illustrations. 

Both Tim Bostic and Davis Elliott of the Navy Department Library helped find 

crucial documents and books. Dr. Kristina Giannotta and Scott Anderson of the 

Histories Branch at NHHC provided much encouragement and support for this 

project. Charles E. Brodine Jr. reviewed the manuscript with his customary care. 

Jim Caiella and Brent Hunt of the Communication and Outreach Division took 

the manuscript to publication, improving it along the way. 

The staffs of the Library of Congress and the National Archives at College 

Park provided assistance. 

Dr. Robert M. Browning Jr. and Dr. Michael J. Crawford served as spec-
xvi | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

tacular outside readers, offering critiques and commentary that saved me from 

many errors.

Short Title List

Sources referenced can be found in the bibliography. Abbreviations used for several sources are listed below. In the notes, the citation will use the abbreviation 

followed by the volume number.

JCCW Report of the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War. 8 vols. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1863–1866. Reprint, Wilmington, NC: Broadfoot Publishing, 2002. 9 vols.

OR The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the 

Union and Confederate Armies. 128 vols. Washington, DC: Government 

Printing Office, 1880–1901. All citations to Series 1 unless otherwise 

noted.

ORN Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the 

Rebellion. 31 vols. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 

1894–1922. All citations to Series 1 unless otherwise noted.
Chapter One | 1

CHAPTER 1

Early Years, 1809-1846

R. Admiral J. A. Dahlgren

Born—Novem. 18091 at Philadelphia on the spot now stands the City Exchange 

corner of Walnut & 3d

On the mothers side—the family had been among the early residents and 

possessed considerable property—the Grandfather (Rowan) had served in the 

War of Independence and was at the battles of Princeton and Germantown—2

Mr Bernard Dahlgren the father—was a native of Sweden—afterwards resident of Philad—and a merchant well known there for his ability and great integrity—had been educated at Upsala and was a ripe Scholar—Ancient and Modern 

languages—Sciences &c He died on the high road to wealth3—

The eldest son (John) succeeded in obtaining a Midshipman’s warrant after a 

struggle which for a year seemed hopeless—

Date of Warrant Feb. 1st 1826—4

Served about Six years as a Midsn. first cruise was in the frigate Macedonian

1 John Adolphus Bernard Dahlgren was born on 13 November 1809. 

2 John A. Dahlgren’s mother was Martha Rowan, who had married Bernhard Dahlgren on 

19 November 1808. Rowan’s father, James Rowan, had served as a commissary during the 

American Revolution. Madeleine Vinton Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren: Rear-Admiral 

United States Navy (Boston: James R. Osgood and Company, 1882), 8–9

3 Bernhard Ulrik Dahlgren was born on 12 May 1784. He left Sweden in 1804, after his agitation for republicanism ran afoul of the monarchy. He traveled to Spain and arrived in New 

York in December 1806. He made his living as a merchant and also served as the Swedish 

Consul in Philadelphia. He died in 1824. Ibid., 7–8.

4 When his father died, John was only 14. He acted on a long-held desire to join the Navy, and 

beginning in 1824 supporters began sending letters recommending Dahlgren’s appointment. 

Dahlgren himself wrote in February 1825 to Samuel L. Southard, Secretary of the Navy, stating 

that “having long been anxious to adopt as a profession the naval service of my country, and 

being sustained in my wishes by the kindness of many of my respectable friends, I beg leave to 

solicit the appointment of Midshipman in the Navy of the United States.” Ibid., 11–16.
2 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

commanded by Com. Biddle—being the very ship captured from the British by 

Com. Decatur—Com. Biddle who now commanded had served in the war of 

1812 and captured the Br. Brig Penguin—very severe disciplinarian—& peculiar 

but a brave and good officer5

1832

J.A.D. passed examination and received Warrant of Passed Midshipman dated April 

28th 1832—his mathematical proficiency was the cause of his being ordered to the 

Coast survey then being re-established under Mr. Hassler—at that time perhaps 

the ablest Mathematician in the country—Mr. H. was as excentric as he was able.

6

1834 

J.A.D. passed on this duty 1834–1835–1836 and 1837-in the various work of 

5 On 25 March 1815, Capt. James Biddle, commanding Hornet, captured HM brig Penguin off 

the Tristan da Cunha Islands. For Commo. Stephen Decatur’s capture of HMS Macedonian on 

25 October 1812, see William S. Dudley, ed., The Naval War of 1812: A Documentary History, 

Vol. 1, (Washington, DC: Naval Historical Center, 1985), 548–53. See also David F. Long, 

Sailor Diplomat: A Biography of Commodore James Biddle, 1783-1848 (Boston: Northeastern 

University Press, 1983); and James Tertius de Kay, Chronicles of the Frigate Macedonian: 1809-

1922 (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1995).

6 Swiss scientist Ferdinand Rudolf Hassler superintended the U.S. Coastal Survey. See also Hugh 

Richard Slotten, Patronage, Practice, and the Culture of American Science: Alexander Dallas Bache 

and the U.S. Coast Survey (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994). 

Swiss surveyor Ferdinand R. Hassler 

served as the first superintendent of the 

U.S. Coast Survey.

Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs 

Division, LC-DIG-pga-06411.
Chapter One | 3

field and office—the most notable of which events were:—J.A.D. was selected to 

serve in the triangulation of the Survey—and to assist in the Astronomical operations as well as the measurement of the Base on Long Island under Mr. Hassler 

himself—This was the first base-line ever measured scientifically in America That 

of Mason & Dixon being a chain & compass measurement.

1835

—Mr. Hassler afterwards chose J.A.D. to make the counter calculations of the 

Base which were to compare with and verify his own—

1836 

In May assisted to observe solar eclipse at Westhills, a station of the Survey—

there engaged in secondary Triangulation till autumn—7

Navy Department offered J A D. the appointment of Sailing Master to the 

Macedonian the flagship of exploring expedition under Com. Jones to South 

Seas; declined, because dissensions had arisen between the Com. Officers and 

J A D. did not believe the Expedition would ever proceed as then organised—

which conjecture proved correct—It was entirely re-organised and sailed under 

the command of Commodore Wilkes—8

In autumn was detailed from the secondary triangulation to assist in the first 

trials of the great Theodolite just completed by Troughton9 for Mr. Hassler—it 

had a diam. of three feet and compound Microscopes instead of verniers for 

7 A theodolite measured vertical and horizontal planes, and provided more accurate measurements of angles than other instruments, which in turn allowed for more precise trigonomic 

calculations in geographic surveys. The Coast Survey set up a station at West Hills, Long Island, 

NY. F[erdinand] R[udolf] Hassler, Principal Documents Relating to the Survey of the Coast of the 

United States, Since 1816 (New York: William van Norden, 1834), 112.

8 The U.S. Exploring Expedition to the Pacific had been organized under Capt. Thomas ap 

Catesby Jones. It ran into organizational problems due to the poor condition of the ships 

assigned to expedition, as well as conflict between the naval officers and scientists. Ultimately, 

Jones resigned and the expedition proceeded under the command of Lt. Charles Wilkes. For 

more on the organization of the expedition, see Gene A. Smith, Thomas ap Catesby Jones: 

Commodore of Manifest Destiny (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2000), 70–92; and 

Autobiography of Rear Admiral Charles Wilkes, U.S. Navy 1798–1877, ed. William James 

Morgan, et al. (Washington, D.C.: Naval History Division, 1978), 321–65.

9 Edward Troughton, along with business partner William Simms, built a three-foot diameter 

theodolite for the Coast Survey; previously, the survey had only possessed a two-foot diameter 

version of the instrument. For more on this device, see Hassler, Principal Documents Relating to 

the Survey of the Coast, 103–7. 
4 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

determining the readings on the limb—10

On this occasion heliotropes were first used in this country in the Survey 

instead of Tin cones,—and their points of glitter[ing] light were visible by the 

naked eye from stations 30 or 40 miles distant—11

1837

Winter at Office in Washn.—bringing up the field work of the summer—Mr. 

Hassler conferred on J A. D. the appointment of 2d Assist. in the Survey and 

charge of a party of Triangulation—He was and is the only Naval Officer that 

held such an appointment—their duty on the Survey being the Hydrographic—

March 8th J A. D. was promoted to be a Lieutenant in the Navy—and soon after 

left Washington for the field—

But nearly four years of unceasing labor was beginning to tell upon eyes of 

uncommon power—so that by the time summer had arrived it was necessary to 

consult med. aid—and entire cessation from use of eyes was directed—

There was no remedy—just as the point of so much exertion was reached this 

terrible disaster intervened—

The active, hardy life in the field and the study of the closet must be relinquished—for weary hours without employment of any kind except to receive and 

follow the treatment of the Surgeons—

This continued until the fall without any apparent effect on the disease—

the celebrated Oculist in Paris (Sichel) was suggested—and in Nov. J A. D left 

the U.S—arrived in Paris middle of Decem remained during the Winter and 

Spring—Eyes much benefitted by Sichel’s treatment—12

1838

Not idle in Paris—observant of Professional novelties—About this time Paixhans 

was endeavoring to draw attention of French government to his system—J A. D. 

10 In these segments, Dahlgren references plane surveying. This method relies on measures of 

distance and angles, from which triangulation can be used to compute other distances. “Readings on the limb” refers to the method of measuring angles in degrees; the vernier provided a 

finer measurement of that angle. 

11 Both tin cones and heliotropes served as targets for measuring distances while surveying. The 

heliotrope reflected sunlight and thus served as a more readily visible target.

12 Treatment in Philadelphia had not been successful, so Dahlgren sought the care of Julius 

Sichel. Dahlgren believed his eyes had been injured by the long hours and fine detail required 

for the Coast Survey. A Navy surgeon declared that Dahlgren’s optic nerves had been damaged. 

Robert J. Schneller Jr., A Quest for Glory: A Biography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1996), 33–34.
Chapter One | 5

translated his pamphlet and had it printed at his own expense for circulation in 

the Navy—13

In Octr. J A D. sent copy to Board of Commissioners—and received the 

usual official reply—All that was done was to fall into the traces of English & 

French precedent and as a consequence the U.S Navy was presented with tolerable copies of foreign ordnance—which it cost years of toil and contention to get 

rid of—14

1839

In January J A D. became a married man and retired for a season to recruit sight 

and health in the country—for two years this course was pursued rigorously—

and to it is due the subsequent use of sight—not a word was read in writing or 

printing for two years and the ordinary work of the farm served for exercise—15

At the earliest moment Lieut. D. appeared for duty and was detailed for the 

Receiving ship at Philad—and in 1843 felt in condition to ask for sea-service—

which obliged him to relinquish residence in the country and place his little 

family more conveniently—numbering three children one of whom was Ulric 

Dahlgren, who afterwards gave his life to his country—16

1843

So in 1843—Lt. D. went to sea in the frigate Cumberland bound to the Mediterranean—with the broad pendant of Commodore (now Admiral) Jos. Smith—

one of the Navy’s best officers—17

The cruise passed as usual in traversing the Med.—visiting its various ports, 

and supervising our affairs—this was the first cruise of the ship,—afterwards 

13 Henri Joseph Paixhans’s system involved explosive shells. Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 33–34. 

The pamphlet was entitled An Account of the Experiments Made in the French Navy for the Trial 

of Bomb Cannon, etc. By H. J. Paixhans, Lieut. Colonel of Artillery. Philadelphia: E. G. Dorsey, 

1838.

14 Dahlgren advocated the use of shell-guns and the standardization of shipboard ordnance. These 

recommendations, advanced by Paixhans and later Dahlgren, were not adopted by the U.S. 

Navy for some time. Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 57–60.

15 On 8 January 1839, Dahlgren married Mary C. Bunker. Following the advice of Dr. Thomas 

Harris, the new couple purchased a farm in Bucks County, PA. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. 

Dahlgren, 78–79.

16 Dahlgren’s three children born at the farm were Charles Bunker, born in 1839; Elisabeth, born 

in 1840; and Ulric, born in 1842. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 80.

17 Commodore Joseph Smith commanded the Mediterranean Squadron.
6 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

she was sunk by the rebel “Merrimac”18—four of her officers afterwards became 

Admirals Commodore Smith—Captain Breese, Lieut. Foote and Lieut. D.19—

Foote was the 1st Lieut. and exhibited the same energy and ability that afterwards 

marked his career before the country—the friendship begun between him and 

Lieut. D. endured for 20 years, until the latter stood by his death bed and listened 

to his name, among the last words uttered by the unconscious sufferer—during 

the whole of that period of 20 years time the utmost intimacy existed undisturbed by the slightest appearance of misunderstanding.

1845

The prospect of War with Mexico induced the return of the Cumberland in 

Decemr.—Soon afterwards Lieut. D. was assigned to Ordnance duty—during 

the war with Mexico he applied for sea-service there, but the Depart preferred 

to retain him where he was, for the introduction of novel means of warfare such 

as shells, war-rockets &c was rendering the ordnance duty of prime importance.

18 On 8 March 1862, CSS Virginia, built on the remains of Merrimack, sank Cumberland.

19 Smith and Samuel L. Breese received promotions to rear admiral on the retired list in 1862. 

Andrew Hull Foote and Dahlgren both received promotion to rear admiral during the Civil 

War while on active service.

Cumberland at the time of the Civil War. Drawing on paper; Alfred R. Waud, 1861. 

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-21375.
Chapter Two | 7

CHAPTER 2

Ordnance Development to the 

Civil War, 1847–1860

1847

Commencement of career in the Ordnance by orders (Jan. 8th) for special duty at 

Washington—proved to be the charge of “Rocket Department”—then about to 

be introduced—The US had just purchased the right for $10,0001—Mason, Secretary of Navy an amiable & able man—2

 Commo. Warrington Chief of Bureau 

of Ordnance—a fine old sea-officer—remarkable for fine natural capacity—had 

captured An English vessel of War in 1814—stranger to me—3 At that time the 

only trace of the present extensive establishment was the small Naval Laboratory 

under Mr Coston—4A new system of Armament the 32 pdr. unit-system was 

being introduced into our Navy, and the Locks, sights—fuses for shells were 

just beginning to be manufactured and these were scattered about in the differ1 The Hale rocket, a British design named after its inventor that used spin to stabilize it in flight, 

unlike a Congreve rocket, which relied upon a wooden stick. Dahlgren, Madeleine Vinton 

Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren: Rear-Admiral United States Navy (Boston: James R. 

Osgood and Company, 1882), 125–26; Taylor Peck, Round-Shot to Rockets: A History of the 

Washington Navy Yard and U.S. Naval Gun Factory (Annapolis, MD: United States Naval Institute, 1949), 105.

2 John Y. Mason (D-VA) served as Secretary of the Navy from March 1844 to March 1845 and 

again from September 1846 to March 1849.

3 Commo. Lewis Warrington, as master commandant, had captured the British brig Epervier 

during the War of 1812. When the bureau system was initiated in 1842, Warrington was placed 

in charge of the Bureau of Navy-Yards and Docks. He also oversaw the Bureau of Ordnance 

from 1846–1851. Charles Oscar Paullin, Paullin’s History of Naval Administration 1775–1911: 

A Collection of Articles from the U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings (Annapolis, MD: U.S. Naval 

Institute, 1968), 210, 213.

4 B. Franklin Coston. Coston also oversaw the production of the Hale rockets. Martha J. Coston, 

A Signal Success: The Work and Travels of Mrs. Martha J. Coston: An Autobiography (Philadelphia: 

J. B. Lippincott, 1886), 24.
8 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

ent workshops, chiefly in the Plumbers 

Dep:—Though not the first appliance 

was on hand for the manufacture of 

the rockets, a lot of them was prepared 

and dispatched in six or seven weeks 

for service in the fleet off the Mexican 

coast—Observing the want of system in 

Ordnance work I proposed a plan for collecting the scattered parts together into 

one Department—which was approved 

by the Bureau—and I was directed to 

take charge of the matter—No time to 

be lost in putting up larger buildings, 

I only asked to have the ship-timber 

cleared out of one end of a timber shed 

and a small quantity of machinery set up 

with the peculiar Ordn. appliances with 

all the effort that could be applied it was 

towards the close of the year that this 

first Ordn. workshop was ready for operations—Its scale could hardly have been 

more limited—but well did it serve its purpose for seven years—5 and within 

its narrow limits was devised the present Armament of the Navy and the great 

establishment that chiefly supplied the Navy in the late war

When I first went to the Navy Yard a room was given me to write in, but I 

was not allowed a writer for some time and then just such a one as would offer 

for the smallest pittance

In this new building, there was still but one room for myself, the writer and 

another officer my assistant But the field was ample it was almost untouched, and 

my will was good—the form of things was not material—The Laboratory now 

devolved on me, for Mr Coston had left—a most able pyrotechnist and of much 

5 The Bureau of Ordnance approved Dahlgren’s plan for a new ordnance workshop on 8 April 

1847. The replacement ordnance building was completed on 8 May 1854. Peck, Round-Shot to 

Rockets, 105–6.

Commodore Lewis Warrington. Oil 

portrait, Rembrandt Peale, n.d. 

Naval History and Heritage Command, 

Photographic Collections, NH119400.
Chapter Two | 9

genius—it was a great loss—6

The work grew rapidly,—faster than the means—the new 32pdrs-were to 

be sighted—the ranges of all were needed—not one of which had been ascertained—therefore this was to be the first work—the usual mode of performing 

it—by firing on a piece of smooth ground was not to be found anywhere about—

what could be substituted?—there was nothing but the sheet of water offered by 

the river—but such an experiment for accurate results had never been tried, and 

means were to be devised by which the jet of water could be determined with 

precision—this jet is thrown up by the shot when it strikes the water—and its 

duration is only for a few seconds—The Plane table would answer if a proper alidade could be invented suitable for such a rapid operation:—and this I must first 

devise.—it was done—then the points where this instrument was placed must 

be fixed with accuracy—which was done—A Base was measured—a series of 

Main triangles established,—the angles measured the results of imperfect means 

skewed our error of only one inch & a third7—In this I had no assistance save 

that of an excellent mechanic Mr John Holroyd—to whom all these things were 

an entire novelty, but whose rapid perception and hearty zeal served me well—

especially in the first service with the “Plane table”

1848

The full account is given in my Report to the Bureau—And printed by its 

order—8

The practice was intended to ascertain the ranges of the new 32 pdrs. just 

being introduced into the our Navy by recommendation of A Board of Officers 

6 Dahlgren has somewhat softened events here. He and Coston came into conflict over authority, 

and Warrington settled the dispute in favor of Dahlgren. According to his wife, Coston also 

developed a percussion primer on his own time, and an agreement he struck with the Navy fell 

through, leaving Coston embittered. Coston’s wife also thought that Dahlgren had used the 

primer design in the Dahlgren gun without compensation. Coston, A Signal Success, 24–27; 

298–99.

7 An alidade is an instrument that can be used to measure both distance and angles; when used 

with the plane table, it facilitates surveying. The Washington Navy Yard lacked enough flat 

ground to test experimental guns; as noted, Dahlgren devised the above system in order to use 

the Anacostia River as a test range. Peck, Round-Shot to Rockets, 105; Dahlgren, Memoir of John 

A. Dahlgren, 128.

8 John A. Dahlgren, Report on the Thirty-two Pounder of Thirty-two cwt. to Commodore 

Warrington, Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance and Hydrography, by Lieut. Jno. A. Dahlgren (Washington, DC: C. Alexander, 1850).
10 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

in 18459—The object of it was to have but one calibre of gun and therefore 

one size of shot in all the ships, thereby avoiding the mistakes apt to occur in 

action, where so many pieces were to be supplied and so rapidly—This was a 

good object but the Board made a mistake in carrying it out—by adapting the 

32 pdr. as the unit calibre—because we had then the 42 pdr. in service10 which 

was better because it was more powerful—By taking the 32 pdr as the unit, they 

sacrificed the best guns in the service—They should have taken the 42 pdr. or 

even higher as the unit calibre—But they unluckily persuaded by the example 

of the English Navy which had just adopted the 32 pdr unit-calibre — they not 

only did this but they copied the weights and the models of the guns, so that our 

system became an imitation of the English—so we actually retrograded—It was 

this system that I finally overthrew after a struggle of seven or eight years, and 

for the 32pdrs & 8” shell guns gave the Navy my IXinch and XIinch Guns—firing 

shells of 72lbs and 130lbs—and shot of 96lbs and 170lbs—It was the XIin guns of 

the Kearsarge that beat the best English Guns on the Alabama and vindicated my 

theory—11

The ranges were to furnish the means of adjusting & graduating sights to 

the new 32 pdrs—When one gun (a light 32pdr) had been so fitted, the Chief 

of Ordnance, Commodore Warrington came down to have occular proof of the 

merit of the new sights—the firing cut out the water-line of a target, and so 

convinced the gallant old Warrior that he gave orders forthwith substituting the 

new sights for the old disparts12—the tools of his own day—with which he had 

captured a British vessel of War (Epervier)—

This subject however important had not monopolised my attention The 

Navy was entirely destitute of Boat Guns—occasionally an old carronade—or a 

field piece from the army had appeared as such in great necessity—but they were 

so useless in boats as never to be used at this time and we were without any proper 

9 Secretary of the Navy Mason appointed a board to evaluate the state of the Navy’s ordnance 

in 1845. The board recommended improvements in the quality of manufactured guns, better 

standardization of training, the use of shells, and the use of a 32-pounder gun on the British 

model. Robert J. Schneller Jr., A Quest for Glory: A Biography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

(Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1996), 69–72. 

10 JAD: “See Shells & Shell-Guns 273 &c.” John A. Dahlgren, Shells and Shell Guns (Philadelphia: King and Baird, 1856), 273.

11 On 19 June 1864, the Confederate screw-sloop Alabama fought Kearsarge off Cherbourg, 

France. As Dahlgren noted, Kearsarge mounted Dahlgren guns while Alabama did not.

12 A dispart is a marking or piece of metal at the muzzle that allows the gun to be aimed parallel 

to the axis of the bore. [William Falconer,] A New Universal Dictionary of the Marine..., ed. 

William Burney (London: Joyce Gold, 1815), 124.
Chapter Two | 11

Naval light artillery—

In the spring of this year I had submitted a system of Howitzer Boat Armament to the Bureau, with a model of 

a Howitzer, and asked leave with such 

means as were at hand to prosecute the 

matter—opinions about the Bureau were 

not favorable to me—and the leave asked 

was only given at this time, when the 

Chief began to see reason for confidence 

in my views—

So on the very day that he witnessed 

the practice above alluded to, I was able 

to show him the casting of the first Howitzer—There was not a boring Lathe in 

the Yard, so this first gun was finished on 

an ordinary lathe having also been cast 

with the most primitive means—Neither 

myself nor a person about me—had ever 

seen a gun cast or finished—and it was 

also the first time that I had ever drafted or computed such—

Yet as good luck would have it the little gun answered perfectly—it required 

a peculiar carriage which I designed—and that also succeeded—The Chief came 

down to see its operations, and brought down others—the little gun was exhibited on early occasion to a large number of officers—passing well through every 

ordeal and establishing the initiative from which the present extensive system of 

Boat Howitzers dates—(A full account of it is given in the work “System of Boat 

Armament 1st & 2nd Editions—1852 & 1856)13

The opposition did not cease here but tried to turn me by flank movement—

which utterly failed—I advanced step by step until the whole system was completely introduced into Naval service—light & heavy bronze 12 pdrs and 24 

pdrs—with Boat and Field carriages—perfect in every detail—An order of the 

Navy Department Dec. 17. 185014 recognized this system and directed full com13 J[ohn] A. Dahlgren, A System of Boat Armament in the United States Navy: Reported to Commodore Charles Morris (Philadelphia: A. Hart, 1852) and J[ohn] A. Dahlgren, Boat Armament of 

the U.S. Navy, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia: King and Baird, 1856).

14 JAD: “See Boat Arm 2d Edition page 21.” Secretary of the Navy William A. Graham issued an 

order with specifications and standards for boat armament. 

A presentation copy of the second edition of Boat Armament of the U.S. Navy.

Naval History and Heritage Command, Navy 

Department Library.
12 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

pliance with it—

A service of 12 years in peace and four years in War (1861 to 1865) has fully 

confirmed the theory and the execution of my system—it remains now unaltered 

in either from the first designs—

1849 

In this year the plan of collecting and organising the Ordnance work in the Navy 

Yard (Washn.) into a whole—proceeded—machinery was purchased from time to 

time and put up in the little apartment assigned to it—The character and style of 

the Boat Howitzers had been fixed and the manufacture for service was begun—

The first ever issued was sent to the “Adams” June 1849—15

Various supplies of Ordnance equipment began to issue to all the other 

Yards—

My attention had however been seriously given to a more important object—

The armament of our Ships as decided by the Board of 1845 was entirely against 

my convictions,—it had been a step to the rear and was not only short of the 

true standard but inferior to the armament that it had superseded—it had not 

only excluded the more powerful 42 pdr—but introduced confusion into the 

Magazine while it simplified the shot locker—

I was aware that I could do nothing towards curing this evil, unless well 

backed by influence—the opinion of the Navy would not supply this, for the 

authorities who represented that opinion had recently decided on the unit-calibre 

of the 32 pdr—my own experience would not give the influence, for that was 

too limited as yet,—so I resolved to amass such a body of well arranged facts as 

would furnish the influence

So I quietly watched each days practice and jotted down facts as they 

appeared—these escaped even the notice of those who looked upon every step 

in my proceeding—At last one them was of a character not to be overlooked, 

and excited an alarm which assisted well in hastening the period when my views 

might be expounded without fear of being laughed at

It is true that this fact nearly cost me my life and did kill a warrant officer 

close by me—but it was worth more than it cost—

On the 13th Nov. 1849 while firing a new heavy 32 pdr, it burst & killed 

the Gunner—a portion of the breech weighing 2000lbs tore up the ground a foot 

from me—16

15 The first howitzer was sent to John Adams on 6 June 1849. Peck, Round-Shot to Rockets, 106.

16 In margin, JAD: “his birth day.”
Chapter Two | 13

A few weeks previously I had opened the question with the Chief, in conversing with him on the results of the new 32 pdr. system, by saying that “its 

most powerful guns lacked accuracy, and its accurate guns lacked power”—The 

veteran asked me to explain—which I did in a very few words—to his demand 

what would I do,—I replied by asking leave to submit the draft of a new gun—

The bursting of the 32 pdr. gave an influence to my statements which perhaps 

nothing else could have done—17

With a hopeful heart I sat down to compute & draft a gun—it was the IX 

inch shell-gun18— 

1850

The draft of the IXinch gun was submitted early in the year—and an order given at 

once for casting one of the kind—

In May 1850, I had the satisfaction of seeing the first piece laid on the wharf 

of the Navy Yard—fearful that opinion was not yet ripe for such a innovation as 

a battery solely of shell-guns I had drafted a 50 pdr. to fall back upon—and this 

came with the IXinch

Before these arrivals I had used an opportunity to sketch my views more into 

a shape19—The Chairman of the Senate’s Naval Committee looking about for 

some information that might guide legislative action in regard to the construction of War Steamers, had addressed me a letter (Febr. 25) upon the subject—In 

discussing it (Mar. 19) I sketched a large propeller frigate that should be armed 

with the heavy cannon which I had in hand—going as far as I considered safe in 

trenching upon old ideas—20

The first practice with the new IXinch so fully confirmed my views, that I 

was enabled to abate nothing whatever of them,—but to adhere to my notions 

in full—and to ask for the casting of an XIinch gun which the Chief promptly 

17 Dahlgren, after the accident, made a report to Warrington that detailed a number of bursting 

guns aboard U.S. vessels. He concluded that “the great importance of heavy ordnance to a navy, 

is evident from its being its chief dependence, and too much care and expense can hardly be 

given to its improvement, so that neither the fate of a ship, nor the lives of men, may be jeopardized by the bursting of a gun.” Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 135.

18 At foot of page, JAD: “Much of this he did at home 41⁄2 street rising betimes & working till 

time to go to the yard.”

19 In margin, JAD: “This year published my first work on Ordnance being Report on “Practice 

with 32 pdr.” See Dahlgren, Report on the Thirty-two Pounder.

20 Dahlgren had received letters from the chairman of the Senate Naval Affairs Committee, 

David L. Yulee. In response, Dahlgren offered suggestions on new types of ships and advocated 

for heavier guns, among other points. Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 99–100.
14 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

assented—so well satisfied was he of my proceedings—for which he was entitled 

to much credit, for opinion was adverse almost without exception—the strange 

form of the cannon, seemed uncouth to eyes which had been accustomed to the 

more graceful form of those adopted by all countries while the weights of cannon 

and projectile seemed a unwieldly exaggeration—the great heresy of introducing 

an entire battery of shell guns, appeared monstrous when the most enterprising 

advocates here and abroad would venture no further than two or four 8inch guns 

in any one ship

But the veteran chief as he once said to me “never gave his confidence by 

halves” So an XIinch gun was ordered and he just lived to know of its completion—for on the 15. Septr 1851 the gallant Warrior21 was seized with a mortal 

disease, though to all appearance in the enjoyment of his usual robust health, and 

died in less than a month (12th Octr—)

No one had more reason to lament his loss than myself—it postponed the 

fulfilment of my plans for several years—Among his last acts was to approve my 

plans for a building suitable for the extent which the Ordnance work of the Yard 

began to assume—and which is now used for that purpose—

In this year Congress called upon the Secr. of War (Conrad) for his views 

in regard to Coast defences22—to make which more, complete he called on 

some officers of Army and Navy—among them—Commos. Morris and Perry—

Dupont—Maury of the Observatory—De Russey, Chase and Delafield of the 

Engineers—myself also23—That of Perry was remarkable because he advocated 

21 At bottom, JAD: “Warrington.”

22 At the request of the House of Representatives, Secretary of War Charles M. Conrad undertook a survey of the coastal defenses of the United States and to evaluate the system of 

defenses planned in 1816. “Letter from the Secretary of War in Reference to Fortifications,” 11 

December 1851. 32d Congress, 1st Session, House Executive Document No. 5, 1-2.

23 After a lengthy summary of fortifications from Chief of Engineers Joseph G. Totten, the views 

of the following naval officers appeared in the report submitted to the House of Representatives: Commo. Charles Morris, Commo. Matthew C. Perry, Cmdr. Robert B. Cunningham, 

Cmdr. Samuel Francis Du Pont, Lt. Joseph Lanman, Lt. Matthew Fontaine Maury, and Lt. 

John A. Dahlgren (though his name appears as “I. A. Dahlgreen”). Lt. Col. René Edward De 

Russy, Maj. William H. Chase, and Maj. Richard Delafield provided the views of the Army.
Chapter Two | 15

the use of Steam Rams—the next to do so, after Commo Barron,24 who earnestly 

urged the idea perhaps 20 years before, and whose model stood for some time in 

the Rotunda of the Capitol—the butt for cavils and sneers—Dupont’s paper was 

also written with his usual ability—My own paper was lengthy, and was used to 

introduce my plan of armament for ships of War—exemplified on a Screw frigate 

carrying IXinch guns on the gun Deck and Pivot Xinch or XIin guns on the Spar 

Deck, all shell guns but to be capable of firing shot if necessary This Document 

with all the papers was printed by order of Congress—(32d Congress 1st Session 

Ex. Doc. No. 5) and also in 1862—37. Congress 2d Session Report No. 86

1852

These public statements together with the practical results themselves gradually familiarised the public & the Navy with the idea of the change proposed—

And so far that in 1852, the attention of the Chairman of the Naval Committee 

(Mr. Stanton25) was drawn to the subject and he entered on its consideration with 

ability and vigor—In order to have a full detail of the plan proposed he addressed 

a formal request in August (1852) to the Bureau of Ordnance for my views—to 

which I replied at length and advised the construction of a new screw frigate 

suitable for the guns proposed—IXinch & XIinch

On the 17th Aug. Mr. Stanton, by instruction of the Naval Committee, 

moved for an appropriation for this purpose, and supported it by a most able 

exposition and argument, in which he cited parts of my paper—the effort nearly 

succeeded,—but there was too much novelty in the idea—it met with the opposition of the Navy Department & some of the Bureaus—therefore failed—but 

only for a season—26

This year my work on Boat Armament was published explaining the System 

of Howitzers which I had devised, and which was rapidly taking its place in our 

24 Commo. James Barron had written a treatise on steam tactics in 1832. John S. C. Abbott, 

“Charles Ellet and His Naval Steam Rams,” Harper’s New Monthly Magazine No. 189 (February 

1866): 299. In his paper, Perry remarked that extensive fortifications were both expensive and 

ineffective and that an enemy could easily blockade a port at some distance. Because of this, 

Perry advocated the use of steamers of war to mount an active defense. He declared that “I 

cannot entertain the idea that we are always to act on the defensive; on the contrary, it is more 

reasonable to suppose that, in the event of another war, the power of the United States will be 

felt beyond their own immediate coasts; most certainly it ought to be, for we have the means of 

placing ourselves upon an equality of naval strength with any of the European nations.” “Letter 

from the Secretary of War in Reference to Fortifications,” 140.

25 Frederick P. Stanton (D-TN).

26 Commo. Charles Morris, who took charge of the Bureau of Ordnance, likely led the opposition to Dahlgren’s proposal. Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 107–11.
16 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

ships—(this was the second work on Ordnance)27

1853

This year was passed in maturing ideas,—collecting facts—putting up the 

present Ordnance building—Meeting the demands of the service for Howitzers—practising with the XIinch gun &c—The Bureau would not however 

encourage the new Cannon—and they remained at a stand—I missed my old 

friend Commo. Warrington—

This year appeared my third work on Ordnance—on “Percussion Primers 

and Locks”—explaining some novelties going into service28

1854

—Was to mark a new era in the progress of the Navy—The “Merrimac” class 

of ships date at this time—29The pressure of the day demanded change, the fine 

sailing frigates of 1820 needed steam,—and the few steamers we had were not 

frigates—So a class of frigate was designed, being in plan, that which Mr Stanton 

would have authorised two years ago and the appropriation obtained—When the 

armament was discussed, it was found that the regulation Cannon the 32 pdr of 

the service would not answer—The ships were to be 3000 tons, one half greater 

than the largest ever built and as large as a 74—but having only two decks would 

carry but 60 guns—so large a ship with 60—32 pdrs was rediculous—So there 

was no escape from my proposition, reiterated so often in three years—the guns 

were queer looking things to be sure,—one facetious old gentleman of past ideas 

called them “tadpoles” one day and asked how they got on—I replied that they 

would be full grown frogs in good time—but queer as they looked, they have 

beat every other gun put alongside of them—So it was decided to place IXinch

guns on the Main deck—that was a great step—but to place XIinch above, that 

would never do—it must await another time:—but I was told that if I would 

draft a Xinch gun on my model, it should be carried as a chase gun, one at each 

end—which will account for the existence of this gun—the rest of the guns on 

the spar deck were to be 8inch guns—I protested against these liberties with my 

27 Dahlgren, A System of Boat Armament in the United States Navy.

28 John A. Dahlgren, Naval Percussion Locks and Primers, Particularly Those of the United States

(Philadelphia: A. Hart, 1853).

29 The appropriation provided for six steam vessels. The Merrimack class consisted of the steam 

frigates Merrimack, Wabash, Minnesota, Colorado, and Roanoke. The sixth vessel was the steam 

sloop Niagara. Paul H. Silverstone, Civil War Navies 1855–1883 (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2001), 15, 17.
Chapter Two | 17

plan, but it was of no weight—Mr. Secretary Dobbin by way of compensation, 

told me I should arm the vessel that was to be built by Mr. Steers—30and towards 

the end of July brought us together—but Mr Steers had unfortunately undertaken to fix one of the principal conditions of Armament that his vessel, the 

Niagara—was only to carry cannon on the Spar deck—and he had gone too 

far to make any change though persuaded by me of the propriety—So in this 

way my plan was cut in two—the Merrimac had my main deck battery and the 

Niagara my spar deck battery—and thus the plan like a circus rider rode the ring 

with a foot on each horse—

1855

To the usual Ordn. business was added all the labor of superintending the fabrication of so many new guns at different foundries—for there to be six new screw 

frigates—Steers and myself too had much to arrange, until one day an accident 

deprived him of life I had received a letter from him and soon afterwards was 

telegraphed that he was thrown from his carriage:—

His death was a national misfortune—much intercourse with him showed 

me a man without ordinary education but the want of it could not restrain his 

fine native powers—He would have been the greatest shipbuilder of the time—

In the midst of the anxieties comes the great sorrow, in the departure from 

this life of the mother of my children—then five—all in fine health & promising 

the third was Ulric31

In the fall I am promoted to be a Commander32

1856

In January dies Commodore Morris Chief of Bureau of Ordnance—a distinguished and excellent officer—When this occurred the Secr. of Navy sent for me 

and said that the President intended to make me Chief of Bur. Of Ordnance, but 

30 James Cochrane Dobbin served as Secretary of the Navy from March 1853 to March 1857. 

George Steers was constructor for Niagara.

31 Dahlgren’s wife died in June 1855. Beyond the children mentioned earlier, they also had John, 

who died in infancy in 1844; Paul, born on 9 August 1846; Eva, born on 19 March 1848; and 

Lawrence, born on 12 November 1850, who also died in infancy. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. 

Dahlgren, 98, 123; and Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 133–34.

32 Dahlgren’s was promoted on 14 September 1855. Edward W. Callahan, ed., List of Officers of 

the Navy of the United States and of the Marine Corps from 1775 to 1900: Comprising a Complete 

Register of All Present and Former Commissioned, Warranted, and Appointed Officers of the United 

States Navy, and of the Marine Corps, Regular and Volunteer (New York: L. R. Hammersly & 

Co., 1901), 146.
18 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

that the law required one to be a Captain, while I was only a Commander, but 

that he thought of postponing the appointment until law could be amended—I 

preferred that the effort should not be made

This year was published my fourth Ordn. work—”Second edition of Boat 

Armament” and at the end of the year my fifth & principal work “Shells & Shell 

Guns”—designed to illustrate some of the points of my theory—it was inscribed 

to my friend Foote—(afterwards Admiral)33

1857

It now became necessary for me to go to sea—the strongest point of my system 

was strenuously resisted and could get no foothold on ship board—the officers 

believed it unmanageable at sea & impracticable—So after much solicitation—

by me and opposition from men who should not have done so, I obtained command of the Plymouth, a fine sloop of War with full leave to alter & arrange at my 

pleasure—one of the redoubtable XIinch guns that a frigate was not supposed able 

to carry was mounted on the Plymouth and I proceeded to sea—34

As the training of seamen to serve as Gun-Captains was an essential to the 

proper use of the Battery I undertook to make the Plymouth a Gunnery ship—

and to relieve the monotony of ship life, a cruise was made along the European 

Coast—first touched Fayal, then at Lisbon England & Holland—here I visited 

the Royal foundries at Liege—also visited the British Navy Yard—and was well 

received—went on board the Excellent,—celebrated as the English Gunnery 

ship—also the Diadem, a new screw Frigate intended to match our Merrimac—

for as soon as the M. had been completed, she was sent to England to show what 

we could do, and as a consequence in less than a twelve-month they had several 

frigates even larger in course of construction and the Diadem, one of them, was 

ready for trial—it so happened that I was on board during the trial trip35

On my return I had the satisfaction of reporting that the XIinch was entirely 

manageable at sea—and so disappeared the last objection to the system—and 

soon after they took place in the arming of our vessels, particularly the new 

33 Dahlgren, Boat Armament in the United States Navy, 2nd ed.

34 Plymouth functioned as a kind of test-bed for Dahlgren’s system of ship armament; the Navy 

referred to it as a “gunnery practice ship.” The XI-inch gun was widely supposed to be too 

heavy to go to sea. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 185–86.

35 Secretary of the Navy Isaac Toucey instructed Dahlgren to travel to the Azores, Portugal, 

France, Holland, England, and Bermuda. He added, “You are authorized to visit the most 

important arsenals of the different countries at which you may touch.” While in England, 

Dahlgren witnessed the first trial of the English screw-frigate Diadem on 2 October 1857. Ibid., 

192, 199.
Chapter Two | 19

gunboats—The winter passed with the usual round of Ordnance duty and in the 

Spring the Plymouth was again ready for sea—

Just then came the tidings that the British cruisers were taking unwarrantable liberties with our merchant vessels passing near Cuba—I volunteered to the 

service of the Plymouth, for she was in fine fighting order—and urged it—The 

Secr. of the Navy36 consented—and the Plymouth was ordered to the spot to join 

the other vessels sent on the same duty—The English commander acted a wise 

part, he immediately stopped the practice and sent away the vessels which had 

been engaged in it—37

This over, the Plymouth & Saratoga sailed for Port au Prince to settle a difficulty about the Grand Island of Nevassa38—thence the Plymouth sailed for San 

Juan—and from that port to Vera Cruz to convey our Minister39 to the U.S — 

While awaiting his arrival from the city of Mexico, I received a dispatch from 

our Consul (Mr Chase)40 at Tampico, urging the presence of the Plymouth to 

put a stop to sundry outrages on American citizens—having no orders I took 

the responsibility and went to Tampico—where I had an interview with Gen. 

Garza41 and required redress for what he had done—he promised to abstain from 

such proceedings in future, but would not or could not disgorge the property 

seized: So I repaired to Vera Cruz and had an interview with President Juarez 

on the subject—it is pleasant to say that he listened attentively to my presentation of the several offences committed by Garza and in each case answered that 

my demand should be complied with—which was truly & promptly done as 

said—and I received the thanks of the merchants concerned—for the merchandize recovered was of value—(mentioned in Annual Report of Navy Department 

36 Isaac Toucey served as secretary of the Navy from 7 March 1857 to 6 March 1861.

37 The British ships had been stopping American vessels to interdict the slave trade; Schneller, A 

Quest for Glory, 160.

38 Americans had been taking guano, for use as fertilizer, from Nevassa. Haitian vessels had 

ejected the American citizens, and Commander Thomas Turner, in command of Saratoga, went 

to Port-au-Prince to make American dissatisfaction known. Report of the Secretary of the Navy

1858, 14–15.

39 John Forsyth Jr.

40 U.S. Consul Franklin Chase.

41 Gen. Juan José de la Garza was governor of Tamaulipas.
20 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Dec. 6. 1858)42 After landing our Minister at Mobile the Plymouth proceeded 

on her way to Washington, and arrived there early in the winter—About this 

time the new screw Sloops of War of the Brooklyn class43 were building as well 

as the Screw Gunboats—and the XIinch at last took its place on board of most of 

them—for the experience in the Plymouth had entirely dissipated the last signs 

of opposition; and thus the Armament that was to carry the National vessels 

through the terrible ordeal of Civil War was finally triumphant, after a struggle of 

Six or seven years—the old school argued against them and the British rediculed 

them with such slang as “Soda water bottles” which in some measure resembled 

but they weathered opposition and do still.

1859

This year was passed in various labors in Ordnance—chiefly of administration—Only one progressive measure was proposed by me and was adopted—the 

building of a large Foundry suitable for conducting some of the Experimental 

work which I preferred to keep under my own eye—The designs of the interior 

were my own—the architectural designs were by the Draftsman of the Ordnance 

draftsman Mr. Cluss44

The armament of the Navy had scarcely been firmly established when symptoms of being superseded by a rival began to loom up—in various rifled Cannon 

but chiefly that devised by Armstrong—and the drift of opinion military Naval 

and Civil set decidedly towards the new Comer—the reports that came across the 

water by every mail were all of a color—and threatened to sweep away all I had 

built up without even discussion—The question was a serious one for me in one 

respect, but it was of much greater importance to the country that for the sake of 

a personal interest I should not stand in the way of a real improvement—and at 

that time my position fully enabled me to do so—it was not the first time I had 

considered the subject,—in 1856 it was noticed at some length in my work on 

“Shells and Shell Guns”—the muzzle loader of Lancaster had been tried, and the 

Breech loading cannon of Cavalli had given results in range & accuracy not sur42 Garza had been forcing American merchants to take loans. Chase and Dahlgren met with 

Garza “and remonstrated against his measures.” Later they met with Mexican President Juarez 

and “obtained from him the assurance the proceedings complained of were contrary to regulations, and that no such levies would be enacted in the future.” Report of the Secretary of the Navy

1858, 15.

43 Actually the Hartford class, which consisted of Hartford, Brooklyn, Lancaster, Pensacola, and

Richmond. Silverstone, Civil War Navies, 20–21.

44 JAD: “since well known in Washington for the design of several Churches & public buildings.” 

Adolf Cluss, who later became City Engineer of Washington, DC.
Chapter Two | 21

passed to this day—I had also been at the practice ground of Braschaet45 in Belgium (1857) and had seen there very heavy rifle cannon and heard what they had 

done—But none of them had been able to satisfy the artillerists of the day—not 

even Cavalli’s,—the best of them—and in its work not inferior to Armstrong’s46

Investigation and results had not been confined to England but were going 

on in France, and had received a confirmation from actual service in the field, 

which imparted to them an interest equal to that created by the English gun—

The rifle Cannon of the Emperor had made its debut at Magenta and seemed 

capable of all that could be desired—47

Subsequent experience has shown how dangerous it is to pass judgement on 

first facts—however decisive—particularly when official authorities48 command 

the opinions of those who pass judgement,—or where powerful interests are 

involved—It may be said now, that neither the Armstrong gun nor the Emperor’s 

rifle gun has sustained the reputation so easily won when they first appeared—

It was due to the interests in my charge to meet the feverish excitement of 

the day and to contribute something to the solution of the question—So during 

the summer I entered up its study and prepared drafts of an Iron and a Bronze 

rifled cannon—projectiles &c—both were cast in my own Department and in 

Septem. the Iron gun, a 40 pdr. had first trial and performed satisfactorily,—and 

soon after the Bronze rifle made its debut—it was designed to enter into the Boat 

Armament, and stood the test so well that it preserves its place there to this day—

1860

This year was chiefly devoted to the prosecution of the Rifle question,—in which 

I adhered to the views already explained,—nothing deterred by the brilliant 

results of the Armstrong gun—that my early judgement was not erroneous is 

best shown by the fact that Armstrong himself has abandoned the manufacture 

of breech loading Cannon of heavy Calibre, and has felt obliged to return to the 

45 Brasschaat, Belgium, was home to a proving ground of the Royal Belgian Artillery.

46 Both the designs of Giovanni Cavalli and Charles William Lancaster were early rifled pieces. 

Lancaster guns saw service during the Crimean War, but proved prone to bursting and were 

removed from service. The Armstrong gun, of Sir William Armstrong, another British rifled 

breech-loader, was more successful, but it too proved fragile in the field. Spencer Tucker, 

Arming the Fleet: U.S. Navy Ordnance in the Muzzle-Loading Era (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1989), 225–26.

47 French forces under Emperor Napoleon III used a rifled cannon at the Battle of Magenta 

during the Second War of Italian Independence in 1859.

48 Before writing “official authorities,” Dahlgren had written, and crossed out, both “a superior,” 

and “a crowned head.”
22 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

muzzle loader which thereby limits him merely to material for construction49

By the end of the year I was able to submit to the Bureau of Ordn. a satisfactory summary of results and to feel confident of having assured some steps in 

this difficult question—the Navy light artillery for instance received a rifle gun 

the 12 pdr—which after the test of continued war service may be considered as 

the established rifled Howitzer for Boats and for landing An iron 50 pdr. was 

also closely scrutinised and proved to be correct in the essential features—pitch 

of rifling, length of bore,—form of gun &c50 and hence I arrived at the data for 

heavier cannon as far as the 150 pdr.—but a troublesome question remained, the 

character of metal suitable for endurance,—which I should have pursued, had it 

not been for the intervention of a more momentous question—

Above all the practice of the two years supplied me with facts to dispel the 

prevailing illusion as to the performance of rifle-cannon at fabulous distances—51

But as already said I was cut short in these enquiries by the looming up of 

a danger that menaced the country with destruction and compelled all of us to 

resist it with such means as we were possessed of—the best heads in the country 

had failed in the argument, and the cannon and bayonet were to be appealed 

to—So far as the Navy was concerned I had no misgivings in regard to the Ordnance with which I had supplied it—

In the last month of this year the State of So. Carolina seceded52 and set an 

example which other states were not slow to follow—

The last important labor of this year was to draw the attention of the Depart. 

to the great importance of providing some ironclads for the Navy—I referred to 

the propositions which I had made in 1852, eight years before, on this subject—

and reminded the Bureau of Ordn. that no notice had been taken of them—I 

now urged the matter once more,—by accident the letter found its way to Congress, instead of my report on rifled Cannon which had been called for, and was 

49 JAD: “that is whether a gun shall be made of wrought iron or cast.”

50 JAD: “See Congress. Doc.—Ex. Doc. No. 43—36th Congr. 2d Session.” In “Rifled Cannon 

and the Armament of Ships-of-War,” Dahlgren sent to Congress the results of trials with various 

kinds of naval ordnance and their results. 36th Congress, 2d Session, House of Representatives, 

Ex. Doc. No. 43.

51 During 1859 and 1860, as noted here, Dahlgren worked on evaluating rifled cannon. He 

found the concept to be sound, but thought, as indicated above, that a metal strong enough 

for a rifled piece remained to be found. During the Civil War, Dahlgren came to believe that 

rifled guns had failed to live up to their promise. Many rifled guns had burst during service and 

were seen as unreliable. The increased range failed to compensate for the sacrifice in reliability. 

Schneller, A Quest for Glory, 166–75, 345–56. 

52 20 December 1860.
Chapter Two | 23

printed53 but neither this nor my repeated personal solicitations to members of 

the Naval Committees were of any avail—the whole subject was ignored until the 

great necessities of the country compelled its consideration—It is needless for me 

to point out how sorely we were pressed afterwards and what risks were run from 

neglect of my entreaties—54

53 JAD: “See Ex. Doc. No. 25 36th Congress. 2d Session.” In his remarks, Dahlgren discussed 

shell guns and armor potential means of protecting against them. “A Report of the Superintendent of Ordnance of the Washington Navy Yard on Rifled Cannon and the Armament of Ships 

of War,” 36th Congress, 2d Session, Executive Document 25.

54 It was only under the threat of confronting Confederate ironclads that the United States 

Navy finally embarked on building some of its own. Dahlgren suggests here that had the Navy 

listened to his recommendations, they would have begun the Civil War already equipped with 

ironclads. Howard J. Fuller, Clad in Iron: The American Civil War and the Challenge of British 

Naval Power (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2008), 50–54.

Chapter Three | 25

CHAPTER 3

Outbreak and Early Years of the 

Civil War, 1861–62

1861

It has been the invariable custom of the Naval service to eschew all active participation in the politics of the day—a custom approved by people and rulers—and 

to which I have always conformed—

The question that presented itself to every American on the first day of this 

year was far removed from the sphere of ordinary politics,—though it had originated there:—The existence of the Union was threatened,—S.C. had already 

withdrawn—two of the Cabinet had resigned (Floyd & Cobb)—and all around, 

the signs of political dissolution were gathering—1

Placed where I was, these signs were daily before me in the working of the 

Federal Machinery, and I was in immediate contact with the actors the ideas 

which naturally arose were that no evils due solely to the management of the 

machine were to be cured by its destruction—one might as well commit suicide to cure a disease—moreover there was no right reserved to pursue such a 

course,—happily it proved there was not the power either—Yet the topic and 

no other was to be heard on all sides—In Congress and out—officers as well as 

citizens—

One very common practice was now found to work badly—to accommodate the officers of the Navy when on shore duty it was usual to assign them to 

the Navy Yards located in or nearest to the sections to which they belonged—so 

that most of the officers of the several Naval stations in the South were Southern 

officers—So it was at the Navy Yard Washington,—and I soon found that these 

gentlemen gradually receded from that frank communion which is apt to exist 

1 Secretary of War John B. Floyd, from Virginia, and Secretary of the Treasury Howell Cobb, 

from Georgia, had both resigned in December 1860.
26 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

between officers of the same service—there was naturally a strong southern sympathy among the residents of Washington,—for it is Southern soil—and thus I 

finally became conscious that my position was daily becoming isolated—2

In the first month of the year events seemed hastening rapidly to a conclusion—five more States withdrew3

—Senators & Representatives were abandoning their seats—The last Southern man in the Cabinet resigned4

—Military & 

Naval officers were doing the same—and the Flag of the Nation was even fired 

upon, in consequence of an attempt to relieve the handful of men that held Fort 

Sumter—There seemed to be no restraining hand to arrest the dissolution of the 

Country—The President officially declared that he [had] not the power of coercion—and there was obviously no other remedy—5

Upon this mournful spectacle I looked with sorrow & indignation—surely 

the great Nation should not thus and so early come to its end—

Now, there arose suppressed rumors that the Navy Yard would be seized by a 

mob,— ill-looking fellows whom no one knew, began to appear & cluster about 

the corners and places of resort—the police was not reliable, and the military 

force in the city nothing—The Ordnance Dept. of the Yard was filled with a 

stock of arms, not large but choice and a large amount of ammunition,—these 

were in my keeping and it behoved me to look to my charge—selecting the most 

defensible building I caused all the breech-loading rifles—and light artillery to be 

transferred thither,—in parcels so as to avoid notice,—all the windows were barricaded, and the doors, save two, which were commanded by two Howitzers,—a 

stove, fuel, and water were provided and on the pretext of some special work, no 

one was allowed to enter but a small body of seamen employed in the Ordnance, 

who I knew would obey my orders, whatever they were—As it would be unsafe 

to include the large quantity of powder, or to blow up the Yard magazines, I 

had it secretly carried into the Cock-loft of the large Ordnance workshops—

2 For more on the resignation of naval officers during the secession crisis and after, see: William 

S. Dudley, Going South: U.S. Navy Officer Resignations & Dismissals on the Eve of the Civil War

(Washington, DC: Naval Historical Foundation, 1981).

3 Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana.

4 Secretary of the Interior Jacob Thompson.

5 In his message to Congress on 3 December 1860, President James Buchanan stated that the 

executive lacked the power to coerce states. Buchanan sought to achieve a compromise with the 

Southern states, but as one prominent historian noted, there was “a general assumption that 

little of the enterprise and inspiration needed to save the Union could be expected from the 

White House . . . Buchanan’s purpose, it transpired, was to avoid . . . extremes until the arrival 

of March 4 released him from his responsibilities.” David M. Potter, The Impending Crisis 

1848–1861 (New York: Harper and Row, 1976), 517–21.
Chapter Three | 27

which was in range of my guns in the Shell House, and could be fired by shells 

if needed,—finally I sent all the spare money that belonged to me and had it 

deposited at Philad. for the use of my family—having done so it only remained 

to await and meet coming events—

The apprehension of violence and riot had also taken hold of the citizens—

they felt that their families and property were in danger—so meetings were got 

up with the view of forming Companies of Volunteers—but the object seemed 

to be the repression of a mob—And the danger of attempts to seize the Capital seemed to attract official attention—for Congress ordered a Committee to 

enquire, while the Executive quietly drew in some companies of Regulars for the 

general security, though then with the Marines in the District barely amounted 

to 500 men

The alarm was by no means ill-founded for it was recognised that the various 

symptoms of disorder corresponded with the suggestion of a Richmond paper 

to seize Washington6—Meanwhile incendiarism began to occur too frequently, 

and night patrols of citizens were arranged to supply the obvious inefficiency of 

the police—

The month of February furnished its quota of exciting incident,—The 

insecurity of Wash: and the conviction that a sudden blow was meditated still 

weighed on the minds of all,—The Congressional Comm. were unable to obtain 

any evidence of a tangible character but the operations of a conspiracy seldom 

furnish that,—some thought the idea had been abandoned, but Gen. Scott7

bluntly told the Comm. that there was “abundant evidence in his mind to justify 

him in making military preparations” to guard against such scheming and so 

he continued to draw in to the city such Regulars as were available—adding in 

this way about 400 men to the force in hand—this was distributed in the public 

buildings or in their vicinity—and by way of further precaution the vaults & 

cellars of the Capitol were examined every night8

6 The particular paper and article are not known. Fears that Southerners would seize Washington 

circulated in the city after the election of Lincoln. For more on the suspected conspiracies, 

and investigations into them, see: David C. Keehn, Knights of the Golden Circle: Secret Empire, 

Southern Secession, Civil War (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2013), 100–12.

7 Lt. Gen. Winfield Scott, who along with Congress, worked to ensure the defense of the District 

of Columbia. The committee mentioned here was likely the Committee of Arrangements, 

which bore responsibility for Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration ceremonies. Winfield Scott, 

Memoirs of Lieut.-General Winfield Scott, ed. Timothy D. Johnson (1864; repr., Knoxville: 

University of Tennessee Press, 2015), 309.

8 Federal authorities apparently feared that Confederate saboteurs would place explosives beneath 

the Capitol.
28 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Meanwhile the Presid. elect was on his way to the Capital, where the Peace 

Convention was now assembled discussing measures that might lead to conciliation & Union;9

 the prospect was truly discouraging for the Seceded States were 

daily confirming their treasonous conduct by new acts—A Constitution had 

been formed and Mr. Jeff. Davis styled President—10His Inaugural appeared in 

the Northern press alongside of the speeches of Mr. Lincoln to the people on his 

way—

Most suddenly Mr. Lincoln appears in Wash. having avoided the assigned 

course of travel—he had been warned that his life would be endangered in Baltimore, and there is every reason to believe from the subsequent conduct of its mob 

that such should have been the case.

9 In January, as a last attempt to avoid war, politicians explored options for a peace conference. On 19 January, Virginia invited delegates to attend a conference to start on 4 February. 

Although more than 100 delegates attended, none came from states of the Deep South, and the 

conference adjourned without any new proposals to resolve the crisis. Instead, it suggested an 

amendment to the Constitution that would extend the Missouri Compromise line and make 

other guarantees for the perpetuation of slavery in the United States. Potter, The Impending 

Crisis, 507, 545–47.

10In Montgomery, AL, the seceded states drafted a provisional constitution and selected Mississippian and former Secretary of War Jefferson Davis as provisional president. Davis was inaugurated on 18 February 1861.

President Abraham 

Lincoln.

Photograph, Anthony Berger, 

1864. Library of Congress Prints 

and Photographs Division, 

LC-DIG-ppmsca-19305.
Chapter Three | 29

Soon after the Peace Convention adjourned, with earnest conviction in 

many parts of the country that it had achieved peace & reunion

The Month of March was not barren of incident—though differing from 

had previously occurred—Mr Lincoln was inaugurated as peaceably as any of his 

predecessors,—but the realm was divided—I stood quietly on Penn. Avenue and 

watched the procession passing with all the customary parade.—The attention of 

the whole Country was now bent on Sumter—South Carolina required instant 

evacuation and the insolent demand was sustained by her confederates;—The 

North appeared undecided upon any particular course,—many seemed willing to let the possession of the Fort go by default, and Senator Douglas11 even 

announced in his place that it could not be relieved and had not one month’s 

provisions; even Charleston was quiescent under the same impression—but there 

was one honest & true heart who knew that the lawful authority of the U.S. 

should not be impugned with his consent that he as President would uphold it 

to the last—

As so came in the month of April 1861—At this time I had only seen Mr. 

Lincoln at a distance,–the throng that gathered about him for various purposes 

was impenetrable. On the 2d he came down to the Ordnance—just then I was 

not in the building and after looking around briefly he departed—Next evening 

however there was to be a wedding in the quarters of the Commandant12 The 

President was invited but did not arrive until the ceremony was over; The spacious rooms were filled to their utmost—uniforms and rich dresses abounded—

Mr Lincoln received marked attention and entered fully into the spirit of the 

evening—In the course of the evening I was introduced,—in the kindest manner 

he took my hand in both of his as if we had been friends for years—just meeting—and an easy off hand conversation ensued & continued until interrupted 

by the claims of others.

Beneath that calm and pleasant manner must have lain heavy thoughts,—

for the measures to relieve Pickens & Sumter had just been decided on and the 

11Stephen A. Douglas (D-IL).

12 The marriage was of Navy Yard commandant Capt. Franklin Buchanan’s daughter. Dahlgren 

noted in his diary that he talked with Lincoln for half an hour. Madeleine Vinton Dahlgren, 

Memoir of John A. Dahlgren: Rear-Admiral United States Navy (Boston: James R. Osgood and 

Company, 1882), 329.
30 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

orders had been given—13

A few days later the Powhatan put to sea—followed by some other steamers the object of these movements was only suspected by the Northern public—but the South was better informed and the usual supply of provisions from 

the Charleston market was at once cut off from Sumter—Virginia demanded to 

know of the President what he intended to do—and again attention was drawn 

to the furtive designs of the disunionists upon the Capital—leaders of daring & 

unscrupulous character such as Ben McCullough14 were noticed about the precincts of the city entering & leaving at unusual hours

Washn. was again excited by the evident signs of approaching trouble the 

calls for Volunteers were responded to,— but no sympathy for the Fed. Govt. was 

exhibited strongly—many of the Volunteers even refused to take the oath of allegiance to the U.S—Gen. Scott continued fully alive to the critical condition of 

things and all the approaches of the city were picketted—The Patent office, and 

Treasury were garrisoned by regulars as well as possible—their lower entrances 

barricaded

Still it was manifest to the least observant that the whole force which the 

Gov. could muster in Wash. served for little more than a police—not at all equal 

to an effective defence—

At last the storm broke—Sumter was summoned on the 11th—Anderson 

refused and on the next day So. Car. struck the blow which she & the South have 

since so bitterly repented—15

On the 14th the U.S. flag came down from its staff on Sumter—

The President hesitated not—the Proclamation that called out 75000 men 

drew the line at once between loyal and disloyal men—

13 Secessionist forces had seized federal property across the South and surrounded other installations. Federal garrisons remained in possession of Fort Sumter, SC, and Fort Pickens, FL. 

Until the end of March, when the situation of the garrisons became critical, the government 

had failed to force the issue; federal authorities feared that reinforcement or resupply might 

provoke war. At the start of April, expeditions to relieve both places were organized. Potter, The 

Impending Crisis, 575–76. 

14 Ben McCullough, by turns a Texas Ranger, scout, Indian fighter, sheriff, and U.S. marshal, 

enjoyed a national reputation. After the secession of Texas, rumors quickly spread that 

McCullough aimed to launch a raid on Washington with Texas Rangers. While he ventured to 

Richmond, VA, briefly in April 1861, he spent most of the month in New Orleans, procuring 

small arms for Texas forces. Thomas W. Cutrer, Ben McCullough and the Frontier Military Tradition (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1993), 189–92.

15 Maj. Robert Anderson, commander, Fort Sumter, refused Confederate demands to surrender. 

On 12 April, Confederate forces opened fire on the fort. Without prospect of resupply or reinforcement, Anderson surrendered on 14 April.
Chapter Three | 31

Had Virginia remained true, there would have been little trouble or bloodshed in compelling the states that had seceded, to return—and yet the great result 

would never have been gained which now ensures tranquillity—slavery would 

have continued the reproach and the danger of the Republic—

The Act of Secession was passed in secret Session by Virginia Convention 

and though not made public, became known to the disloyal men of Maryland 

& the District16

The Capital & Gov. were now in imminent jeopardy—placed as they were 

in the midst of a disloyal and aggressive population—only separated by the Potomac from Virginia, while Maryland stood ready to bar the way from the North, 

whenever the moment was deemed opportune—The Mayor of Baltimore17

enjoined the people to keep the peace, but his Proclamation said not a word of 

the Union—the troops in Wash. amounted to less than a thousand including 

Marines—Volunteers of the District were more numerous but the majority were 

probably not to be relied on in the event of a collision;—on the 18th about 500 

Penn. Vols. had arrived—But next day when the Mass. 6th attempted to pass 

through Baltimore the true temper of that city was displayed—the mob attacked 

the regiment ferociously and was met by some well placed volleys which put 

an end to the fray until the travellers were able to pursue their journey but a 

Penn. regiment having no arms was driven back—So the Capital was thus isolated for the while from all help—and if Virginia and Maryland moved promptly 

what could save it to the Union?—18surely not the Thousand Regulars and 1300 

Northern volunteers which now constituted the garrison—

The day previously a body of Virginia troops had seized the Arsenal at Harper’s Ferry—and at this critical and gloomy period the safety of the Navy Yard 

seemed menaced by the resignation of its Commandant & Officers19

I was seated in my office much occupied in making dispositions of arms and 

ammunition suitable to the exigency when a confidential messenger from the 

Navy Department entered—with a message that the Department distrusted the 

16 The Virginia Convention went into secret session on 16 April 1861 and the next day voted to 

secede. Virginia voters would later approve the ordinance in May.

17George William Brown.

18 A mob in Baltimore, of Southern sympathies, attacked the 6th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment and attempted to block the passage of other regiments heading to Washington.

19 Capt. Franklin Buchanan, commandant of the Washington Navy Yard, resigned following the 

attack on Fort Sumter. Virginia troops occupied the armory at Harper’s Ferry on 18 April 1861.
32 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

state of affairs in the Yard and directed me to take the command—20 I replied 

that the Dep might fully rely on me, and at once sallied out to view things and 

take proper measures—not long so employed when a messenger came to say that 

the Commandant wished to see me—for I had considered it my duty to take 

command and to exercise it without concerning myself about the authority of 

any one else—On reaching the Comdts. office he said that he was about to resign 

and wished to turn over the command to me—very few words passed and I once 

more resumed operations for defence21

The Government held Washington by a most precarious tenure—With 

small exception the population could not be expected to sympathise with the 

North.—and illy suppressed open manifestation—the troops that could be relied 

on to fight for the U.S. did not exceed 2000 to 2500 men half of which were 

entirely inexperienced—the prize was great for if the South were to occupy Washn

it would offer to foreign nations the semblance of the legitimate Govt.—and 

might be sure of recognition by France & England at least—the last restraint 

on Maryland would be removed and she would be added to the active rebellion—The Richmond press was urgent for instant measures—the loyal press even 

announced that there was “imminent danger that the Fed. metropolis might be 

wrested from the Gov”—and that such was “a leading feature in the plans of the 

revolutionists”

All communication with the North by land was severed—as the R. road 

bridges above Baltim. were broken and that city was rampant—the river alone 

offered a chance for passage of friends—Whatever force Virginia could raise 

might be precipitated on the city immediately—The Potomac only lay between—

A glance at a map of the locality will show that the Navy Yard lies on the 

extreme left of and rather more than a mile from the city as it faces to the South—

it lies immediately along the Anacostia, a branch of the Potomac,—which separates it from the country opposite,—known as the Eastern shore of Maryland—a 

region thoroughly imbued with the slavery and disunion proclivities of the 

South, and not better disposed probably even to the present time—the connection between the two sides of the river was established by a bridge immediately 

above the Navy Yard,—four or five hundred resolute men passing over suddenly 

could not fail to cut off and obtain possession of the Yard—which was assailable 

20 In his diary, Dahlgren identified the messenger as one of Gideon Welles’s sons, who carried 

word that “his father desired me to take command, as there was something wrong going on in 

the Yard.” Dahlgren, Memoirs of John A. Dahlgren, 330–31.

21 Before Buchanan resigned, he ordered Dahlgren to “superintend the defense of the yard when 

necessary.” ORN 4: 418.
Chapter Three | 33

on every side—On the North and it was enclosed by a brick wall of no great 

height—which could be scaled easily or forced at the gates;— the south side was 

washed by the river and in the West was an old and infirm wooden fence—just 

where all the Ordnance stores—of artillery, rifles and Powder were to be found—

The Marine barracks about 600 yards from the Northern wall would have 

served as a strong support in case of attack, but it had been stripped of its garrison 

of Marines from the 19th to the 24th of April, who had been sent in the Pawnee to 

assist in the destruction of the Norfolk Navy Yard—22

During this critical period the defence of the Washington Yard depended 

upon some 50 Seamen in the Ordn Dep. and about 40 Marines—with such aid 

as could be had from two small War Steamers in the stream, whose crews did not 

probably exceed 150 men.23 The small detachment of District volunteers would 

rather have embarrassed the defence—

To obtain possession of the Yard was to open an easy way to the City on the 

22 Commo. Hiram Paulding embarked 100 Marines on Pawnee, and steamed for Norfolk, VA, to 

prevent the supplies and vessels at the navy yard there from falling into enemy hands. See ORN 

4: 284–85, 289–91.

23 Anacostia, a packet under the command of Lt. Thomas Scott Fillebrown; and Pocahontas, under 

the command of Cmdr. John P. Gillis. ORN 4: 410–11 and 419.

“U.S. Gun Boat Pawnee.” Drawing on paper; Alfred R. Waud, c. 1861. 

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-20335.
34 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

East—and at the same time would have been attended with the loss of ordnance 

Stores indispensable for the supply of the whole U.S Navy, which would also have 

been invaluable to the attack,—for there was on hand a number of new Brass 

Howitzers and breech-loadg rifles with powder and every kind of Ammunition—

While the various steamboats & other craft at the wharf would have 

instantly furnished the means of holding the river & all the water communications to the city—

Whilst this post not so important to the defence of the City,—I received no 

support therefrom—not even to keep open the communication of about a mile 

through an open country—

It is difficult to understand why the revolt omitted to strike a prompt blow 

at the National capital—Many times afterward it seemed in great peril, but in 

reality never so much as in these days—

The sudden abandonment of their duty by all the officers of the Yard (for I 

belonged to the Ordnance) at the most critical portion of this period, seemed to 

offer a desirable opportunity—

It was just at this eventful crisis that the command was devolved on me—

by those who hardly knew me by sight24—Yet I can say truly that at this most 

gloomy period not a misgiving crossed my mind but that the defence would be 

made good to the last—whether successful or not

I lost no time in looking to the first important points—Two Howitzers were 

sent to the bridge and planted so as to rake it with Canister—manned by seamen 

who I knew perfectly, could & would fire canister at the rate of seven to 10 shots 

in a minute—they were supported by a small detachment of riflemen—pickets 

were placed along the line of wall—Boat Howitzers at the weak points—The two 

small War steamers in the stream could bring their guns to bear upon the bridge, 

or upon the approaches to the Yard by the Western side—

A strong force of mechanics was thrown upon the river steamers of the Mail 

line which had been seized,25 so as to equip them to assist in keeping command 

of the Potomac, now our only communication unobstructed—they were too 

weak as they were to receive a single cannon—so the decks were well shored 

and a 32 pdr placed on board—this was kept going all day and by night too—

Coal, water & provisions were hurried on board, and before night of the day I 

24 Commandant Franklin Buchanan resigned on 22 April 1861.

25 The Army had seized the steamers Baltimore, Mount Vernon, Philadelphia, and Powhatan on 

21 April 1861, at the direction of President Lincoln. They soon turned them over to the Navy, 

and Dahlgren had “been directed to have them equipped for war service forthwith.” ORN 4: 

416–17.
Chapter Three | 35

took command, one of these vessels (the Mt Vernon) was ready for service and 

at midnight I sent her down the river to capture suspicious craft[,]26 to observe 

the movements of the disunionists and to give pilots to any vessels that might 

be coming with troops from the North to the relief of the Capital—Having no 

officers to aid me, I put her in command of an old Boatswain—Wilmuth—one 

of those samples of seamen whom we in the Navy like to look upon—Time had 

whitened his locks, but had not bleached his ruddy visage nor abated his vigor—

nor his allegiance to the Flag— This veteran probably fired the first hostile shot 

at rebeldom in this quarter27

Night came, and the mechanics passed out of the yard as usual to their 

homes, but the work on the steamers continued, as well as the use of precautions 

to prevent surprise, and it was near midnight when I laid down on a sofa in my 

office to snatch a little sleep—

The next day brought no change or improvement of the condition of the 

Yard—I was constantly moving around observing all that passed and urging the 

26 Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles had given instructions to Dahlgren on the use of Mount 

Vernon on 22 April 1861. ORN 4: 419.

27 Boatswain George Willmuth. Mount Vernon fired muskets and a shell at a boat that had set the 

lightship at Cedar Point, MD, on fire. Willmuth’s complete report can be found in ORN 4: 

425–26.

“U.S. Steamer Mt Vernon (Washington & Fortress Monroe line).” Drawing on paper; Alfred 

R. Waud, 1861. 

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-20339.
36 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

equipment of the remaining Mail steamers—The City was in confusion & excitement—reports that the rebels were attempting to obstruct the Potomac—The 

resignation of many officers was made known, among them Gen. Johnson, Col. 

Robt Lee &c—28some troops were known to have arrived at Annapolis, but it 

was not sure that they would reach here without opposition—for we had no 

communication with the North in any way—To day the Gov. took possession of 

the Railroad at this place—

The critical condition was gradually improved but it cannot be said to any 

material extent until the last day of the week—

On Thursday the 25th the communication with the North by land was effectively opened by the arrival of the 7th N. York at Washington and the occupation 

of the Railroad from Annapolis by Gen. Butler with Mass. and other troops—On 

Saturday. the 27th the 71st New. York reached the Navy Yard and Col. Vosburgh 

reported his regiment to me to assist in the defence of the Yard—29

28 Brig. Gen. Joseph E. Johnston, Quartermaster General at the time of his resignation, and Col. 

Robert E. Lee, who held command of the 1st Cav. 

29 Col. Abram S. Vosburgh and the 71st New York State Militia arrived in Washington and were 

posted at the Washington Navy Yard on 27 April 1861. [Augustus Theodore Francis], History of 

the 71st Regiment, N.G., N.Y. (New York: The Veterans Association, 71st Regiment, N.G.N.Y., 

1919), 124–25.

Men of the 71st New York form a hollow square at the Washington Navy Yard in 1861. 

James Guy is moored on the right, Powhatan is at left.

Photograph c. 1861, printed c. 1880. Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-34786.
Chapter Three | 37

Previously I had received slight temporary aid in other ways—one of them 

was a Reading Co. of Volunteers commanded by Capt McKnight—composed of 

as fine material as I ever saw30

One night a citizen Company spent with me—made up of gentlemen then 

visiting Wash—and brought together by that then zealous patriot Gen. Lane 

and Col. Cassius Clay—they had buckled and belted bayonet and cartridge box 

over the ordinary garb of the citizen31—part of them I posted at the bridge and 

the remainder along the weaker defences of the Yard—where they did watch and 

ward until the next day relieved them—

Meanwhile the Capitol and all the Public buildings were occupied by the 

troops newly arrived—which rendered them strongholds—barricaded with barrels of Cement and with other material that was convenient—while the Senate Chamber and the Represen. Hall and the offices were crowded with armed 

men—who ate & slept there and made the outer courts ring with their heavy 

muskets—

During this anxious period I entered not my regular quarters but slept and 

ate in the office near the Wharf, or on board of a steamer alongside, just where 

the work of the closing day found me—The activity was incessant in every 

Department—between defence, against surprise and in preparation for Naval 

supplies of all kinds—

Meanwhile Maryland continued to confirm the disunion position first taken

On Sunday I was out of the Yard for the first time since the trouble began, 

and only for a short time to see the President—Deeply concerned in passing 

events, he was as composed as a Veteran and nothing daunted, was declaring his 

position as each emergency arose—just now appeared his Proclam.— blockading 

30 Capt. James McKnight commanded the Ringgold Artillery, a Pennsylvania militia company 

from Reading. The Ringgold Artillery and other Pennsylvania militia units arrived quickly in 

Washington after the Civil War began. John David Hoptak, “The Union’s First Defenders,” 

Pennsylvania Heritage Vol. 39 No. 3 (Summer 2013), 5–15.

31 James Henry Lane had been elected senator from Kansas in April 1861, but had not yet been 

seated. Both Lane and Kentucky politician Cassius M. Clay were committed anti-slavery advocates and had previous military experience; Lane had led Free-Soil militia in “Bleeding Kansas” 

during the 1850s, while Clay had fought in the Mexican-American War. Both men raised 

volunteer companies to defend Washington from secessionists. Assistant Adjutant General 

Thomas Talbot had ordered Clay and Lane to report to the Navy Yard on 24 April 1861, 

instructing them: “you will report to the commandant of the Navy Yard . . . on each succeeding 

night for the periods that your respective commands may have been enrolled.” Cassius M. Clay, 

Cassius Marcellus Clay: Memoirs, Writings, and Speeches, Vol. 1 (Cincinnati: J. Fletcher Brennan 

& Co., 1886), 262.
38 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

the coasts of Virginia & N.C.—32I 

found him in the Cabinet-Room 

and had a brief conversation with 

him alone—

The closing of U.S troops 

about Baltimore, enabled the Gov. 

to restore the communication by 

Railroad through the city by the 

10th of May—And so the Capital 

was finally re-connected with its 

true Base, the North and the troops 

which had now gathered sufficed to 

make it sure—

The cause of the Union had 

now passed its hour of peril and the 

power of the loyal States could be 

put forth to crush the Rebellion—

The Wash. press33 stated that 

the plan of the Insurgents had been 

to enter Wash. between the 18th and 

21st of April before day break but 

some failure to adjust the parts of 

their scheme postponed it until too 

late—

My service on this occasion I 

count as the best which I ever rendered to the country—

On the 6th of May I had the pleasure of a visit from Major Anderson—

32 Lincoln ordered the blockade of ports in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, 

South Carolina, and Texas on 19 April 1861. After the secession of Virginia and North Carolina he ordered that “an efficient blockade of the ports of those States will therefore also be 

established.” ORN 4: 340.

33 JAD: “Star. May 6th.” The article claimed that “the scheme of the oligarchy was to have 

attacked this city some time between daybreak of the 18th and daybreak of the 21st April 

ultimo . . . The conspirators had no idea that the Government would prove more prompt and 

efficient in their measures of defense, than they in theirs of attack.” The newspaper mentioned 

Governor John Letcher of Virginia as a conspirator, as well as John Bell of Tennessee, the 

former candidates for president of the Constitutional Union Party in the 1860 election. Evening 

Star (Washington, DC), 6 May 1861, 2.

Ulric Dahlgren, son of John A. Dahlgren, in 

the uniform of an Army captain.

Glass negative, c. 1862. Brady Photograph Collection, 

National Archives, B-6209.
Chapter Three | 39

fresh from Sumter—and my son Ulric also came down from his law studies at 

Philad.—anxious to do such duty to his country as a lad could offer

The Anacostia & the Potomac are now alive with movement—large steamers 

arriving & landing troops, cannon and stores of all kinds at the Arsenal and Navy 

Yard—every where is heard & seen the signs of War—The Rebel flag too can be 

perceived floating over Alexandria—we shall pull it down soon—34

On the 9th of May the President came down to a Concert given by the 71st

N.Y. who still formed part of the garrison of the Yard—In some way or another 

quite a number of ladies & gentlemen collected too and well filled the lower 

floor of the Navy Store which was made to serve the purpose temporarily—The 

singers were all of the Regiment and did the thing in good style—Mr Lincoln 

enjoyed it very much and afterwards asked to see some practice from the battery 

with the XIin gun—I could offer him no hospitality for my quarters were still in 

the Office—

A few days afterwards the President came down in his usual off hand way and 

sat some while in the office conversing with me on various matters, among other 

things he expressed anxiety lest the insurgents should raise batteries to obstruct 

the Potomac35—So next day I went down early in a steamer and examined some 

of the points where this might be likely to occur—A few days [later] Capt. Ward 

arrived with two little armed Steamers and kept an eye along the river banks—36

On the 24th the move on Alexandria took place as previously determined:—

The night before I was to send down steamboats to Giesborough Point for the 

Zouave Regiment,37 which was to land at the Alex. wharves at the same time that 

a column passing over the Long Bridge should enter the upper part of the city

To prevent mishaps as far as possible in the embarcation,—for all were new 

to the business, I went down myself to supervise the operation—It was midnight 

34 Possibly the secession banner flown from the Marshall House, a hotel in Alexandria. The 

banner could be seen from the vicinity of the Navy Yard. “With the 11th New York Fire Zouaves 

in Camp, Battle, and Prison: The Narrative of Private Arthur O’Neil Alcock” in The New York 

Atlas and Leader, ed. Brian C. Pohanka and Patrick A. Schroeder (Lynchburg, VA: Schroeder 

Publications, 2011), 94.

35 This visit took place on 18 May. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 333.

36 Cmdr. James H. Ward left the New York Navy Yard on 17 May with Thomas Freeborn and an 

unidentified small propeller-driven ship and arrived at the Washington Navy Yard on 20 May. 

ORN 4: 467, 471.

37 The 11th NY Inf. Regt. The regiment wore the distinctive outfit of the Zouaves, who were 

French North African light infantry auxiliaries. They wore fezzes, bright red pantaloons, and 

special jackets. Col. Elmer Ellsworth had popularized the style in America before the Civil War, 

leading a drill team that demonstrated the unique light infantry drill of the Zouaves.
40 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

when the steamboats got to the Point—Ellsworth was afoot and in the act of 

forming one of the companies, the rest of his regiment was soon aroused—38

but it took some time to get the men aboard—it was well that we had a bright 

moon—I invited Ellsworth into my own boat, the Guy, which carried no 

troops—39the steamers now moved down the river, and I looked towards the 

Long Bridge for some sign of the column that was to cross—but it was too 

dark—Col. Ellsworth & myself conversed quietly about the business in hand 

and when near the wharf I put him in one of the steamboats with his men at his 

own request—I caused the vessels to move no faster than would just bring us to 

the wharf by break of day—the Howitzers of my own steamboat were trained so 

as to sweep with Canister, if any sign of resistance appeared,—presently we were 

close to,—a few musket shots were fired from the rebel sentries,—the steamers 

ran alongside—the Zouaves jumped ashore and entered the narrow alleys—there 

was no defence I waited to be sure—and finding that our men were in possession, 

I went on board the Pawnee at anchor off the town and laid down on a sofa to 

catch a few moments of sleep—for I had been up nearly all night—It seemed 

as if I was hardly asleep when a quarter Master awakened me with word that 

Ellsworth was killed—40I got ashore quickly and hurrying up into the town, met 

a detail of Zouaves carrying the body of their Colonel to the wharf—I directed 

them to my own steamer, and returned to the Navy Yard—It seemed strange, 

though we had been together & conversed—I had never seen his face—it was 

too dark during the night and now he had been sewed up in a coarse blanket41

The enterprise had been entirely successful—the U.S. troops had occupied 

Alexandria and the contiguous country without opposition—some 500 or 600 

rebs in the town escaped but a troop of Fairfax Cavalry was captured and sent to 

38 For an account of the embarkation and travel to Alexandria, see Pohanka and Schroeder, “With 

the 11th New York,” 92–96, 98.

39 Steamer James Guy, commanded by Acting Master David C. Woods. Pocahontas had picked it 

up on Machadoc Creek, VA suspecting the loyalty of its owner. ORN 4: 472, 475, 477.

40 Ellsworth had entered the Marshall House, intent on removing the secession banner seen from 

the camp of the 11th NY Inf.. As he made his way down the stairs after tearing the banner 

down, James Jackson, the proprietor of the hotel shot and killed him with a shot to the heart. 

In turn, one of Ellsworth’s men killed Jackson. Pohanka and Schroeder, “With the 11th New 

York,” 99.

41 Arthur O’Neil Alcock, a newspaper correspondent, gave an account of the removal of Ellsworth’s body from Alexandria, and discussed the activities of a shore party from Pawnee. Ibid., 

95-96, 99.
Chapter Three | 41

the Navy Yard—42

Without delay the engineers were at work intrenching the line of Heights 

that encircle Wash: on the S.W. and the numerous regiments that had been collecting in Washington pour over Long Bridge and extended themselves along the 

new position—Thus the National Capital was effectively assured against the any 

effort that could be made to take it—

In the afternoon the President drove to the Yard—He had known Ellsworth 

and his kindly nature was shocked and grieved at the suddenness and manner 

of his death—After some conversation with me he asked, if it be proper to have 

the funeral service at the White House—I advised him that it would be proper 

to consult his feelings solely—he concluded to do so—and the necessary orders 

42 Union forces captured 38 Confederates of the cavalry troop under the command of Capt. M. 

Dulany Ball. Ibid., 96. Dahlgren’s report on the expedition is found at ORN 4: 477.

“Action between the US vessels Pawnee and Freeborn and the rebel batteries at Acquæ Creek.” 

The captions written by Waud along the top of the image, from left to right, “gun boat Freeborn,” “rebel batteries,” “R.R. depot and Long dock on fire,” “rebel batteries,” and “US. Sloop 

Pawnee.” Alfred R. Waud, 1861. 

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-21146.
42 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

were given—Next day the body was transferred to the White House and the 

fitting rites were performed

On the 1st of June the oath of allegiance to the Gen[eral]. Gov[ernment]. was 

tendered to the workmen of the Navy Yard in my presence—out of 700 or 800 

only three refused—they were expelled immediately—The presence of 100,000 

Union bayonets had had the effect of settling opinion the right way—

About this time the rebs. began to manifest more decided intentions towards 

the river—and batteries were observable at Acquia probably to protect the terminus of the Rail Road and its buildings—this attracted our cruisers under Captain 

Ward and straightway he went at them with his little vessels and their metal was 

however too light to make much impression, but it showed Ward’s good will and 

he gave them little rest—43

In the first week of June, I was authorised to release the Virginia troop of 

Cavalry, taken prisoners when we seized Alexandria—during their captivity every 

care had been taken to make it as light as possible,—they were 35 in number 

and were well accommodated in the Powhatan, one of the Mail steamers that 

used to run between Washington and Acquia—the thousands of passengers that 

have travelled in this Boat knew the ample extent of her two Cabins, Upper & 

Lower—The Officers had State rooms and some of the others—The Guard was 

taken from the 71st—they lived and sat down to the same table as the Virginians—letters went and came without restraint—When Capt. Ball’s mother & 

wife came to my office and asked to see him,—I sent on board the Powhatan, 

invited him ashore, and assigned him, a room opposite my own where he could 

spend as much of the day as he chose with his family—I gave orders to admit no 

one on board whom the prisoners did not wish to see—for artists and reporters 

were as usual invading every corner—in fact nothing was omitted to soften the 

rigors of captivity—and finally in my many opportunities with the President I 

lost no one to urge their release—these things are not recapitulated with a view 

to any credit therefor, but as an instance of the feeling that prevailed towards men 

whose hands were not then red with the dearest blood of the land—44

On the 27th we lost that gallant officer Ward—his efforts to keep the river 

43 Cmdr. James Ward’s reports on his attacks on the Confederate batteries at Aquia Creek, VA, 

are in ORN 4: 490–91 and 491–92.

44 Dahlgren may have been at pains to explain that he treated the prisoners well because M. 

Dulany Ball publicized a statement after his release alleging poor treatment. Among other 

things, he claimed that “while prisoner we were exposed to constant insults . . . we were assured 

the Federal forces were in possession of our homes and our families had been driven out; we 

could hear nothing from our friends.” OR Series 2, Vol. 3:684–85.
Chapter Three | 43

clear and to cut off communications between its shores had been unceasing he 

seemed ubiquitous with two or three little steamers—his best gun a 32pdr:—

most troublesome menaced Matthias Point—a bluff, heavily wooded tongue of 

land that projected out in the river forming a turn in the channel—& compelling it to wind at short range around its extreme—batteries here would close 

navigation—so all attention was given to that—Ward wished to anticipate any 

movement of the rebs. to this effect,—he planned an attack,—asked for military 

aid—did not get it—made the landing himself—came in contact with an overwhelming force, ten to his one to his own before which his little party wilted 

away—Ward was close by with his little gunboat—and opened fire from her 

only 32pdr—to cover his men—the Captain of the gun was shot & fell—Ward 

stepped into his place, and just as he stooped to aim the gun, a ball pierced his 

body,—he fell, was carried aft—and lived but an hour—thus this country lost 

one whose courage, zeal and ability could illy be spared—and one of whom too 

little has been said—The remains of the heroic officer were brought to the Yard, 

“Capt Wards pet 32 pdr which he took aboard the Freeborn—& met his death close to 

it.” Also noted below Ward: “all caps are felt hats Navy Yard N.Y.” The sketch at bottom is 

labelled: “carrying sails aboard Navy Yard.” Drawing on paper, Alfred R. Waud, 1861. 

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-21514.
44 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

and received from me all the honors in my power—45

And now the City and the camps that whitened every surrounding hill were 

alive to the coming trial,—the cry was on to Richmond,—and the public would 

not be satisfied with aught else—

The press publishes a list of every regiment that has reached Washn.—

amounting to some 56,000 men by the 1st July—so that the enemy need not 

trouble himself to spy out our real condition

At last came the 21st July—it was well known then that the Army, perhaps 

50,000 strong had advanced—and would soon come to blows—

It was a fine quiet Sunday, and as the 71st had left the Yard, it was perfectly 

quiet—About 6OC in the evening the President drove down for the ride, and in 

the course of conversation said that the battle had begun—he had telegrams 

from the field and all was going well He had not left the Yard half an hour when 

I had a telegram from Gen. Mansfield asking me to send a vessel with dispatch 

to Alexandria to cover the approaches—this looked badly—46as if our army was 

being forced back—I had nothing but the Perry, just arrived and she was hurried 

down;47 gradually the worst of the tidings arrived—and before daylight some of 

the 71st got to the Navy Yard—

The next day was a “black Monday” truly—the Army had lost no time in 

falling back on the lines,—the city was filled with fugitive soldiers—whose tales 

were well calculated to alarm the citizens—the rain fell in torrents,—and the 

hopes of the Republic looked gloomy enough—48

It was about 10OC when the 71st returned to the Yard—that is what was left 

of it in an organised form—perhaps not the force of two companies,—seemingly 

worn out with hunger and fatigue—food was soon provided for them and sleep 

followed—the officers were gathered into my own quarters to a hasty lunch and 

45 Cmdr. Ward, of Thomas Freeborn, fell in action against Confederate forces at Mathias Point, 

VA. A Navy landing party had gone ashore there and soon faced an overwhelming Confederate 

response. Ward brought Thomas Freeborn in close ashore to cover the withdrawal from the 

beach. Cmdr. Stephen C. Rowan, in his after-action report, wrote that Ward had been “shot 

in the abdomen while in the act of sighting his bow gun.” F. M. Gunnell, a Navy surgeon, 

remarked that the wound had been “almost immediately fatal.” ORN 4: 537, 538, 540.

46 Brig. Gen. Joseph K. F. Mansfield’s telegram is in OR 2: 751.

47 Perry and a steam tug left the Washington Navy Yard for Alexandria, VA, on 21 July 1861. 

ORN 4: 582.

48 On 21 July 1861, Union forces under Brig. Gen. Irvin McDowell had been defeated by 

Confederate forces under Gens. P. G. T. Beauregard and Joseph E. Johnston at the Battle of 

Manassas. The Union troops left the field in some disorder, hurrying back into the defenses of 

Washington. 
Chapter Three | 45

there I listened with deep interest to the various accounts of what passed—In 

the course of the day numbers of the regiment dropped in by parties large & 

small or even in pairs—it was a fine regiment and must have endured much in 

the days work—

The disorganization that prevailed was complete—one who should know, 

describes a woful ignorance of the first elements of military life,—on some of 

the main roads to the city there were no troops at all—the camps were located 

without regard to defence,—the roads not picketed,—in no quarters would the 

defence have been even respectable against vigorous attack—“There was nothing 

to prevent the enemy shelling the city from heights within easy range, which 

could be occupied by a hostile column almost without resistance,—the streets of 

Wash. were crowded with straggling officers and men &c”49

In the sad scene of disorder and helplessness the first resort was to the soldier 

who had so vigorously overborne the rebel cause in Western Virginia and the 

telegraph summoned McClellan to Washington on the day after the battle50

The Navy was called on to contribute its assistance—and I sent down three 

IXin ship cannon and five Howitzers, with a body of trained seamen and some 

Marines—in short time they arrived in Steamers at Alexandria—and the heavy 

guns drawn by Oxen, the Howitzers by hand were marching for the lines—on 

the contiguous range of hills—this ends abruptly about a mile from the town, 

leaving a flat open country by which an enemy could turn the whole of our fortified line,—the Navy Battery was planted just at this point—so as to check such a 

flank move—51I had given the command to Captain Foxhall Parker, a most excellent officer—who quickly completed the arrangements for the new position, and 

put his command in such effective order as to render his post impregnable—On 

this occasion my gallant boy Ulric Dahlgren only 19 years old made his first essay 

as an Aid to Capt. Parker—52

49 This information was drawn from Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan’s report on conditions in 

Washington when he took command. Dahlgren’s dash in the quotation elides the following 

phrase: “Many soldiers had deserted, and.” OR 5: 11.

50 McClellan led Union forces to victory in the Rich Mountain Campaign in West Virginia; after 

McDowell’s defeat at Bull Run, Lincoln placed McClellan in command of the newly-created 

Army of the Potomac.

51 The naval force at Fort Ellsworth consisted of a battery of three IX-inch guns, five howitzers, 

110 seamen, and 50 Marines, all under the command of Lt. Foxhall Parker. ORN 4: 589. 

Parker’s report on the expedition can be found in [John A.] Dahlgren, Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren

(Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1872), 44–47.

52 Ulric Dahlgren arrived in Washington on 1 July 1861. When Parker was sent to Fort Ellsworth, Ulric volunteered to accompany him as an aide. Ibid., 40.
46 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

In about a couple of weeks after the battle of Bull Run confidence and order 

were restored, and the Gov. began to collect an Army that would be equal to the 

task before it—

Early in August, Congress manifested its sense of my service, by a special 

act enabling me to hold command of the Wash. Navy Yard,—for by law no one 

below the rank of Captain could do so and I was only a Commander—53

And a day or two later the Navy Depart. offered me the Bureau of Ordnance, 

but I preferred the Yard in every way for Washn. had again become the centre of 

great operations,—and the importance conferred on the Yard, made it equal to 

any naval trust that could be given so I declined—54

The rebels perceiving the probable inability of our Army to move for 

some time—covered the country up to our very lines and began to look seriously to obstructing the river communications—now very important for the 

transportation of much of the vast material required by an army of nearly two 

53 House Resolution 78, 37th Congress, 1st Session, amended the 1804 authorization for a naval 

peace establishment “so that the President shall be authorized to select the superintendent of 

the navy yard at Washington from captains or commanders of the navy of the United States.” 

As Dahlgren indicated here, previously the language had limited selection to captains. It passed 

on 2 August. Robert J. Schneller Jr., A Quest for Glory: A Biography of Rear Admiral John A. 

Dahlgren (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1996), 187. 

54 This offer came from Welles on 5 August. Ibid.

Gideon Welles, Lincoln’s Secretary 

of the Navy. 

Glass negative, c. 1860. Brady-Handy 

Photograph Collection, Library of 

Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, 

LC-DIG-cwpbh-01102.
Chapter Three | 47

hundred thousand—

There were indications also of a purpose to cross a rebel force into the Eastern shore, known to be disaffected and thus menace Washington from another 

quarter—

By the middle of September the rebels had occupied ground close in our 

front and the flag of Rebeldom was plainly visible from the ship-house of the 

Navy Yard—this brought out skirmishers from both sides and some sharp work 

ensued—Ulric Dahlgren tired of the regular & undisturbed life of the post,—circulated among some friends in the Camp and was daily in the outer skirmish line 

about Munson’s Hill, with his rifle.—where his good aim and activity exposed 

others as well as himself55

Among our friends from abroad we have the Prince de Joinville & his 

nephew56—the large number of officers and distinguished civilians collected in 

the city give occasion to continued reunions in the evening and to dinners—

The conduct & discipline of the Navy at our battery in the lines has been 

so satisfactory that Gen. McClellan desired to hand over Fort Ellsworth to Naval 

occupation—So I was directed to take charge of it and sent down 600 sailors 

under the command of that truly gallant officer Lieut Wainwright—57

When October came the army was in condition to spread out and occupy 

more ground—the rebs. made no serious opposition and drew in their outposts 

toward Manassas—But at the same time came certain evidences that their batteries were going up on the river bank—those so long feared batteries

The necessities of this central position have gathered a number of Steamers 

at & off the Yard—some of the them altered from merchant vessels which work 

has much occupied my attention—for it is no small matter to convert such to 

war purposes—

We know too that the Merrimac has been raised and is being rapidly converted 

by the rebs. into an Ironclad—before me is a sketch of what report makes her, 

55 The flag visible from the Navy Yard was on Munson’s Hill. On 5 September 1861, Ulric wrote 

that “I was in two skirmishes near Munson’s Hill, in which we lost several killed and wounded, 

and they lost some also. It is regular Indian-fighting that we do every day near here, and I have 

a Maynard rifle, with which I send a telegram south occasionally.” Dahlgren, Memoir of Ulric 

Dahlgren, 49–50.

56 François, Prince de Joinville, son of King Louis Philippe of France. He served in the French 

navy and left France for England during the turmoil of the Revolution of 1848. Prince de 

Joinville, Memoirs (Vieux Souvenirs) of the Prince de Joinville, trans. Lady Mary Loyd (London: 

William Heinemann, 1895). 

57 A contingent of 400 additional men left the Washington Navy Yard for Fort Ellsworth on 28 

August 1861. Lt. Richard Wainwright later took command. ORN 4: 642.
48 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

by a Navy officer of high rank—and 

now it seems to have been correct 

enough for our guidance.—We are 

just talking about iron-clads—but 

nothing done.58

Foote is at work out West—I 

have a letter from him—in which 

after speaking of movements 

expected he says “I expect of course 

to be shot by a Kentucky rifleman 

but I mean to die game as there 

must be a Providence in all these 

things”—he was hit but by something bigger than a rifle ball—59

By the middle of October 

the batteries showed their teeth—

Rumor after rumor pointed to their 

existence and naturally much anxiety was felt on the subject for the 

navigation of the river would be 

seriously troubled

The Pocahontas & Seminole

were to go down the river, and 

Drayton who commanded the former, being my friend from boyhood 

was staying with me—the breakfast 

was very early for his convenience in 

leaving—when over I accompanied 

him to the door—we laughed about the batteries—and the probability of their 

opening—he felt sure that they were ready, but he had no orders to disturb them 

by firing first—I replied laughing “Well I’ll give you orders”—Drayton in great 

58 The Confederates raised Merrimack and converted her into the ironclad CSS Virginia.

59 On 30 August 1861, Gideon Welles assigned Capt. Andrew Foote to command the naval 

forces on the western rivers, who set about creating a flotilla upon his arrival. Foote died from 

disease during the war. Spencer C. Tucker, Andrew Foote: Civil War Admiral on Western Waters

(Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2000), 114–21. 

Rear Admiral Andrew H. Foote.

Glass negative, c. 1863. Brady Photograph Collection, 

National Archives, B-3859.
Chapter Three | 49

glee said—“Well I’ll do it”60

The two vessels steamed 

down, Pocahontas ahead—presently they came opposite the 

suspect point—all was quiet, not 

a head visible—only a long row 

of trees—Drayton cast loose his 

heavy Pivot gun and deliberately 

put in one shell after another, 

while in range—Instantly men 

were seen—flying axes—down 

fell the trees, and the batteries 

appeared—blazing away finely,—

but the Pocahontas having passed, 

the rebs aimed at the Seminole—

hitting her several times—The 

Pawnee being about to follow 

filled with Marines, when Capt. 

Craven arrived from below with 

the news,—the men were transferred to light steamboats which 

I sent down after dark and passed 

safely—61

A week later came the misadventure of Edward’s Ferry—Gen. 

McClellan with a friend was taking a quiet dinner with me in my quarters at the Navy Yard and the evening 

was sliding away pleasantly in easy chat about matters, when the Yard telegraph 

conveyed a message from Col. Stone saying he had crossed a body of troops at 

Edwards Ferry: McClellan replied by the same way, and soon after concluded to 

return to his Headquarters—he had left but a short time when came another 

dispatch by Telegraph

60 Gideon Welles, on 5 October, informed Dahlgren that Cmdr. Percival Drayton would receive 

command of Pocahontas; Drayton formally assumed command on 9 October. ORN 4: 703, 

767.

61 Cmdr. Thomas T. Craven commanded the Potomac Flotilla. Craven’s report of this action, 

as well as that of Cmdr. John P. Gillis of Seminole, is found in ORN 4: 718–21. Dahlgren’s 

instructions for Pawnee and the Marines are also found in ORN 4: 721–23.

Percival Drayton later in the war, wearing the 

uniform of a captain. At Charleston, Drayton 

commanded Pawnee and Passaic. Glass negative, 

c. 1864. 

Brady-Handy Photograph Collection, Library of Congress, 

Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-cwpbh-03078.
50 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

[“]Edward Ferry Oct. 21

Maj. Gen. McClellan

Col. Baker has been killed at the head of his Brigade. I go to the right at 

once—C.P. Stone

 Brig. Gen[”]

The public were as much distressed with this small affair as if it had been 

much greater,62— but was soon diverted to the interruption of the river, against 

which they clamored loudly—I offered to establish counter batteries on the Md. 

side,—but the military opinion properly considered these batteries a part of the 

reb. position and preferred to have them fall with it—direct attack could end in 

nothing of consequence—A strong Division was located opposite to prevent any 

62 On 21 October 1861, a small Union force suffered a defeat at Ball’s Bluff, on the Potomac 

River in Loudoun County, VA. Col. Edward Baker, a sitting senator and friend of Abraham 

Lincoln, was killed during the fighting. Many blamed Brig. Gen. Charles P. Stone for the fiasco. 

Dissatisfaction with the progress of the Union’s military endeavors, including the battles of First 

Manassas and Ball’s Bluff, led Congress to establish the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the 

War, in an effort to exercise oversight of the war effort. Gary W. Gallgher, JCCW index vol., 

“Introduction,” vi-vii.

“Steam sloop Pensacola brought to Washington under canvas from Pensacola, some time 

1861.” Drawing on paper; Alfred R. Waud, 1861. 

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-20187.
Chapter Three | 51

connection with the rebs—

The Prince de Joinville often rides to the yard and seems entirely engrossed 

with our affairs—

By the middle of Novem the engine of the Pensacola was in condition for use 

and the President came down with several of the Cabinet and took a trip down 

the river

Foote began to be ready to move in the West and wanted seamen—no alternative but to withdraw the seamen from Fort Ellsworth and send them,—which 

was done—they were a fine body of men and served him well—

Just now the course of our affairs was disturbed by the seizure of Slidell & 

Mason creating much feeling—63the Diplomats all think against us, and show 

more feeling than good will—in the evening I dined with the Prince de J— he is 

a good friend and thinks England will not let us off easily—Many distinguished 

persons continue to visit the Yard—and scarcely a day passes but that I meet with 

our principal men, discussing our affairs, so that the company at Wash. never 

has been of like interest—The President everywhere—and always the same kind 

sagacious gentleman—I had occasion to observe in more than one instance how 

the Mason affair weighed on his spirits—

Our Christmas was not merry,—there was too much at stake—

A day or two afterward—the President came down, and proposed a trip 

down the river—no one was with him, so we went to the Pensacola and steamed 

as far as Craney I. then back—The President talked as much upon many subjects 

but forbore from the British trouble,—when we landed, he said “well there has 

been a pleasant day”—“such a relief from politicians—”64

Next day the whole matter was out—á soirée at the Dutch Ministry was fully 

attended except that our Sec. of State65 and the Br. Minister66 were absent—The 

Diplomats did not spare their remarks on the Slidell-Mason business—I told 

one of them as they were so partial to the British mode of doing business, I hope 

63 In early November 1861, Capt. Charles Wilkes commanding San Jacinto, stopped and boarded 

Trent, a British mail steamer, and removed two Confederate diplomats bound for Europe, 

James Murray Mason and John Sliddell. The action caused an international incident as Wilkes 

had acted in violation of international law by removing the two from a neutral vessel. Wilkes 

discussed the episode in his autobiography; see Autobiography of Rear Admiral Charles Wilkes, 

U.S. Navy 1798–1877, ed. William James Morgan, et al. (Washington, DC: Naval History 

Division, 1978), 767–81.

64 The trip took place on 27 December 1861. Earl Schenk Miers and C. Percy Powell, Lincoln 

Day by Day: A Chronology 1809–1865 (Dayton, OH: Morningside, 1991), 85.

65 William Henry Seward.

66 Lord Lyons; Richard Bickerton Pemell Lyons.
52 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

before long they would have some further experience of it—it has since turned 

out so—bitterly enough—The Prince de J. was there & the French Minister—

but they avoided meeting

1862

New Years day came (1862) and the usual forms followed,—but there was 

no real gaiety—we Americans were too much concerned to be at ease—The President was kind as usual shaking hands with all—Next day he was at my quarters in the Navy Yard—sat some while—and talked—but was not satisfied with 

affairs—speaking of one of the expeditions that was not ready—he observed with 

much feeling “no one is ready”

A few days later the Pensacola passed down the river under the fire of the reb. 

batteries but they did her no injury—67

Then came the unlooked for resignation of Cameron Sec. of War—he seemed 

in good spirits a few days afterwards at a dinner given by Hanseatic Minister—68

It was some relief to heavy apprehensions—the party of Mrs Lincoln—69It 

was [a] very elegant affair and most creditable to Mrs Lincoln—gathered in 

all the distinguished and a few more—and the presence of some two or three 

showed how singularly free was our good President from ill-feeling—one gentleman I noted who had been so far suspected at the beginning that he was provided 

for at Fort Lafayette—a lady too whose husband’s door had been provided for a 

while with a Sentry—Fremont70 was there Gen McClellan & family—and Gen 

67 Dahlgren reported that Capt. Henry W. Morris and Pensacola passed the batteries, which fired 

nearly two dozen shots but did no damage. ORN 5: 16–17.

68 Simon Cameron, a Pennsylvania politician, served as Lincoln’s first Secretary of War. Allegations of corruption and mismanagement of the war effort swirled around Cameron. By early 

1862, many politicians and much of the public had lost faith in him, leading him to resign 

from the cabinet. Lincoln appointed him minister to Russia. Paul Kahan, Amiable Scoundrel: 

Simon Cameron, Lincoln’s Scandalous Secretary of War (Lincoln, NE: Potomac Books, 2016), 

206–14. Rudolf Mathias Schleiden was the Hanseatic minister.

69 Lincoln’s wife was Mary Todd Lincoln. This “presidential reception” began on 5 February 

1862. Dahlgren noted in his diary that McClellan “admired my sword very much; for, being in 

full uniform, I wore that presented by the Seventy-first.” Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 

355–56.

70 Maj. Gen. John Charles Frémont. Before the war, he had led expeditions to the West and ran 

as the presidential candidate for the Republican Party in 1856. Ezra J. Warner, Generals in Blue: 

Lives of the Union Commanders (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1964), 160–61.
Chapter Three | 53

_____ who a few days later was suddenly arrested on suspicion71—The supper 

was superb—Of course Mrs Lincoln was abused by all who had not been invited; 

but she did her part handsomely for all that—

Our kind President suffered a stinging blow by the death of his little boy Willie—72which saddened the appearance of better fortune—breaking out around 

us:—In the West Foote had opened the ball by taking Fort Henry, and Grant was 

beginning that career at Fort Donelson that was to end at Richmond—Burnside 

& Goldsborough had captured Roanoke I.—73

The President willing & anxious to use every opportunity of peace proclaims 

an Amnesty74—The 22d—served to inaugurate the Reb. President75 and with 

us to remember Wash—Congress assembled to hear his farewell Address76, and 

there was a vast gathering of notabilities—Domestic & foreign—The spectacle 

was very imposing—So tender still was the feeling to the South that the display 

of captured reb. flags was not permitted—they had been collected in the rotunda, 

& were not to enter the Hall,—

While preparation was being made on one part for an advance in full force 

upon the Rebel centre, a blow was struck directly at us, which was only warded 

off by the interposition of Providence—

On the 8th of March the rebel Ironclad Merrimac suddenly issued from the 

Elizabeth River, destroyed two of our frigates, and would have served all the 

71 As a result of the Ball’s Bluff disaster, suspicion fell upon the loyalty of Brig. Gen. Charles 

Pomeroy Stone. On 8 February 1862 he was arrested and held in confinement until that 

August. No formal charges were filed and he was restored to command in May 1863. Stone 

resigned from the Army in 1864. Ibid., 480–81.

72 Lincoln’s son, William W. Lincoln, died on 20 February 1862.

73 Capt. Andrew Hull Foote, commander of a naval flotilla on the western waters, captured Fort 

Henry on the Tennessee River on 6 February 1862. On 16 February, Brig. Gen. Ulysses S. 

Grant captured nearby Fort Donelson on the Cumberland River. The loss of these forts forced 

Confederates in the west to rearrange their troop dispositions and also made the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers available for Union use. Flag Officer Louis M. Goldsborough, 

commander of the North Atlantic Blockading Squadron, and Brig. Gen. Ambrose Burnside 

captured Confederate-held Roanoke Island, NC. In the following campaign, Burnside moved 

his troops into the North Carolina interior. 

74 Presumably Lincoln’s executive order of 14 February, where he ordered all political prisoners 

held by the military to be released, contingent on their not providing any further aid to the 

Confederates. Miers and Powell, Lincoln Day by Day, 95.

75 On 22 February, Washington’s birthday, Jefferson Davis was inaugurated as President of the 

Confederacy, previously having been only the provisional president.

76 George Washington’s “Farewell Address” of 19 September 1786. In it, he called for Americans 

to set aside differences and work for the preservation of the Union and the common welfare.
54 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

others present in the same way—77

Though it was Sunday I was sitting in the ordnance office attending to 

some public business that could not be postponed,—when the President was 

announced—I stept out to his carriage—“Get your hat and ride up with me,”—

in a minute I was in the carriage by his side—“I have frightful news”—and then 

self-composed, though earnest he told of the Merrimac’s raid

Half an hour landed us at the White House,—In the cabinet were several of the Secretaries—Gen. Mc

Clellan &c after some desultory remarks all the 

telegrams were read carefully—discussion followed—then the President said to 

Gen. McClellan, Meigs & myself “Now you are a Committee to advise measures,”—just step into the next room and talk it over”—78The arrival of the 

Monitor however settled the matter and the Merrimac was sealed up for the 

remainder of her term—

The mission of the Merrimac having thus failed, the rebel army evacuated 

Manassas and drew back on their Capital, for they seemed to be better informed 

of the meditated flank move of McClellan than our own public

The effect of this change was magical upon affairs at Washington—the 

throng of officers vanished from the hotels and the streets—the rebel batteries 

on the river were abandoned and the tide of War seemed rolled entirely away 

from us—

A few days later the President & Secs. of War79 & State went down to Alex. 

to see Gen. McClellan—I sent up a messenger to let him know and he came 

down—dressed plainly and without ceremony or attendance—a pleasant conversation ensued in the Cabin about matters generally—then the Gen. landed and 

77 CSS Virginia, a Confederate ironclad built on the hull of the steam frigate Merrimack, sortied 

on 8 March 1862, sinking both Congress and Cumberland.

78 This conference took place on 9 March 1862. After the war, Gideon Welles recalled “that day 

and its incidents were among the most unpleasant and uncomfortable of my life.” Lincoln 

brought Dahlgren to the White House, where Lincoln, Stanton, Seward, Welles, Assistant 

Secretary of War Watson, Brig. Gen. Montgomery C. Meigs, McClellan, and Lincoln’s aide 

John G. Nicolay waited. After discussion, Lincoln directed Dahlgren, McClellan, and Meigs to 

make arrangements to block the Potomac by sinking ships full of stones and gravel to protect 

against a raid on Washington by CSS Virginia. Dahlgren asked Welles on both 10 and 11 

March to take command of Monitor as its captain, Cmdr. Worden, had been disabled. Welles 

refused. Ultimately, about 60 canal boats were prepared to serve as blockships, but the duel 

between Monitor and CSS Virginia abated the threat to Washington. Dahlgren, Memoir of John 

A. Dahlgren, 358–60; William E. Gienapp and Erica L. Gienapp, eds., The Civil War Diary of 

Gideon Welles, Lincoln’s Secretary of the Navy: The Original Manuscript Edition, (Urbana: The 

Knox College Lincoln Studies Center and the University of Illinois Press, 2014), 679–81.

79 Edwin M. Stanton replaced Simon Cameron as the Secretary of War.
Chapter Three | 55

we returned to the Navy Yard—80

The move for the Peninsula is now fairly afoot—the Potomac is crowded 

with every description of vessel carrying troops, horses, field guns—stores of all 

kinds—the President is constantly on the move, looking with deepest interest at 

the proceedings—

Early in May, our army overcame the resistance at Yorktown and moved 

up the Peninsula,—came the news at the same time that our fleet had taken 

New Orleans81

About the middle of May—some of the Cabinet visited McClellan at Cumberland on the Pamunkey I was with them–a large corps of the Army here, about 

to move upon Richmond—McClellan came on board, with many officers,—also 

the Prince de J. and his nephews—matters were discussed—weather rainy & 

uncomfortable—We left soon after,—looked at Yorktown, and at Norfolk, and 

at all that was to be seen of the redoubtable Merrimac—which was little more 

than the lip of her stern pushing above water,—the rest lay below on the bottom—82

Then we followed up the James—saw the batteries abandoned by the rebels—and further on encountered a double-ender coming down—reported the 

fight at Drury bluff—Galena severely damaged—There I passed on, intending to 

80 This trip took place on 18 March. Though not mentioned here, Assistant Secretary of the Navy 

Gustavus Vasa Fox accompanied Lincoln, Seward, Stanton, and Dahlgren. During the meeting, 

the men discussed war plans and McClellan also urged the promotion of Burnside to major 

general, not realizing that Burnside had already been promoted. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. 

Dahlgren, 361.

81 The Confederates opposing McClellan’s army left their defenses around Yorktown on the night 

of 3 May; the Union Army took Yorktown the following day. In April, David G. Farragut 

bombarded the Confederate defenses below New Orleans; his ships passed the Confederate 

batteries and captured the city on 29 April. Several days later, on 1 May, Union Army forces 

under Maj. Gen. Benjamin F. Butler occupied the city. 

82 On 13 May 1862, Dahlgren joined Welles, Stanton, Attorney General Edward Bates, and 

other “ladies and gentleman” aboard the steamer Baltimore to visit McClellan at Cumberland 

Landing on the Pamunkey River. Bates recorded in his diary that the party included Welles, 

Welles’s wife and niece, Seward, Seward’s son Frederick, Bates’s wife, Commodore Goldsborough, Goldsborough’s wife and daughter, Chief of the U.S. Navy Bureau of Medicine and 

Surgery William Whelan, Chief Clerk of the Navy William Faxon, Eva Dahlgren, as well as 

other relatives of the party. The Prince de Joinville and his nephews, Louis Philippe, comte de 

Paris, and Robert, duc de Chartres, served as aides to McClellan. The trip lasted several days, 

with the visit to Yorktown on 15 May, Norfolk on 16 May, and Jamestown Island on 17 May. 

Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 366–67; The Diary of Edward Bates 1859–1866, ed. 

Howard K. Beale (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1933), 258–59, 259n.
56 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

go as high as the bluff,—but the Sec. of State could not spare the time83—When 

I visited the Galena, it was evident that she had been fairly at her work, and that 

Rodgers had not withdrawn her any too soon—in fact she was well mauled—84

On the 23rd of May the President rode through Fredericksburg—on horse83 Dahlgren wrote in his diary that at 4 a.m. on 18 May, Seward “wanted to move for Washington right off. There were State reasons for it.” Baltimore arrived back at the Washington 

Navy Yard on 19 May. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 368.

84 Cmdr. John Rodgers, of Galena, had engaged Confederate land batteries at Drewry’s Bluff 

on the James, along with several other vessels. According to Rodgers, during the battle Galena

“expended nearly all her ammunition.” After the action, Rodgers reported that “we demonstrated that” the ironclad “is not shot-proof” and thought that “the Galena should be repaired 

before sending her to sea.” Of her crew, 13 were killed and 11 wounded. ORN 7: 357–58.

Galena after the engagement at Drewry’s Bluff. Visible are two IX-inch Dahlgren guns, and 

just left of bottom center, a bung plugs a hole from the battle. Photograph, 1862. 

Naval History and Heritage Command, Photographic Collections, NH 53984.
Chapter Three | 57

back attended by Gen McDowell and staff—Secr. of War & myself in company, 

generally the houses were shut—but we carried our own welcome—the force 

here was about 45000 men—and the review showed them to be in fine order—

all ready to advance and give a hand to McClellan at Hanover junction85

Next morning about daylight we landed at the Navy Yard wharf—just as 

the President crossed the plank from the boat a telegram was handed him—he 

said good morning to me, stepped into his carriage with the Sec of War and 

drove off—

There was matter enough in that slip of paper—it announced the onslaught 

of Jackson at Harper’s Ferry—and of course spread rapidly—my share was a telegram asking if I could send my Howitzers to Harper F—I offered beside to send 

some heavy Cannon and that evening they and the Howitzers with a choice body 

of seamen were being whirled on the Railway to the Ferry—where they arrived 

in good season and were soon planted in a commanding position some 2000 feet 

above the ocean level—the only officer I could spare was a young master and his 

associate was my son Ulric, who was now to begin the career for his country that 

only ended with his life—86

To this battery, opened in good time on Jackson’s columns, the safety of the 

post was probably due—the rebs were astonished at shells as large as the IXinch

making havoc among them, and drew off—It was Thursday late at night that 

Ulric Dahlgren came to the War Depart. with an account of the repulse—The 

President & Sec of War listened with interest and the young man returned with 

an appointment as Captain—87

We were now to pass the trying ordeal of the campaign in the Peninsula—of 

course it is needless for me to go over the well told tale—

85 Dahlgren left for Aquia Landing with Lincoln and Stanton late in the evening on 22 May. 

Details on the visit can be found in Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 369–70. 

86 The Naval Battery, under the command of Acting Master Charles H. Daniels, arrived at 

Harper’s Ferry on 27 May to support Brig. Gen. Rufus Saxton’s command. Ulric Dahlgren also 

accompanied it as a volunteer aide-de-camp. The battery was in place by 28 May, when it “had 

some splendid practice . . . shelling the woods and heights across the Shenandoah.” On 30 May, 

the battery helped repel a Confederate attack. Saxton wrote: “I cannot speak too highly of the 

services of Lieutenant Daniels, U.S. Volunteers, and his splendid rifled 9-inch Dahlgren. Both 

he and they did their work well.” He later noted that the “naval battery of Dahlgren guns on 

Maryland Heights, 2,000 feet above the level of the sea, did splendid service throughout the 

entire siege.” OR 12: 1, 634, 636, 641.

87 Ulric Dahlgren met with Lincoln and Stanton on 29 May; John Dahlgren later wrote that 

“what the lad had to say was of interest, and was clearly narrated, both to the President and to 

Secretary Stanton.” As Ulric left, Lincoln “tendered . . . an appointment as additional aide-decamp, with the rank of captain.” Dahlgren, Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren, 63. 
58 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

On the 10th of July the President landed at the Navy Yard—he was just from 

the army of the James—anxious, and harassed by the fierce conflict of opinions 

about him, he left so privately that the public knew not of it—reached the army, 

heard and saw for himself—I gave him refreshments at my quarters—he told me 

there were 81,000 men present and in fine condition for battle—

July 18th (1862) I was commissioned as Chief of Bureau of Ordnance—and 

therefore detached from command of the Navy Yard—a change by no means 

acceptable to me, but I had no choice the Dept. had permitted me to refuse a 

year ago, but now insisted—

The Commission as Chief of Bureau was dated 18th July—and addressed to 

me as a Commander—So I was the first of the grade that ever filled the office,—

and when I declined it a year ago perhaps the only officer who ever declined such 

a position

And so ended a service of one year and three months as Commandant of the 

Washington Navy Yard—which came to me not by the ordinary routine, but the 

unexpected and extraordinary events of the Rebellion—In that situation it had 

been my fortune to be so associated with the great passing events and the actors, 

as will never occur again—For surely the Country will never again be called to 

pass through such an ordeal—it is the last time that the people of any section will 

ever appeal from the ballot to the sword and bayonet—I was also fortunate in 

not being transferred from the Yard until its temporary importance was at an end

It was my good fortune while in that command to receive a practical proof of 

appreciation, in the enactment of a Law to enable me to retain the command,—

for being only a Commander I was thereby disabled—

It is true that I did not desire to go to the Bureau,—but only because in such 

circumstances I wished more active duty.

The duties of the Bureau now brought me in connection with all the Navy 

Yards and Foundries of cannon &c—The latter part of July I found it necessary to 

look personally at our new Ironclad the Ironsides at Philad.—and the Monitors at 

New York, where I had an interview with their distinguished Inventor—though 

my attention had been long given to him—from his essay with the Princeton, and 

he always had my hearty admiration, as a man of real genius—88

The rebs. are now busy with their ironclads for the Merrimac had certainly 

been a success,—As it would take time for us to build I was anxious to resort 

meanwhile to temporary expedients—among others to cut down the Niagara

88 Swedish inventor John Ericsson designed both Princeton and Monitor.
Chapter Three | 59

and fill her with Steam power, for a Ram-Ally.89 4th I received promotion to be a 

Captain by appointment, dated back to 16th July—

The city once more in commotion—the Rebel General taking advantage of 

the withdrawal of McClellan is concentrating on Pope, and news are coming in 

of disaster—90

On the 19th the President sent for me on official business,—and afterwards 

began to talk of the “situation”—ending with the remark “now I am to have a 

sweat of it for 5 or 6 days”—

By the first of Septr. it was well enough known that results were discouraging—our army falling back, in as good order as a beaten army could—but fighting bravely—Fresh levies coming through the city from the North brings back 

the sights of previous days—the Army too is much distressed and even Clerks are 

89 Niagara was decommissioned on 16 June 1862. She underwent a refit including new boilers 

and armament. Paul H. Silverstone, Civil War Navies 1855–1883 (Annapolis, MD: Naval 

Institute Press, 2001), 17–18.

90 Emboldened by McClellan’s retrograde maneuver to Harrison’s Landing, Confederate Gen. 

Robert E. Lee began shifting his army northward. His Army of Northern Virginia would clash 

with Maj. Gen. John Pope’s army on 29–30 August 1862 at Second Bull Run, which resulted 

in a Union loss and Pope’s men falling back on Washington.

John Ericsson, the Swedish 

engineer who designed Princeton, 

also designed the famed Monitor. 

Photograph of print.

Library of Congress, Prints and 

Photographs Division, Detroit 

Publishing Company Collection, 

LC-DIG-det-4a26414.
60 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

sent from the city to aid the wounded—I forwarded men from the Ordnance for 

the same purpose—

Really I did not consider the city in danger if the troops were handled 

rightly,—for we had the men of the Peninsula and other veterans,—who would 

not be brushed out of a strong position—In the great stir of such events, it was 

impossible to trace the minor atoms of the mass, and I was much concerned 

about my son Ully—of whom I heard little,—but at last an old seaman of the 

Ordnance who had been tending the wounded came to me,—while so engaged 

Ulric was riding by with his orderly, when spying his old friend he halted to 

greet him—he was not hurt though frequently in the melée, and though much 

fagged was hearty—A day or two afterwards he suddenly entered my office—the 

brave boy looked as cheerful as ever,—but had worn off every ounce of spare 

flesh,—bronzed as a veteran—Passing out of the Department, we came full on 

the President who stopped and greeted us with that warm kindness, so much 

his own—But how anxious and wasted—Still the pleasant smile lighted his face 

as he spoke, and he motioned us to the War Depart—and drawing Ulric by the 

arm, just inside of its outer door,—he said—“Come now tell me what you have 

seen”—the young soldier clearly and distinctly told of the last battles, on which 

doubts had arisen—while the President leaning forward lost not a word—and 

yielded to some absorbing thought when the narration was ended Then he shook 

hands, bade Ully come and see him & pursued his way to the White House How 

little either imagined that both were to fall by the hands of bitter enemies!—

The middle of Septem found the enemy in Maryland, hoping to raise the 

standard of revolt there,—but McClellan was close upon him, and on the 14th

the sound of Cannon heard in Washn. gave token that the issue was joined—91

Early in Nov. the first of the new Monitors (Passaic) is ready for trial and I 

proceeded to New York to look after the Ordnance part of the vessel;92 the noise 

of the XIin is very stunning

A few days afterwards while in my office, received a telegram saying that 

Ulric had been captured in a dash into Fredericksburg—and I passed a troubled 

night—but better news came next day—he had surprised the place,—entered it 

91 Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia invaded Maryland in 

early September 1862. On 14 September, Union forces under Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan 

engaged in three separate battles in an attempt to take control of the passes through South 

Mountain, in Frederick County, MD, and thereby threaten Lee’s dispersed forces and prevent 

the concentration of the Confederate Army. The Union attacks were largely unsuccessful, and 

three days later the Union and Confederate Armies met in battle at Antietam.

92 The Passaic-class monitors moved the pilothouse to the top of the turret and were armed with 

one XI-inch and one XV-inch smoothbore cannon; Silverstone, Civil War Navies, 5.
Chapter Three | 61

with some 60 or 70 cavalry,—and after a series of continued conflicts, hand to 

hand with rebel cavalry, had routed three times his number, and was in possession—finally he came out with prisoners more than half his command. It was 

bravely done, and his own notion.93

The Winter season brought Congress together,—and then came the fatal 

battle of Fredericksburg—94

93 A thorough discussion of Ulric Dahlgren’s 9 November raid and safe return on 10 November 

1862, as well as transcriptions of the various dispatches referred to above, is found in Dahlgren, 

Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren, 92–116.

94 From 11–13 December 1862, Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee repelled an attack by Maj. 

Gen. Ambrose Burnside, delivering a heavy defeat to the Army of the Potomac. 

Chapter Four | 63

CHAPTER 4

Promotion, Command of the South 

Atlantic Blockading Squadron, and the 

Siege of Charleston, 1863

1863

Early in Febr. I encountered the President entering the Navy Depart.—he said 

that Mr Seward had told him of a raid by rebel Rams from Charleston, and he 

had come over to hear more about it.1

Feb. 12—Congress puts vote of thanks to Commo. Stringham, Captain 

1 On 31 January 1863, the Confederate ironclad rams CSS Chicora and CSS Palmetto State

attacked the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron outside of Charleston. The Confederate 

vessels forced the surrender of Mercedita, although they did not take her as a prize, and inflicted 

heavy damage upon Keystone State. ORN 13: 577–99; Robert M. Browning Jr., Success Is All 

that Was Expected: The South Atlantic Blockading Squadron During the Civil War (Washington, 

DC: Brassey’s, 2002), 138–43. News of the attack reached Washington around 4 February; 

Gideon Welles recorded in his diary that “we have the whole world agog with an account of an 

onset on our fleet before Charleston.” Secretary of State William Seward evinced concern over 

the attack, as foreign consuls in Charleston declared that the attack had lifted the blockade. 

William E. Gienapp and Erica L. Gienapp, eds., The Civil War Diary of Gideon Welles, Lincoln’s 

Secretary of the Navy: The Original Manuscript Edition (Urbana: The Knox College Lincoln 

Studies Center and the University of Illinois Press, 2014), 134,134n.
64 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Davis, myself Rowan and Porter—2

On the last day of Febr. I learn that my nomination as Rear Admiral has been 

confirmed by the Senate—

On the 4th of March Congress adjourned and closed its existence—Perhaps 

no body of men ever were charged with greater responsibilities—I was on the 

2 On 11 July, Lincoln recommended that Congress thank the mentioned officers, among others. 

On 7 February, Congress approved a joint resolution: “That the thanks of Congress be, and are 

hereby, given to the following officers of the United States Navy, upon the recommendation 

of the President of the United States, viz: Commodore Charles Henry Davis, for distinguished 

services in conflict with the enemy at Fort Pillow, at Memphis, and for successful operations at 

other points in the waters of the Mississippi River: Captain John A. Dahlgren, for distinguished 

service in the line of his profession, improvements in ordnance, and zealous and efficient labors 

to the ordnance branch of service: Captain Stephen C. Rowan, for distinguished services in the 

waters of North Carolina, and particularly in the capture of Newbern, being in chief command 

of the naval forces: Commander David D. Porter, for the bravery and skill displayed in the 

attack on the post of Arkansas, which surrendered to the combined military and naval forces 

on the tenth of January, eighteen hundred and sixty-three: Rear-Admiral Silas H. Stringham, 

now on the retired list, for distinguished services in the capture of Forts Hatteras and Clark: 

and that a copy of that resolution be forwarded to each of the above officers by the President of 

the United States.” Acts and Resolutions of the Third Session of the Thirty-Seventh Congress, begun 

on Monday, December 1, 1862 and Ended on Wednesday, March 4, 1863 (Washington, DC: 

Government Printing Office, 1863), 238–39. For the text of Lincoln’s recommendation, see 

Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, New and Enlarged Edition, ed. John G. Nicolay and John 

Hay (n.p.: Lincoln Memorial University, 1894), Volume 7: 267–68.

Stephen C. Rowan. 

Glass negative, c. 1863.

Brady Photograph Collection, National 

Archives, B-4517.
Chapter Four | 65

floor there was nothing of the confusion that too often discredits such occasions.—but quiet—and the mere form of proceeding—Presently the Speaker3

rose,—and so did every member,—he made a short address and then announced 

that the 37th Congress was dissolved—

The President is evidently much occupied in thought with Charleston—

The ironclads are there and Dupont is to operate before long, but when, is not 

known exactly—4

Among the measures of the late Congress was the Act incorporating the 

“National Academy of Science”—consisting of 50 members, styled Incorporators—of which I was named as one—but as soon as it was organised, I sent a 

resignation to the President of the Academy (Prof. Bache)5 who replied next day 

(May 15th) regretting that I had done so, and urged me not to insist,—but I 

felt under the circumstances that it was best to do so and therefore wrote again, 

adhering to my determination—The honor was duly appreciated and quite a 

temptation but it is not allowable to occupy such position without contributing 

to the work and I felt that my hands & head were fully occupied with public 

duties.—For similar reasons I had also withdrawn from the American Association6

 &c—formerly.

Towards the end of March I observed that the President seem rather discouraged at the state of affairs,—more so than I had ever seen before—It was pretty 

well understood that the new ironclads would soon be tried at Charleston and 

public expectation was alive

In this state of affairs I left Wash. to visit our Naval posts in the West and 

look to the Arrangements for arming the ironclads building at Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, St

 Louis &c—in the course of this tour I had an opportunity of realising 

the immense capabilities of this great section of the Union—While at Cairo came 

3 Galusha A. Grow (R-PA).

4 Rear Adm. Samuel Francis Du Pont commanded the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron 

and had been instructed to make an attack on Charleston. Du Pont feared that his ironclads 

alone would be unable to deal with Confederate defenses and urged for a joint operation rather 

than a strictly naval effort. Both Welles and Fox, however, pushed for an attack and believed 

Du Pont to be too cautious. In early 1863, a number of new monitors arrived at Port Royal to 

strengthen Du Pont’s squadron in preparation for the attack. Kevin J. Weddle, Lincoln’s Tragic 

Admiral: The Life of Samuel Francis Du Pont (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 

2005), 154–86.

5 The National Academy of Sciences was established on 3 March 1863, with Alexander Dallas 

Bache as its first president. Bache succeeded Ferdinand Rudolph Hassler as superintendant of 

the United States Coastal Survey in 1843, in which post he served until his death in 1867.

6 The American Association for the Advancement of Science.
66 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

tidings of the attack on Charleston—and its want of success—On the 20th April 

I reached Washn. and found the affairs at Charleston occupied much attention 

in doors and out—The public will not be content with anything but success,—

though experience should have taught them not to ask for impossibilities—7

A few days afterwards while sitting in my office the President after reading 

the last telegrams aloud, observed that he had written a joint letter to the General 

and Admiral &c8

And now Hooker9 is about to put his army in motion in obedience to the 

cry of “On to Richmond”—but there has been a check on the publicity of our 

Military operations,—and the enemy does not so readily learn of them from our 

7 On 7 April 1863, a fleet of Union ironclads under Du Pont attacked Confederate fortifications 

at Charleston Harbor. The bombardment inflicted little damage and revealed shortcomings 

of the monitors. Du Pont had warned against the folly of the attack, believing correctly that 

Confederate defenses, particularly submarine obstructions, were too strong for the Union fleet. 

Ibid., 187–98.

8 Lincoln wrote both Maj. Gen. David Hunter and Du Pont on 14 April 1863, instructing 

them to cooperate at Charleston, advising that they continue their demonstrations against the 

Confederates. He also wanted them to attempt to capture Charleston, “if it affords any considerable chance of success.” OR 14: 441.

9 Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker received command of the Army of the Potomac after the Battle of 

Fredericksburg; he spent much of early 1863 reorganizing the army and preparing it for the 

1863 campaigns. As with every other commander of the Army of the Potomac, he faced intense 

pressure from the public and politicians to capture the Confederate capital of Richmond.

A stereo view of the turret of the monitor Passaic. The turret armor shows battle damage from 

cannonballs. Stereo view by Samuel A. Cooley, c. 1863.

Robin G. Stanford Collection, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-stereo-1s04456.
Chapter Four | 67

own Press: so in general there is nothing flitting but rumors—first his crossing 

and then of battle,—but not of victory—this is generally understood by the 4th

of May and each day tells something of detail but still not all,—On the 6th the 

papers were announcing victory in large headings when a two words by telegraph 

from my son told me distinctly that the army had recrossed, for it was dated “Hd. 

qrs. at Falmouth”—He had been in the thickest and lost his horse10

Capt. Drayton came in—just from Charleston—bringing home the monitor Passaic—he says it would be madness to go into Charleston again—which, as 

brave and able a man as he would not say without good reason.11

On the 20th May I was in New York with the Assist. Secretary and visited 

the Passaic with Adm. Gregory and Capt. Ericsson—she was out of water, on 

the Railway, so we went round and examined and discussed—then visited the 

Puritan and Dictator—Ericsson a great engineer—12

When I came back to Washn. found much gossip afloat in Naval circles about 

affairs at Charleston—it is rumored that Adm. Dupont will be relieved,—successor not determined on, though opinion points to Adm. Foote—And so it 

proved shortly after—for one evening Foote came to my house to urge me to go 

with him—Naturally I had a great disinclination to go afloat except in full command yet I was anxious for sea service but I finally yielded to the wishes of the 

Navy Department and of Foote—So it was arranged that I should command the 

Ironclads of the Fleet separately and have the priviledge of entering Charleston 

Harbor whenever it was ordered13

10Hooker had crossed the Rappahannock and Rapidan Rivers at the end of April. His army 

fought the Army of Northern Virginia under Gen. Robert E. Lee from 1 May to 3 May 1863, 

and suffered a crushing loss during the Chancellorsville campaign.

11During the attack at Charleston, Passaic, under the command of Capt. Percival Drayton, 

suffered mishaps and damage. One of its guns had been disabled early and its turret jammed 

after being struck by enemy fire. The pilot house had also been severely damaged. Drayton 

thought that “the pilot house is not capable of withstanding heavy shot for any length of time, 

and even throws a doubt on the turret itself, or at least its machinery.” ORN 14:11.

12 Assistant Secretary of the Navy Gustavus Vasa Fox and Rear Adm. Francis H. Gregory. Both 

Puritan and Dictator were Ericsson-designed monitors then building in New York. The former 

had been laid down in 1862 and was of a single-turret design, while the latter was laid down in 

1863 and was to bear two turrets. Dictator was never finished. Paul H. Silverstone, Civil War 

Navies 1855–1883 (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2001), 8–9.

13 Welles ordered Foote to relieve Du Pont and also requested that Dahlgren serve as second-incommand. Dahlgren, for his part, suggested that the fleet attacking Charleston be embodied 

as a command separate from the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron. During a meeting in 

New York City with Foote, Dahlgren received command of the ironclads of the fleet. Robert J. 

Schneller Jr., A Quest for Glory: A Biography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren (Annapolis, MD: 

Naval Institute Press, 1996), 243. 
68 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

On the 3rd of June I was in 

N. York to confer with Adm. 

Foote and found him not at all 

well,—complained of a head 

ache which however I knew he 

had always been liable to when 

we were messmates—Whilst conversing Gen. Gilmore came in, 

who I understood was to conduct 

the operations by land—we were 

introduced but exchanged only a 

few words, as he had business with 

Adm Foote, and as not having yet 

received my formal orders, I drew 

off to another part of the room 

and entered into conversation 

with Gen. Strong, leaving Gen. 

Gillmore to confer privately with 

Adm. Foote.14

Next day I returned to Washington—soon after came the tidings of the Cavalry fight at Beverly 

Ford, where Hooker anticipating 

mischief had promptly let loose 

his horsemen on the rebels:—it was very handsomely carried out, and I learned 

that my son Ulric with his habitual gallantry had accompanied the desperate 

charge of the Penn. Lancers15 and had another narrow escape, for his horse was 

shot in several places—At Chancellorsville, he also lost his horse,—16Grant is 

striking heavy blows in the West—and will not be turned aside from his pur14 Brig. Gen. George Strong, of Vermont, who would command a brigade sent to Charleston. He 

was wounded during the 18 July assault, contracted tetanus from the wound, and died several 

weeks later. Ezra J. Warner, Generals in Blue: Lives of the Union Commanders (Baton Rouge: 

Louisiana State University Press, 1964), 483–84.

15 6th Penn. Cav., also known as Rush’s Lancers.

16 For a description of the cavalry fight at Beverly Ford on 9 June 1863, see John A. Dahlgren, 

Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1872), 147–51.

Major General Quincy A. Gillmore. Glass 

negative, c. 1865.

Brady Photograph Collection, National Archives, B-3323.
Chapter Four | 69

pose—17 My eldest son was on this line, serving as Master in the Fleet—18 So that 

all the men of my name North are in line of battle—

By the middle of June it is known positively that Lee taking advantage 

of the weakened state of our Army has marched Northward for Pennsylvania 

and soon after Hooker nothing daunted gallantly moves forward to attack the 

rebel Army—

About the 19th Adm. Foote was known to be lying ill at the Astor House, 

and having arrived the day before I went around immediately to see my friend—

passed part of the morning and afternoon with him—conversing on our expedition—he was evidently very ill, and suffering from oppression at the chest—Next 

day he was unconscious,—I left him with most painful regret as business required 

my return—almost doubtful how his illness was to end—

Reached Washington and went to the Depart to make known the results 

of my journey,—the Depart. had other reports (Medical) of the condition of 

Adm. Foote—When I left, being Sunday I went to Church, and had not been 

there long when an official messenger from the Secretary required my attendance—I was then told that it would be impossible for Adm. Foote to go to 

Charleston, and that the command of the Naval forces in that quarter had been 

assigned to me—19

This was on the 22d June and on the 24th I left Washington for New York—

to sail without delay for the South—

Thus ended my duty in the Bureau of Ordnance,—and indeed with Ordnance matters to this date—if ever at all to be resumed—it had nearly filled one 

year and during that time I not only administered the affairs of the Bureau, but 

also continued to conduct practical matters at my old Headquarters at the Navy 

Yard—remaining in the Navy Department until noon, then at the Ordn. Yard 

during the afternoon so that Uncle Sam could not complain of not getting the 

worth of what he paid me—

17 Maj. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant had renewed his operations to capture the Confederate stronghold 

at Vicksburg. He crossed the Mississippi River in April and fought several successful battles 

before besieging the Mississippi city in May 1863.

18 Charles B. Dahlgren had been appointed Acting Master on 14 May 1863. Edward W. 

Callahan, ed., List of Officers of the Navy of the United States and of the Marine Corps from 1775 

to 1900: Comprising a Complete Register of All Present and Former Commissioned, Warranted, 

and Appointed Officers of the United States Navy, and of the Marine Corps, Regular and Volunteer

(New York: L. R. Hammersly & Co., 1901), 146.

19 Foote suffered from Bright’s disease, a chronic inflammation of the kidneys. This date was 

actually 21 June; 22 June was a Monday. Spencer C. Tucker, Andrew Foote: Civil War Admiral 

on Western Waters (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2000), 204.
70 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

On the 24th I took leave at the Navy Depart. and by night was in New York 

Next day my first care was to visit my old and beloved friend Foote—alas! he 

was delirious—a few words recalled the fast departing senses—the wandering 

eye rested on me for a brief moment and he uttered my name distinctly—even 

remembering my boys—then he relapsed and another day ended in this world the 

life of as brave and as good a man as ever served any country—no one better knew 

his virtues than I—no one prized them more dearly—we had been bosom friends 

for 20 years—and never a cloud between us—What a loss to the country!—20

But I was not allowed to linger over this sorrow—I was to leave at once and 

the vessel that was to take me was yet to be purchased,—for a regular War vessel 

was not to be had—However it was finally decided to buy a small screw steamer 

from a packet line—which was done and in the most hurried manner I left N. 

York on the 30th of June—without a staff officer, except Capt Badger21 as Ordn. 

Officer of the Fleet or any domestics—in fact with less equipment than would 

bring a midshipman to meeting—which I would never advise any one to do that 

can help it—

20 Foote died on 26 June. Observers blamed Foote’s service on the western waters for breaking his 

health and causing his death. Ibid., 204.

21 Lt. Cmdr. Oscar C. Badger.

The U.S. Fleet Offshore, from Morris Island, SC. Glass negative, Haas & Peale, 1863.

Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-cwpb-04757.
Chapter Four | 71

The run Southerly was present—On the 4th of July we were off Port Royal 

and anchored there about breakfast time—found Adm. Dupont in the Wabash, 

(blue flag at the Main—) with several vessels of the squadron—The Admiral sent 

me a very kind note,—saying he would send his barge for me at 10OC—going 

aboard, the Admiral met me at the gangway, and the deck was alive with officers, marines and men—according to the ceremonial of the service—few men 

are endowed with the superb personal presence of Dupont—and the equipment 

of the ship was in full accord with the high condition of the best days of the 

Navy—chiefly due to the fine abilities of her commander Capt. Raymond Rodgers22—the officers were regular & of high stamp—one who has not seen a U.S. 

ship of War in the pride of full efficiency can form no idea from description of 

what it is—

In the conference that followed with the Admiral he apprised me that Gen. 

Gillmore had addressed him asking for aid to operate against Morris. I.—23 but 

that as he knew of my coming, he preferred not to act—In the afternoon I went 

ashore and Gen. Gilmore then explained his plans and asked for an immediate 

move—though the whole subject was so new to me—the locality I had never 

seen,—nor did I know anything of the force to be handed over, I acceded at 

22 As indicated, Du Pont’s flagship at this time was Wabash, and his fleet captain was Christopher 

Raymond Perry Rodgers.

23 Gillmore’s proposals for joint operations, and Du Pont’s response, are found in ORN 14: 

298–99, 304, and 307–8. Du Pont made a note on the latter request from Gillmore that he 

had discussed the matter with Dahlgren on 4 July 1863, ORN 14: 308.

“Patapsco engaging Sullivans Id. Batteries,” 6 April 1863. Drawing on paper, Alfred R. Waud 

or William Waud, 1863.

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-21438.
72 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

once and the General named Wednesdy—the difficulties that lay in my way 

were—that three of the Monitors were in the hands of the mechanics being 

strengthened in the parts that proved weak in the attack of 7th April,—24 this 

work must be discontinued and the vessels got ready in some way or the other;—

all the arrangements for movement and battle were to be made,—I had not even 

seen the locality, nor had time to study it—and had yet to form a staff—I was 

entirely without instructions except to take command of the squadron,—though 

it has been asserted since that a regular plan had been agreed on and in my possession—which is entirely false—the Naval attack was made on my own respon24 Du Pont’s attempt on Charleston had revealed that the monitors suffered from too little armor 

on the decks, turrets, and pilothouses. Nahant, Montauk, and Weehawken had been repairing at 

the time Dahlgren arrived. ORN 14: 317. 

“E. & G. W. Blunt’s Map of Charleston and vicinity.” Map, 1862.

Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division, g3914c.cw0369000.
Chapter Four | 73

sibility and I so informed the Department in my first dispatch—25

On the day before that agreed on Gen. G. asked me to postpone for one 

day,—he was not ready—I agreed—

Wednes. morn. left Port Royal and reached Charleston bar by night—before 

daylight of Thursday—the Monitors which I had ordered were off the bar and I 

was preparing to go on board of one when an Aid came from the General asking 

another postponement for one day—he was not ready—

Finally on Friday morning the work began—the batteries on Folly I. opened 

25 JAD: “See first dispatch to Navy Dep in report of Sec. Navy.” Printed in ORN 14:311.

“General Map of Charleston Harbor South Carolina Showing Rebel Defences and 

Obstructions.” Prepared by the U.S. Coast Survey at the direction of Rear Admiral John 

A. Dahlgren. From the 1865 Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 39th Congress 1st Session.

Map, C. O. Boutelle and E[ugene] Willenbacher, U.S. Coast Survey.

Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division, g3912c.cw0370100.
74 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

a rapid and steady fire,—and I, standing across the bar with four Monitors ranged 

up and began a flanking fire—26the effect of which was instantly noticeable—the 

rebels disconcerted by it—began to waver, then to slacken, the fire which they 

returned to the land battery, and at last to break—by this time our troops were 

landing and the rebels abandoned their works quickly, fleeing up the island

Seeing this I steamed the Monitors in the same direction and presently laid 

my own Monitor abreast of Fort Wagner and opened fire on it—The other Monitors followed me in line of battle—27the action continued until noon, but no 

further effort was made by the General, although it was plain that this was the 

auspicious moment,—the enemy being beaten and in confusion,—after giving 

the seamen their dinner I resumed the attack, and continued to batter the work 

until 6PM when I hauled off—The first part of the day had been a brilliant success 

ending in the capture of all the Southern defences—but the failure to follow it up 

by an assault lost us the fruits—The statement since made by the General is that 

his men were fatigued,—true it was a hot day in July—but it was the early part 

of the day and only nine O.C. in the morning when the Southern works were in 

our possession and the advance within range of Wagner—if the soldiers who had 

crossed were fatigued,—they might have been refreshed in two or three hours, 

and led forward,—or fresh other troops might have been brought over from Folly 

I—and pushed forward—in either case if ever Wagner was to be assaulted that 

was the time for it—

The work of the day acquainted me with some points of the Monitors, the 

endurance was capital,—my own vessel had been struck 67 times but the ponderous XVin was too slow in repeating fire,—which was its own fault and not that 

of the Monitor and a fatal defect in hammering earth works, for which rapid fire 

is needed—their batteries being iron were fouled so as to reduce their speed—

If the Monitors had not been present on this occasion, the rebel Ironclads 

lying in Charleston harbor would have come down and operated on our troops 

with a flanking fire—which must have prevented the landing and the capture of 

the southern defences—and yet Gen G. asserts in his official [report]28 that the 

26 Catskill, Montauk, Nahant, and Weehawken.

27 Dahlgren wrote and crossed out here the sentence: “The General appeared to halt his men as 

they came near the work.”

28 In his report, Gillmore mentioned little about the assistance of the Navy. OR 28,1:8–12.
Chapter Four | 75

work could have been [carried] without the Navy29—which is not only untrue 

but unmanly to say after being thus assisted30—Nothing but the presence of the 

Monitors restrained the rebel ironclads; they had been out not long before and 

scattered our wooden vessels right & left—

The next morning an assault was made on Wagner—and without any notice 

to me,—as a consequence our soldiers went forward without the aid of the Naval 

fire—and were easily repulsed with severe loss—31The day previous the assault 

might have been made in force on a reduced and disheartened garrison, kept well 

down by the fire of the ironclads—instead of which it was made the day after 

upon a reinforced garrison, which had had time to collect its senses, and without 

the aid of the Naval fire—

The day after Gen. Gillmore came to see me—and seemed undecided what 

course to pursue—afterwards it appears that he concluded to try another assault 

covered by land batteries as well as by the Naval fire—batteries were accordingly 

established as quickly [as] possible and on the 15th a good spring tide and smooth 

sea enabled me to have the Ironsides gotten across the bar—

The day before the Gen. had informed me of his conclusion to try another 

assault on the 16th—when he expected to have 18 rifled guns in battery & 12 or 

29 JAD: “Gen. Gillmore in a letter to me—July 7th—which is omitted from the correspondence 

with me says:—‘It seems so important and in fact indispensable that the main ship channel 

abreast of Morris I. should be held against any attempt to dislodge us from that island, when 

once there, by the enemy’s ironclads from Charleston, that we should leave as little as possible 

to chance or stress of weather.’” Here, Dahlgren tried to demonstrate that Gillmore, at the 

time, had requested the assistance of the Navy, and only later claimed that it had not been 

needed. The 7 July letter does not appear in his volume, the OR, or the ORN. Dahlgren copied 

a portion of it into a manuscript he sent to the historian John William Draper. The section he 

copied reads: “I will recapitulate the arrangements for co-operating already agreed upon by us; 

as follows:—1st I am to attack Morris I. on Thursday morning next, &c—[ . . . ]3d—The Navy 

is to enter the channel abreast of Morris I. early in the morning,–say about sunrise, &c—[ . 

. . ] My desire that there should be a perfect and cordial understanding between us in these 

combined operations &c.” John William Draper Family Papers, Box 2, Library of Congress.

30 JAD: “Gen. Hunter (Gilmore’s predecessor) was ready on the 8th of April to do just what 

Gillmore did—but avers that he could not because Du Pont would not assist—then the 

defences were trifling—See Hunter’s letter to the President—. Gen. Hunter’s letter will be 

seen at page 110 of the Report to Congress on ‘Armored Vessels.’” Maj. Gen. David Hunter 

argued in his letter to Lincoln that if the Navy had operated in support of his troops on 8 April, 

instead of attacking the Confederate fortifications on their own, he would have realized great 

results. Because Du Pont had not listened to him, he alleged, the Confederates had been able 

to reinforce their defenses. The letter appears in Report of the Secretary of the Navy in Relation to 

Armored Vessels (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1864), 110–12, as well as OR 

14: 455–57.

31 Dahlgren’s report on the actions of 10 and 11 July 1863 is found at ORN 14: 319–21.
76 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

15 Mortars—he said “the result must be a success for us”

The attack did not come off until the 18th July—the work ashore being 

delayed by heavy rain—On the 16th the Gen. visited me—I observed that he did 

not seem so sanguine and he said he depended on my vessels—

On the 17th the Gen. signaled that he was not ready—I replied that it was 

better not to delay, as we had all our force and the enemy could increase his I 

could see them at work strengthening—32

July 18th—heavy rain—which retards things ashore—the Gen. signals he 

will be ready by noon—33At 111⁄2 I went on board the Montauk. Capt. Fairfax34—and led up the channel—followed by the Patapsco Nantucket, Katskill, 

Weehawken and the Ironsides35—about half an hour after noon I opened with 

the first gun from the water—soon the firing was general from ships and from 

batteries—As the tide was low the shoals kept all of us some 1200 or 1300 yards 

32 Dahlgren notes this in his diary; Madeleine Vinton Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren: 

Rear-Admiral United States Navy (Boston: James R. Osgood and Company, 1882), 402.

33 According to his diary, Dahlgren notes that at 9:30 a.m. he received the signal that Gillmore 

would attack at noon. Ibid., 402.

34 Cmdr. Donald M. Fairfax had been placed in command of Montauk in April 1863 after her 

previous commander had returned “to the North in consequence of ill health.” ORN 14: 131.

35 Abstracts of the log books for these ships are printed in ORN 14:363–365.

“The iron-clad New Ironsides under sail.” Engraving, c. 1885.

Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-33816.
Chapter Four | 77

from the fort—but at 4OC it had flowed sufficiently to get nearer—I ordered the 

anchor of the Montauk, up and closed steadily with Fort Wagner until less than 

300 yards from it—then down anchor and continued to blaze away—the rebels 

left their guns and ceased to fire—As I stood outside on the top of the Turret not 

a head was to be seen,—some of the officers near me said,—the rebels had left 

the work—

About sunset, a note came from Gen. Gillmore saying he had ordered an 

assault,—as the light of day was fading we could [see] the masses of our soldiers coming along the beach, but lost sight of them in the darkness before they 

reached the fort—Presently the darkness was lighted up by the flashes of artillery 

and muskets—We could do nothing,—to fire, might cut down our own men by 

hundreds, for they were outside the rampart,—the rebels were in and sheltered—

we could discern nothing but the flashes For an hour and a half the contest was 

maintained—Shaw and many officers and men were stricken down36—some of 

our men got in to the work and held one of its salients—if they were supported 

there was a chance for us—it was said they might have been and were not—of 

which I know nothing—At length all was hushed—the absence of all indication 

from the work told too well that we had it not—

It was 10OC when the ironclads were hauled off and the weary crews were 

allowed to rest as well as they could in the sweltering heat of a southern July night 

it is said, and I believe authentically that our loss was 1500 men—37

The next morning I sent ashore the flag Lieut and Surgeon Duvall38 under 

flag of truce to ask for our wounded, or if refused to offer medical aid for them—

both were refused—many were lying where they fell—and were seen by our officers who landed on the beach near the fort—Of course I could not fire that day 

without danger to these poor fellows, so we passed a quiet Sunday—

That night it was made known to those concerned that the blockade had at 

last been made effective—a blockade runner contrived as usual to get through 

the outer vessels and was rejoicing in a clear way to the city, when her course was 

arrested, almost under the rebel batteries by the astounding report of a XVin gun 

and the close passage of its huge shell—a Monitor which I had pushed up close 

36 Col. Robert Gould Shaw led the 54th Mass. Inf., an African-American unit, against Fort 

Wagner. 

37 Dahlgren’s report on these operations, including the delays, the activities of his fleet on 19 July, 

and mention of Gillmore’s sunset note, can be found in ORN 14:359–60. Gillmore’s casualty 

returns give the number of killed, wounded, and missing during the 18 July attack as 1,515. 

OR 28, Part 1:210.

38 Lt. Samuel W. Preston and Surgeon Marius Duvall.
78 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

to Sullivans I. had detected the steamer, and ever ready Geo. Rodgers quickly 

fired—alarmed and confused the evil doer lost his head, and struck on the dangerous shoal near by—of course there was a movement at once among all the 

vessels and even signals were seen that the Rebel ironclads were coming out—

next morning disclosed the truth,—the newcomer was a wreck on the shoal, and 

remained till the end of the war a warning to others on like errand—39

Thus the blockade was perfected by the ironclads alone,—two months before 

our troops covered the island and while Wagner was still in rebel possession; 

though it is pretended that it was effected by our batteries on Morris I—rather 

oblivious of facts—

The day after I was much afflicted by learning that my son Ulric had been 

dangerously wounded near Gettysburgh40—while on the other hand his elder 

brother had the good fortune to be present at the capture of Vicksburgh and 

commanded a battery of IXin Navy Guns (my own) landed by Adm. Porter 

to assist41—So, both of my boys are aiding as well as they can in the country’s 

cause—There is but one more but he is a boy, and a Midshipman in the Navy—

The course of operations on Morris I. must be changed—Wagner will not be 

taken by assault merely—the experiment has cost too much blood—if this price 

were necessary to “make manifest its real and concealed elements of strength”42 it 

was more than we could afford,—on the 20th July Gen. G. wrote me that he had 

39 These events took place on the night of 19–20 July 1863. Initially, Capt. Joseph F. Green, in 

command of Canandaigua had pursued the “large side-wheel steamer.” The blockade runner 

entered the Pumpkin Hill Channel, until Green backed off in case the steamer attempted to 

get back outside the blockade. Dahlgren reported that after this, Cmdr. George W. Rodgers, in 

command of Catskill, had forced the steamer to ground. See reports of Dahlgren and Green, 

ORN 14: 374–75.

40 Ulric’s leg was wounded during fighting at Hagerstown, MD, on 6 July 1863, during the 

Gettysburg campaign. He returned to Washington to recover, but his foot did not heal and his 

leg had to be amputated. The amputated leg was buried at the Washington Navy Yard. Dahlgren, Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren, 168–79.

41 Charles Dahlgren managed a pair of IX-inch guns; Adm. David Dixon Porter noted that they 

“were admirably served.” ORN 25: 279. 

42 JAD: “Gillmore’s report Sec. 82.” Gillmore also wrote that “the truly formidable character of 

the armament of Fort Wagner, its hidden resources, and the great strength and capacity of its 

bomb-proof shelter, could not yet be fully developed,” which, in his opinion required an attack 

to discover. Q. A. Gillmore, Engineer and Artillery Operations Against the Defences of Charleston 

Harbor in 1863; Comprising the Descent Upon Morris Island, the Demolition of Fort Sumter, the 

Reduction of Forts Wagner and Gregg. With Observations on Heavy Ordnance, Fortifications, Etc.

(New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1865), 35.
Chapter Four | 79

“lost 33 per. cent. in killed, wounded &c” of his force—43 Ten days after landing 

with scarcely the loss of a man—

It only remained to proceed to engineer the rebels out of Wagner—a tedious 

process—which might be sure enough as far as regarded Wagner but also gave 

time to the defence to make all the preparation which might be needed to establish fully other points in lieu of Wagner & Sumter—for the capture of Sumter 

was deemed to be involved in that of Morris I. and to depend on it—from the 

island, Sumter had been reduced in April 1861—

About this time I received from the Department, its acknowledgment of 

my No. 144—in which I announced that Gen. G. had asked for assistance, and 

having no instructions, that I had taken the responsibility—and asked for the 

instructions of the Depart.—The Department in reply encloses its instructions, 

which it seems had been sent to Dupont but in the haste of leaving—were not 

turned over to me—they were dated the 6th Jun 1863, and ran thus:—

“Gen. Gillmore has been ordered to take charge of the Department of the 

South, and you will please afford him all the aid and assistance in your power in 

conducting his operations”—Signed by the Secretary of the Navy—45

Thus the Department confirmed to me without change in previous order 

to Adm. Dupont—after it was aware that the operations on Morris I. had 

begun What was the gist of these instructions?—the Navy was to assist Gen. 

Gillmore,—in doing what?—while he was “conducting his operations?”—not 

a word of that long plan which Gen. G. has detailed as the result of an agreement—nor had there had been a word on the subject to me from Gen. G. it 

was not even mentioned in the paper sent me by him in which he says “I will 

recapitulate the arrangements for co-operating already agreed upon between us, 

as follows:”—dated July 7th—and which is excluded from what he gives as the 

43 Gillmore further added that: “My actual loss in killed, wounded, and prisoners will not fall 

far short of 1,200 men; as many more are laid up by sudden sickness, occasioned by excessive 

fatigue duty. With this more than triple decimation of my active available command, I hesitated to incur any further immediate loss in the absence of powerful reasons to the contrary.” 

ORN 14: 381.

44 Dahlgren reported that he had moved immediately to assist Gillmore; “there was no time, 

therefore, to obtain the views of the Department on this subject.” He also requested that “If 

the Department has any specific instructions to give upon such subjects I shall be happy to 

conform to them.” ORN 14: 311.

45 This was the entirety of the order; see ORN 14: 241. The Navy Department asked Du Pont in 

1864 whether or not he had given a copy of the order to Dahlgren. Du Pont replied that “I do 

not recollect having given Admiral Dahlgren a copy of the order in question.” He did aver that 

“I showed him the order . . . and I gave Admiral Dahlgren all the information I possessed that 

could be of service to him.” ORN 14: 242.
80 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

correspondence between him & myself— 

A survey of my means showed that they lay in the Ironclads alone—there 

were,—the Ironsides—and six Monitors available for Charleston—one Monitor 

at Wassaw to check & blockade the rebel ram Savannah—so that I had one 

Monitor and the Keokuk less than Dupont on & after the 7th April—which I 

only mention because one book that speaks very authoritatively says my force 

was greater—

As a curious instance of Gen. G. appreciation of the rebel enterprise I may 

mention that on the 25th July when it might be supposed that he was securely 

established he wrote me asking for “a strong force of Boat Howitzers abreast of 

his advanced line each morning for a few days”—which does not look like that 

independence of the naval force which was afterwards avowed—46

About this time I was desirous of bringing the Pawnee’s fine broadside of 

IXin guns to bear on Wagner, after the ironclads had silenced the guns, but Gen. 

G. objected to her removal from Stono, where he considered her essential to his 

position—He added “In my opinion no impression has yet been made on the 

strength of Fort Wagner and I doubt if the bomb-proof shelters there can be 

effected by any number of guns firing horizontally”

About this time I began to have some evidences that the enemy were working their torpedoes.—one just missed the Pawnee and destroyed her launch—47

In the early part of August the hot weather of this climate and the incessant 

labor of the men, with reduced crews began to produce their natural effects and 

to bear heavily on the men—

About the 11th Aug. there was much excitement got up ashore—the General 

signals at Two O.C. in the morning “Wagner has opened with grape and canister. 

An assault may be intended. Please be ready with gunboats.”—(Which is not in 

that correspondence)48 Though the Monitors were ordered into action at once—

The Gen. followed his first telegram in half an hour with a Please—“open as soon 

46 Dahlgren noted Gillmore’s request and ordered that “the howitzers will use canister and will be 

placed so as to sweep the approach to our lines.” ORN 14: 396.

47 Cmdr. George B. Balch reported that at midnight on 16 August 1863, “a torpedo exploded 

under the stern of the Pawnee . . . and totally destroyed the launch; but did not injure the ship; 

another torpedo went off within 30 yards of the ship at 4 a.m.” ORN 14: 445.

48 This signal does not appear in the OR or ORN. Dahlgren’s staff logbook does record it as 

being received at 2 a.m. The entirety of the message appears above. John Adolphus Bernard 

Dahlgren Papers, Box 38, Library of Congress.
Chapter Four | 81

as possible—the enemy’s fire is heavy”49—in short order the Monitors were at 

49 Gillmore sent this request by telegram at 2:35 a.m. Dahlgren replied: “All right.” ORN 14: 

436.

“Admiral Dahlgren’s flag ship Philadelphia—Off Charleston 1863.” Drawing on paper; 

Alfred R. Waud, 1863.

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-21376.
82 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

work clearing the whole ground between our lines & Wagner50—The night was 

still and the bugles and drums ashore were heard quite lively—The Staff-Log of 

the fleet has the entry “at 3:30AM Admiral Dahlgren went up the harbor to examine personally the state of affairs”51—it was my invariable practice to look after 

matters myself—and this morning coming down from the front in my barge, 

some of Wagners heavy shot came quite close enough to my boat52—such incidents I note occasionally to show how quickly the Navy was appealed to when 

any danger was apprehended—

And the feeling which inspired me towards the military is exemplified by a 

letter received from Lt. Preston—He was my Flag Lieut and being much weakened by the climate I permitted him to return North for a while53—and directed 

him when at Washn. to see the President54 and endeavor to explain away the 

impressions produced by Gillmore’s injudicious unlucky assault and to suggest 

more men for him—It will be remembered that Preston afterwards fell at Fort 

Fisher,—he was one of the most gifted young men that I have met with—he 

wrote me,—

“The failure in the assault of the 18th has injured Gillmore very much in military circles here. From the President down I found a rather positive dissatisfaction. The general view taken of it, is that it was a rash and useless expenditure of 

men.” Preston goes on to say that his representation had the effect of modifying 

their feelings,—and that the President ordered 5000 men to reinforce, tho’ Gen. 

50 The logs of Catskill and Patapsco give details on this action. ORN 14: 436.

51 The staff log lists the time of Gillmore’s message as 2:30 a.m. Within ten minutes, Catskill was 

underway, and the monitors opened fire on Wagner at 3:10 a.m. The quotation above appears 

in the staff log. John A. Dahlgren Papers, Box 38, Library of Congress.

52 Dahlgren noted in his diary that on this occasion “The Wagner firing passes repeatedly a few 

yards from my boat.” Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 407.

53 Preston left Charleston on 30 July aboard a supply ship and returned by the start of September. 

He had been suffering health problems since May. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 406. 

Du Pont mentioned that “Preston has been taken twice with fainting spells.” Samuel Francis 

Du Pont, Samuel Francis Du Pont: A Selection from His Civil War Letters: Vol. 3, The Repulse: 

1863–1865, ed. John D. Hayes (Ithaca, NY: Published for the Eleutherian Mills Historical 

Library by Cornell University Press, 1969), 139.

54 Gustavus Vasa Fox took Preston to see Lincoln who asked the pair why Dahlgren had not 

been able to take Charleston. Fox pointed out that a “purely naval attack” would not do, and 

impressed upon Lincoln the need to send more troops to Gillmore. Du Pont, Civil War Letters, 

230.
Chapter Four | 83

Halleck was opposed55 to it56

We shall see that while I was then endeavoring to do the duty of a comrade 

to Gen. G— he not long after had little hesitation in the use of means calculated 

to save himself by shifting to me the disappointed expectations of the public—

Aug. 17th—According to arrangement this day was to put to trial the labors 

of a month and more—the trenches had been advanced and heavy batteries 

erected which to were to fire over Wagner at Sumter—the work had been prosecuted steadily under cover of the Naval fire whenever it was needed—considerable bodies of troops had arrived from the North to reinforce Gen. Gillmore and 

great expectations were raised as to the result—Early in the morning the shore 

batteries began, and the Ironclads stood in to the attack—The Weehawken led 

with my flag—anchoring about 1000 yards from Wagner the other Monitors 

and the Ironsides took convenient positions and opened fire as they did so—

Wagner and Gregg replied briskly firing round and grape—About 81⁄2OC the tide 

favoring I caused the Weehawken to be shifted closer to the Fort and anchored 

about 450 yards from it—Fort Moultrie was also firing and making good practice. About this time the Katskill was seen to withdraw from the action, but I was 

too busy with the general business to give it much attention—At 10OC Wagner 

was silenced and I shifted my flag to the Passaic steaming with the Patapsco up 

towards Fort Sumter—these Monitors had rifled guns—as soon as we opened on 

Sumter the fire of Gregg and Moultrie was directed to these two vessels—as well 

as that of Sumter

At noon, the rebels being silenced I made signal to withdraw—it was then 

that I learned of the death of Capt. Geo. Rodgers—my Fleet Captain—at that 

time a loss almost irreparable—a heavy shot had struck the roof of the Pilot 

55 On 28 July 1863, Halleck wrote Gillmore that “you were distinctly informed that you could 

not have any additional troops, and it was only on the understanding that none would be 

required that I consented to your undertaking operations on Morris Island.” OR 28, Part 2:29.

56 JAD: “Preston also wrote that reinforcements would be sent—The Richmond with her fine 

battery was ordered from the Gulf—The Monitors Lehigh—Sangamon also the Canonicus & 

Onondoga (double turret) about 1st Octr.” Welles had written Dahlgren on 28 July that the 

steam sloop Richmond would be sent to Charleston, along with several smaller steamers. On 9 

October, Welles let Dahlgren know that Canonicus, Onondaga, Sangamon, and Tecumseh would 

join Dahlgren’s squadron once work had been completed on them. ORN 14: 401; ORN 15: 

26. 
84 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

House, killing himself and another officer and wounding the others57—Towards 

the end of the day the Gen. telegraphed that the enemy might make a sortie in 

the night, would I put in the Monitors—

On the 21st of Aug. the firing from the batteries had dilapidated Sumter very 

effectually on the faces towards us—but the Northern faces could not be seen, 

57 Rodgers and Acting Assistant Paymaster Josiah G. Woodbury had been killed when “a shot 

struck the top of the pilot house, fracturing the outer plate, and tearing off an irregular piece of 

the inside plate of about one square foot in area, and forcing out several of the bolts by which 

the two thicknesses are held together, pieces of which struck” the two men. Pilot Abner C. 

Penton received a slight wound to his scalp, while Acting Master’s Mate Peter Truscott suffered 

a concussion. ORN 14: 458, 458–59.

Officers and crew of Catskill with boat howitzers at Charleston Harbor. Lieutenant 

Commander Edward Barrett sits atop the turret in front of the pilot house. The view shows 

indentations from battle damage on the turret, as well as how the XV-inch Dahlgren gun 

could not fit through the porthole in the turret. Glass negative, 1865.

Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-cwpb-02977.
Chapter Four | 85

and only inference was possible—So I decided to feel them that night and started 

in the Weehawken before midnight—unfortunately the leading Monitor got on a 

shoal and by the time I knew she was off it was too late to get into good position 

and do much, so I was obliged to steam down again

The attempt was renewed the next night as soon as the moon set—some 

delay & confusion ensued in getting into position, but this was finally accomplished and we opened fire at as near a range as the Chief Pilot considered could 

be attained without becoming entangled in the obstructions58—The delay and 

confusion inseparable from managing vessels in the darkness without any mark 

to steer by, and getting into position had delayed our beginning to fire until three 

O’C—so that an hour or an hour and a half would disclose our force & position 

to the fire of all the batteries on Sullivan’s I—So we fired away as rapidly as circumstances permitted—Moultrie replied and the unusual force with which her 

shot told on the iron plating, was token of our being close to—As if to embarrass 

our aim still more a heavy fog arose and enveloped every thing, so the firing from 

my own vessel was performed by using a star to sight by—We did not move until 

broad daylight had come and it was 61⁄2OC when I signalled to retire—Battery 

Bee, Fort Moultrie & Beauregard were now pounding away rapidly—

Gen. Gillmore had been certain that the “offensive power” of Sumter was 

destroyed, but not withstanding, some shots were fired,—proving otherwise—in 

fact we found subsequently that many of the lower casemates were in serviceable 

order & heavy cannon mounted—

The next day being Sunday The weary crews of the Monitors were permitted to rest

On the 24th and 25 it blew from S.E. and, made too much sea for naval 

work—this wind is the worst experienced here, and the Monitors have lost too 

much speed by the fouling of their iron bottoms to be trusted near the narrow 

passage between the forts & obstructions—

The powerful barbette armament of Sumter had now been disabled and 

probably the guns also in the upper tier of casemates, but there was no reason to 

suppose that this was true as regards the lower tier of casemates on the North & 

N.E. faces which look directly on the passage and were farthest from our batteries—the long and powerful line of works opposite on Sullivans I. was untouched, 

and it was perfectly natural to suppose that the enemy had not been idle since the 

day of our landing (10th July) a period of six weeks in strengthening their interior 

58 These impediments included, at various times, pilings, floating booms, rope obstructions, 

cables, contact torpedoes, and command detonated torpedoes. Browning, Success Is All that Was 

Expected, 157–58. Depictions of some of these appear in ORN 16:390–95.
86 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

defences—indeed this was confirmed by what we heard and saw—especially in 

the huge bomb-proof that had been completed at Fort Johnson—

Still I concluded without any conference with the General to feel the defences 

at the entrance and be governed accordingly,—proceeding as far as their strength 

relatively to my means would warrant—

As already mentioned the weather allowed no fair opportunity on the 24th

& 25th—and I took the 26th as the first night that was possible—though appearances were very threatening—

John Dahlgren drew this map after the war to show the attack of the night of 22–23 August. 

The square North of Morris Island shows the position of Fort Sumter, while Batteries 

Beauregard and Bee and Fort Moultrie are opposite on Sullivan’s Island. At the top, he wrote 

“Channel & Course of vessels in blue—”. Below the map he wrote “The Rebel Batteries are 

marked in red” and “A—position of Army in front of Wagner” and “B. Position of ironclads 

selected by Gillmore.”

Library of Congress, John William Draper family papers, 1777–1951.
Chapter Four | 87

I went on board the Weehawken and about 9OC the Monitors were underway—the ebb tide was so strong that it was 11OC before we were abreast of 

Wagner—when a heavy squall of wind & rain shut the other vessels out of 

sight—obliged to anchor—when it cleared away, up anchor and went on—

about midnight became so thick with rain that we could not see and had to 

anchor—About 2OC Ensign Porter59 who was in charge of the boats to remove the 

obstructions came to me and reported that “it was too thick and foggy and rough 

to do anything with the obstructions” (Log)—I was anchored about 600 yards 

from Moultrie, the other Monitors were in company, the rebel steamers could be 

seen inside patrolling the channel and the flood tide was setting like a sluice—it 

would have been madness to risk the Monitors amid such circumstances and I 

reluctantly withdrew as the Pilot declared that a S.E. gale was coming on—it was 

now so dark that the Monitors could hardly see each other and it was necessary 

to send an aid (Lieut. Forrest)60 in a boat to give the order—The rain came down 

in torrents and when the anchor was up, it was for a while a question whether 

the Weehawken moved against the strong tide and wind—at last she gathered 

way slowly and it was not far from morning when we regained the anchorage—

Soon after I had reason to believe that Gen. Gillmore was mistaken in saying the offensive power of Sumter was destroyed—literally it might be that its 

guns were no longer capable of damaging the ironclads, and if Sumter were the 

only obstacle, it would not bar the passage—but the close reconnaissance of the 

passage by myself and by others showed that obstructions lay across the channel, 

which must be removed for the Monitors to pass, and were covered at one end by 

the guns of Sullivans I. and by the Sumter at the other—

Looking at the operation of our battery at Sumter it seemed demolished and 

promised what was not realised—it was fair to suppose that in such condition the 

garrison would have been compelled to abandon it entirely—but when we came 

to act on this conclusion we found that such was not the case—the garrison yet 

held it and if deprived of the use of heavy cannon could still use their muskets 

and light artillery so as to sweep the water of any boats that might attempt to 

remove the obstructions—

On the 21st Aug—Gen. Gillmore wrote me that “the barbette fire was very 

much impaired, and by tomorrow noon there will be nothing there to interfere 

with a near approach of the Monitors to that place”—the idea of passing in is 

59 Ens. Benjamin H. Porter. On 25 August 1863, Dahlgren had asked for “a few volunteers for a 

special service” and authorized Porter to select these men and assemble boats for the purpose of 

clearing obstructions. ORN 14: 514–15.

60 Flag Lt. Moreau Forrest.
88 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

not even hinted at—only a near approach—that near approach was tried and 

Gen. Gillmore’s batteries were never one fourth as near “that place” as were 

the Monitors—61

As the abandonment of Sumter seemed to me indispensable to any success 

even in passing in, and the enemy was not to be forced out of it by a mere cannonade, it only remained to await the capture of Wagner, and then they must 

surely leave Sumter,—this was a natural expectation,—if any one knew better it 

should have been Gen. Gillmore who was an Engineer—

On the 2d Septr. I wrote the Navy Dep:—in speaking of the results obtained 

“A glance at the map, and at the means at disposal, will show that the entire 

advantage cannot yet be realised to ourselves, because we cannot occupy the fort. 

The army is unable to do it unless possession of Fort Wagner is had; nor the Navy 

without forcing the defences by water in the shape of obstructions &c”62

Not disposed to give up the attempt entirely I had repeated the feeling of 

the entrance on the night of the 1st Septr.—taking up the Ironsides,—rather large 

for night operations among shoals—when to ground was perhaps to remain—

It was past midnight before we could get into position and some heavy firing 

followed for four hours;—Sullivans I—kept it up steadily—and Sumter fired but 

few shot probably to avoid drawing our fire—My flag was in the Weehawken, 

and I had the misfortune to have the third fleet Captain disabled—a heavy shot 

struck the turret and drove inside an iron splinter which broke his leg—a great 

loss to me—It was nearly 7OC when we regained the anchorage—63

This observation of the night only served to confirm my belief in the impracticability of any operation inside until the enemy had left Sumter—

About this time some question arose as to Sumter having any guns 

mounted—My own impressions were that such was the case—as shots were 

invariably fired when the Monitors were high enough to open the sea face—Gen. 

Gillmore seemed solicitous then to believe there were none mounted,—but since 

exposes some inconsistencies on the subject—for instance his own “Look-out” 

61 Gillmore’s letter, as it appears in ORN, reads “The barbette fire of Fort Sumter is very much 

impaired, and by to-morrow noon there will be nothing there to interfere with the near 

approach of the monitors to that place.” In the same letter, Gillmore also mentioned that he 

preferred that Dahlgren employ the monitors against Fort Sumter and the inner defenses of 

Charleston Harbor instead of against Wagner. ORN 14: 465.

62 In the letter to Welles, Dahlgren also reported on the action of 1 September 1863. ORN 14: 

531–33.

63 Lt. Cmdr. Oscar C. Badger. In his diary, Dahlgren opined after the incident that “A fatality 

seems to attend my staff.” Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 412.
Chapter Four | 89

signalled him on Sept. 1st that “We have dismounted two guns on Sumter and 

impaired one this AM—But two remain”64

Now if Gen. Gillmore’s own information was correct—five guns were 

mounted on Sumter that day—for our fire dismounted two—injured one and 

left two—these were seen by the “Lookout”—therefore must have been placed 

on the Gorge wall or SE face—the other faces being invisible from Morris I—or 

in barbette on the other faces—the case mates of the three faces that would bear 

on the fleet could not be seen—How then could it be known from Morris I. that 

there were no guns in those casemates—there were certainly five besides what 

may have been there—I note this to show how much Gen. G. inferred when it 

suited his purpose—but I was sure that there were guns on those faces, for I had 

been close to them and had as good proof as it was possible to have under the 

circumstances—that there was ample offensive power in Sumter to defend the 

obstructions from all attempts to remove them—

Above all, how extraordinary when the time arrived that Gen. G. deemed 

advantageous for entering and crushing the enemy that he permitted it to pass 

without even drawing it to my notice!—and yet he remembers it now—In truth 

there was no such a programme contemplated by the Navy Dep: or it would have 

been made known to me—And what is more essential; to make the movement 

which was indicated by Gen. G. some 18 months after the event—would have 

been folly or treason—for it would have exposed the fleet to the heaviest losses 

without a ray of hope in the way of benefit—

I am the more urgent on this point because Gen. G. is so now—It will be 

borne in mind that during the ten or 15 days following the pounding of Sumter 

our troops were in front of Wagner toiling painfully in the treacherous sand to 

advance the trenches, and there was no little discouragement—the rebels possessed complete control of the entrance, and if the Ironclads should be pushed 

past the obstructions at all hazards, what next?—along the line of shore were 

powerful earth batteries terminating at the City—Could the ironclads reduce 

them? All the efforts of Gen. Gillmore’s entire force with all the efforts of the 

ironclads had been expended six weeks upon Wagner, and Wagner still bade 

defiance—What then would the ironclads alone do against the interior works, 

which were not only more powerful singly than Wagner but which supported 

64 JAD: “330.” In his book, Gillmore renders the message “We have dismounted two guns on 

Sumter, and injured one, this A.M. But two remain. We are firing with great accuracy.” In the 

afternoon, Gillmore also reported to Dahlgren that “the artillery fire on Sumter to-day more 

accurate and destructive than ever.” Gillmore, Engineer and Artillery Operations, 330, 331. Also 

in OR 28: Part 2:77.
90 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

each other, and could not be attacked alone, while Wagner was isolated and had 

to bear the whole brunt of our attack—But Gen. G. admits that Wagner could 

never have been reduced by a naval force (S240)—65which consequently admits 

that none of the interior works could be so reduced for they were of like character 

& much stronger. If then the ironclads could not reduce these defences, what 

were they to do? Gen. G. says pass the defences—that is carry the Monitors some 

three or four miles into the Cooper or Ashley Rivers, leaving between them and 

his forces on Morris, all these untouched batteries—his forces struggling alone, 

to gain possession of a work which had resisted combined efforts of ships & 

troops—the supplies of Coal & Ammunition for the ironclads cut off—a voluntary division of forces likely to ensure the destruction of both,—who ever heard 

of such a plan?—And yet he seriously puts this forth as a means by which to 

achieve success!—it would be a reflection on Gen. G. common sense to suppose 

65 In his book, Gillmore wrote: “It reflects no discredit upon our navy, to say that Fort Wagner, 

with its garrison covered as it was by a secure bomb-proof, and with facilities for keeping its 

supplies of men, ammunition, and guns, unimpaired, could never have been reduced by a naval 

force, or by any other means than those adopted, viz.: by sapping up to the ditch of the work, 

and then assaulting, or threatening an assault, from the advanced trenches.” Gillmore, Engineer 

and Artillery Operations, 118–19.

“Fort Wagner Captured Sept 6—1863 Charleston.” Drawing on paper; Alfred R. Waud, 

1863.

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-21552.
Chapter Four | 91

that he was sincere in this idea—66

I admit that in opposing my simple opinion to that of Gen. Gillmore, both 

of us being present, I leave it optional to others to decide either way—But when 

I say that my view is entirely sustained by Gen. Sherman, it is probable that very 

few will care much for the opinion of Gen. Gillmore—This opinion of Gen. 

Sherman I will present subsequently—67

It will be perceived that it is not only the difference of opinion that existed 

between us—but that Gen. Gillmore also adroitly kept this and the programme

out of view during the period that he now alledges to have been most suitable 

and thus deceived me—

66 Dahlgren wrote and crossed out after this: “an idea that I first heard of when he published his 

book some 18 months afterward.”

67 See Appendix 1.

Fort Sumter. The top drawing shows the fort as it stood in 1861, the second drawing is likely 

a study of the elevations, and the bottom drawing shows the effects of repeated bombardments. Drawing on paper, Alfred R. Waud, c. 1865.

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-20945.
92 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Well, the trenches advanced slowly until they were so near to Wagner on the 

6th Septr—that a grand cannonade was that day opened by land & sea preparatory to an assault—this the rebels would not withstand—they had delayed the 

capture from the 10th of July to the 6th Septr. thus giving more than 8 weeks to 

improve the next line of defence—and to avoid capture withdrew

So we fell into possession of Morris I.—it could hardly be that the rebels 

would dream of retaining Sumter,—it looked a mass of ruin, but therein lay 

its strength—the rifle shot fired from batteries distant from Two to Two and a 

half miles had been scattered over the entire surface of the fort and thus gradually pounded the walls into dust instead of cutting a breach clear through the 

wall as would have been the case if concentrated on one spot—which happens 

when fired from a short distance—So that the operation seemed brilliant, but 

was deceptive—By the time we had Morris I. the fort was thus converted into a 

species of sand work—and the rebels having already approved the value of such 

a defence remained—Thus all calculations of what would happen were defeated 

and Gen. Gillmore found that only to a certain extent could cannon impair the 

offensive power of Sumter

Finding that the enemy would not evacuate Sumter—and having been well 

satisfied from experience that unless such were the case it would be a sacrifice of 

the limited force of ironclads to attempt to force the entrance unless in co-operation with the land force, I decided to attempt storming it—the difficulty of the 

enterprise was very apparent, but on the other hand there seemed no alternative, 

if anything further was to be done—So far as could be ascertained by the closest 

inspection which circumstance permitted the ruins of the gorge wall appeared 

to me to form a regular slope from the water—and Gen. Gillmore on the 23d

Aug. had written—“The gorge wall is breached the entire length, the debris in 

several places forming a practicable ramp from the level of the water to the top 

of the ruins.”68 If therefore a party of sufficient force could reach the foot of this 

slope, they could ascend and compel the enemy to make good his defence hand 

to hand.

By accident I learned that Gen. G. intended to make a similar attempt and 

on the same night—This was elicited by a request from me for a loan of some of 

his boats—he answered he could not spare any as he designed to try an assault 

and would need them,—but proposed acting together, which of course I assented 

to—Owing to misunderstanding partly from signals, I sent Lieut. Preston then 

68 In his letter of 23 Aug., Gillmore averred, as well, that: “I consider the offensive power of 

Sumter entirely destroyed from to-day’s firing.” OR 28, Part 2:56
Chapter Four | 93

acting as Fleet Captain, ashore to Gen. Gillmore—the night advances,—no 

answer—I fear that there some obstacle—my own column in boats—has been 

advanced well up the channel so as to lose no time finally Preston comes on 

board—and reports the arrangement complete—and asks “may I join my division”69—I had been unwilling as it left me without a staff officer, except one very 

young—but gave way to his urgency—I said—“Are you sure all is right and no 

mistake with the General?” He was positive—“Very well you can go”—I never 

saw him again—In order to see personally to the junction of the columns and 

matters generally in so difficult an undertaking, my own steamer was got underway and moved up the channel when near enough, I got into a boat and pulled 

directly for Sumter—the log says

“At 1.30 the Admiral left the ship,—just as about to leave a very heavy volley 

of musketry was seen to be fired from Fort Sumter. Admiral immediately pulled 

for Sumter, meanwhile Fort Sumter threw up a rocket and burned a red light and 

almost immediately the batteries on Sullivan’s and James I. opened a heavy fire.”70

On my way up the Lehigh suddenly loomed like a shadow in the darkness, and 

I paused a few moments to enquire about the boats—then resumed my course 

but the conflict was short—the firing of musketry about Sumter had ceased—but 

grenades seemed to be flying, and the shells from Fort Johnson and the rebel 

ironclads and Sullivan’s I. were crossing in the air over the boat and screaming 

like mad. It was evident that our men were not in the fort—but where?—after 

lying on the oars for a while, pulled for then supposed position—not a sign in 

the darkness—then tried to find my own steamer—not to be found—the Captain had weighed anchor and steamed down, not stopping for me to return—So 

there was nothing but to pull for it, which we did groping as well as possible—at 

last by the coming down made out a vessel—and got on board71—I had been 

severely taxed—so ill for several days as hardly able to walk—had been busy all 

day—solicitous about the Weehawken battered by the rebels—and there all night 

in a small boat—

Events had disappointed much of my calculation—The Weehawken was to 

have lain off the beach and covered the men,—instead she got aground and compelled me to put all the other ironclads at the heavy batteries to save her—the 

column of Gen. Gillmore had not been seen—he says now very coolly the tide 

69 Preston commanded the third division of boats. ORN 14: 627.

70 ORN 14: 612.

71 Dahlgren boarded Lodona. ORN 14: 636.
94 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

was too low for his boats72—but it was fair to suppose that at midnight when 

Lieut. Preston left him, he would have known enough not to give assurance of 

assisting in the assault—

There it was however,—the assault was not only repulsed but the force of 

the ironclads was sadly depreciated—The Katskill absent under repair for new 

top to Pilot House, crushed in & Rodgers killed on the 17th Aug—Weehawken

hurt below water, could not tell to what extent also leaking—had been struck 

below overhang while aground and bare—by falling tide—The Passaic reported 

disabled—73in the action of the 8th Nantucket at Wassau blockading rebel ironclad Savannah—leaving present for duty four Monitors, Montauk, Patapsco, 

Nahant and Lehigh with Ironsides—Even some of these were more or less in need 

of repair—The Montauk reported—“repairs requisite for effective service,—are 

extensive” (p. 246. Ar. Vess)74 Patapsco’s smoke pipe “almost carried away by a 

shot” (p. 244)75

Of course all independent movement with these vessels was out of the question—if army would advance, I was bound to run any risk to assist them—but as 

Gen. G. did not advance,—I could only wait until he did or await the reinforcements—which it was intended I should have— 

For some weeks previous to the capture of Morris I. various remarks began 

to appear in the Public correspondence depreciative of the Naval service in this 

quarter—which then were utterly incomprehensible to me, for the Gen. and 

myself met after and with every seeming of the best feeling which was certainly 

honest on my part as any one will see who will glance over the published correspondence, and note that I never spoke illy of Gen. G., but always in good terms 

even where there was too little reason to do so—But I believed he was what he 

appeared to be, and I felt that the public cause would again suffer if there were 

any dissensions between us—

But when the failure to assault Sumter occurred I was perfectly astonished at 

72 Gillmore wrote that “the force assembled . . . was detained by low tide at its rendezvous in the 

creek west of Morris Island until after the naval attack had failed.” ORN 14: 636.

73 Lt. Cmdr. Edward Simpson reported that in the ten weeks he had commanded Passaic, 

the monitor had been hit 90 times and that the cumulative damage had rendered the vessel 

disabled. Armored Vessels, 248–49.

74 JAD: “249 Armored Vessels.” Lt. Cmdr. John L. Davis informed Dahlgren that Montauk

required an overhaul of its engines, as well as extensive repairs to its hull owing to damage from 

enemy torpedoes and artillery fire. Ibid., 246–48.

75 Patrick Hughes, Assistant Inspector of Iron-clads, reported to Dahlgren on the damage the 

various monitors had received. Patapsco had indeed lost her smokepipe, but it had been “almost 

carried away by a shot from her own fifteen-inch gun.” Ibid., 244.
Chapter Four | 95

the senseless clamor and unjust criticism that came down on me, I was blamed 

for making the only effort that it was possible to make if we were to proceed, 

whilst not a word was said of Gen. G. failure to assault with me as he had promised to do—It never occurred to the critics that to attempt to enter the harbor 

with only my own diminished force without driving the rebels out of Sumter, 

would have been to sacrifice the only sea-going ironclad squadron the U.S. possessed without any prospect of advantage—In fact there was nothing else to be 

done at the moment—

The land forces now set about fortifying Morris I. and there was no appearance that any other measure was in contemplation—though undoubtedly it was 

advisable to move against Sullivans I. and try to reduce it from the adjacent 

Island as we had done Morris I.

Seeing however that the purpose ashore was bent on making very sure of 

Morris I. I took the opportunity to have the Monitors renovated by turns, keeping no more Monitors off Charleston than were needed—Hoping that before 

long I could be sure of having aid from our batteries on Morris I and then with 

my own Monitors repaired and some new ones from the North, I could afford 

the loss of some vessels to get in—

Toward the end of Sept. I regretted much to learn that Gen. G. had removed 

his own quarters from Morris I. to the Island below (Folly I.)—it looked to me, 

thus removing from the immediate scene of action, as if this change of residence 

announced an intent to relinquish further active operations—It is true that if 

such were the case, it had been already disclosed to me as the purpose of Gen. 

G. by what he had said in my Cabin a few days previously,—that “it was absurd 

to expect us to advance, when together we would be weaker out of present 

position than the enemy”—and that “he thought it probable I would lose half 

the vessels in forcing a way to Charleston.”—Still I presumed that these opinions had reference to the existing condition of things and that when I had been 

reinforced and his batteries on Morris I. were in readiness, some corresponding 

effort would be advisable—

But notwithstanding the entire concordance that seemed to me to exist 

between Gen. G. and myself,—the correspondents who were hovering about 

his Headquarters were not abstaining from any remarks that were calculated 
96 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

to depreciate my course,76 and by inference or directly to have it understood 

that Gen. G. has done all that he was to do or could do and that the shortcoming was mine—At last one of them went so far as to affirm that Gen. G. and 

myself differed so widely that he had tendered his resignation—Before I had 

an opportunity to speak to Gen. G. on this subject, I received from him the 

following note:—

 “Morris I. S.C.

Sept. 23d—1863

Admiral

I am much chagrined at the reports in the newspapers about my tendering 

my resignation in consequence of a disagreement between you & myself—And 

that we did not co-operate cordially.

It is not necessary for me to assure you that I am entirely ignorant of the 

slightest foundation for such reports and had no idea that they existed, until they 

appeared in the papers. They were doubtless started by some scribling sensationist in lieu of news. I will see that they are authoritatively contradicted.

 

Sincerely Yours

Q. A. Gillmore

Rear Admiral Dahlgren

Present”

It will be observed that the date of this note is the 23d Septr. more than 

two weeks subsequent to the capture of Morris I.—and to the occurrence of 

the events which terminated our joint operations—It is also to be observed that 

18 months later Gen. G. published an official report in which he77 alledged in 

substance that he was in opposition to my course and that I did not in effect 

co-operate with him in the plan that had been decided on—

Moreover in that report he does also substantially express the very sentiment 

which in the note he repudiates as those of scribling sensationists—

It is certain that the statements of the note and those of the subsequent 

report—both subsequent to the end of our joint operations,—cannot both be 

76 JAD: “In this general connection See—Dr Duvall’s Journal published by the Navy Dept in 

the Book entitled ‘Armored Vessels’ page 273—.” Surgeon Marius Duvall’s journal provided 

details on U.S. Navy operations in Charleston Harbor; he also mentioned prohibitions against 

providing information to newspapers and described how both Du Pont and Dahlgren had been 

treated in the press. Ibid., 273–79.

77 Dahlgren wrote and crossed out here “shows conclusively that.”
Chapter Four | 97

true—which of them is not—

It will be seen that the sentiments expressed in the note are in accord with 

those I have above attributed to Gen. G. in conversation that passed—

Certainly such a note was calculated to allay any doubts that may have arisen 

in my mind—And matters were in this condition when the enemy made a practical exhibition of some of the means which had been in contemplation for use 

against us—About 10OC at night of the 5th Octr. all were startled by some rapid 

firing in the vicinity of the Ironsides—On steaming up there I learned that a 

torpedo had been exploded under the Ironsides and created some sensation—the 

whole proceeding had been so novel in its character as to puzzle every one in 

regard to the nature of the machine—and but for an accident we might have 

remained in ignorance some time78

Next morning however two persons were captured from whom it was ascertained that it was one of a the torpedo boats of which some account had occasionally reached us—It was early in the morning when a poor wretch was dragged 

78 Accounts of the attack on New Ironsides by the Confederate torpedo boat CSS David can be 

found in ORN 15: 10–21.

Confederate David-type torpedo boat. Photograph, 1865.

Naval History and Heritage Command, Photographic Collections, 165-C-751.
98 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

before me, who evidently looked for nothing less than immediate hanging he was 

told that a full account of the machine was indispensable79—he was glad to find 

this would answer and described the “boat,” as I found afterwards, with entire 

accuracy—there were four persons in it, and it was almost entirely submerged—

It was only visible some 50 feet from the ship, the sentry hailed,—and the officer 

of the deck instantly jumped on the gangway and hailed too,—the answer was a 

shot from the boat that hurt him badly instantly followed by a loud explosion—a 

shock,—and a huge column of water, part of which deluged the engine rooms—

the musketry of the ship opened rapidly but ceased when no further movement 

was observed—the column of water thrown up by the explosion had fallen partly 

in the “torpedo boat” nearly extinguishing the fires of her little engine—two of 

her party jumped overboard, but the pilot and engineer remained,—and finding 

that they escaped notice in the darkness, contrived to start the engine and to get 

back to Charleston80

The effect had been really serious on the Ironsides, and would have been far 

more so if it had occurred lower down—on her bottom.81

It may be supposed that the doubts of the sceptical part of our crews were 

pretty well removed by this evidence of the existence of torpedoes—there is 

always a number in every circle who pride themselves on being above apprehension from such invisible dangers and deride their existence,—and being irresponsible expand largely when there is no danger, or when held back from danger by 

the decision of those who are responsible—it was interesting to observe how the 

present experience disposed of the need of further argument—the interest in 

guarding against these hidden foes became general—

One thing was evident if the great massive frame of the Ironsides was so 

affected, the thin iron bottoms of the Monitors would be blown through without fail—

Soon after, while at Port Royal I was surprised one evening by the music of a 

full band near me,—suddenly a steamer came alongside and Gen. Gillmore came 

on board with some friends in the merriest mood—I only mention this to show 

79 Presumably Pilot Walker Cannon; Dahlgren wrote, “I did not see” the other captured Confederate, Lt. W. T. Glassell. Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren, 417.

80 Lt. Glassell and Pilot Cannon abandoned CSS David after the attack and were captured by 

Union vessels; Assistant Engineer J. H. Tomb and Seaman James Sullivan remained on board 

David, restarted the engine, and returned to Charleston. ORN 15: 19–20. 

81 Carpenter T. H. Bishop detailed the heavy damage to New Ironsides in the coal bunkers and 

hull near the engine room and recommended, “this ship ought to be docked as soon as she can 

possibly be spared from this harbor.” ORN 15: 17–18.
Chapter Four | 99

the friendly relation that existed between us—and yet, My suspicions had been 

somewhat excited by seeing reference in some abusive correspondence to matters 

contained in confidential correspondence—

About the middle of October Gen. Gillmore came on board to see me, 

dined and remained several hours—I referred to some replies by letter that I 

had received from him in regard to operations and expressed my surprise at 

them differing so widely in their tenor from the conversations that had passed 

between us—

It is fairly supposable that if Gen. G. had any objections to urge to the 

Naval operations—any failure to carry out the alledged plan of operations he 

would then have explained himself fully—Instead, he disclaimed all idea of disagreement, or that there had been any but the best understanding between us—

laughed and proposed to suppress the two last letters,—I replied that if he wished 

to have his letters back he could do so—I handed the last to him, which he tore 

up then and threw into the Stove—The works on Morris I. were said to be now 

nearly complete and ready to open—On the 22d Oct—I convened a Council of 

Officers, in compliance with the directions of the Departt.—It embodied probably the best experience that was then to be had in regard to naval operations 

off Charleston—and include Capt. Rowan (now Rear Admiral) commanding 

the Ironsides Capt. Emmons the Chief of Staff—Capt. Ammen on my staff and 

formerly commanding the Monitor Patapsco on the 7th April, during the attack 

by Adm. Dupont—and the Commanders of the Seven Monitors—making Ten 

officers in all—82

The discussion & deliberation was perfectly unrestrained and the fullest 

expression was invited—I submitted all the official papers—the officers themselves were well acquainted with the ground and had been in many of the actions 

that had taken place—I took no part in the discussion, and limited my action 

merely to the business pending—

We sat in full sight of the harbor the forts, &—the vessels—it is to be taken 

for granted that if any Naval opinion was to be relied on, it was in this case

The Council decided by a vote of Six to four that “there would be extreme 

risk incurred without adequate results by entering the Harbor of Charleston with 

82 Dahlgren’s report of 23 October to Welles and the findings of the council of officers are in 

ORN 15: 65–68. The attendees were Capt. Stephen Clegg Rowan, commanding New Ironsides; Flag Capt. George F. Emmons; Cmdr. Thomas H. Stevens, commanding Patapsco; Flag 

aide Cmdr. Daniel Ammen; Cmdr. Andrew Bryson, commanding Lehigh; Cmdr. Edmund 

R. Colhoun, commanding Weehawken; Lt. Cmdr. Edward Simpson, commanding Passaic; 

Lt. Cmdr. John L. Davis, commanding Montauk; Lt. Cmdr. Greenleaf Cilley, commanding 

Catskill; and Lt. Cmdr. John J. Cornwell, commanding Nahant.
100 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

the Seven Monitors the object being to penetrate to Charleston”

The majority was composed of the Senior Officers—Capts. Rowan & 

Emmons—Comdrs. Ammen, Stevens, Bryson & Calhoun—

The Council was equally divided as to whether the Ironsides should enter if 

the Monitors did—and her own commander, Rowan who was the best judge in 

such a matter, voted against her going in.

In favor of co-operating with the Army in attacking Sullivans I. the Council 

voted Ayes Nine—No: one

And unanimously that Forts Moultrie and Johnston could not be reduced by 

the present force of Iron-clads, unsupported by the Army—83

It is probable as already said that no better opinion of the Naval question was 

to be had—and it can not be rejected—It is decisive against the opinion of a Military officer, who was necessarily uninformed on the subject (See my reply to the 

Comm. on the Conduct of the War—published in their Report to Congress—3d

Volume 1865—38th Congress 2d Session page 9.)84

The opinion of the Council as to entering the harbor, was also fully confirmed by the reply of Commo. Rodgers to the query of the Committee on Conduct of the War Febr. 3. 1864—See page 82—Second Vol. report of Com. 2d

Session 38th Congr 1865)—85

To those who may consider that these are merely the inevitable opinions 

of Army & Navy Officers differing from mere pride of opinion—I will offer 

Military testimony that will not be disputed—I mean the opinion of Lt. Gen. 

Sherman. It will be seen in the course of this narration that it was my pleasure to 

contribute all the efforts of my command to the interior movement of this great 

General from Savannah Northward in Geo & S.C.—and it may be well to note 

that Gen. Sherman has peculiar means for judging in relation to Charleston, 

because he had spent many years of earlier life on Sullivans I. and his keen powers 

of observation were familiarised with every spot of the locality— 

I think therefore that every military doubt is removed by his opinion, if in 

83 See ORN 15:67–68 for the Council of Officers.

84 For Dahlgren’s testimony about this conference and operations in Charleston to the Joint 

Committee on the Conduct of the War, see JCCW 6, “Miscellaneous,” 1–11.

85 John Rodgers, in response to the question “What is the reason that our navy does not 

now, or has not heretofore operated actively against the city of Charleston” testified that: 

“if General Gillmore on the same island, assisted by his artillery and the whole force of the 

monitors, in forty-eight days, could not capture Fort Wagner by them alone, it is perfectly 

certain that the monitors alone never can take the much stronger defences which line 

James’s island and Sullivan’s island.” JCCW 5, “Heavy Ordnance,” 82.
Chapter Four | 101

truth & sincerity any existed

I had informed Gen. Sherman of the destruction of the Monitor Patapsco by 

a torpedo in the course of measures to force the entrance by way of assisting his 

movement

The clear & proper view of what he deemed necessary was contained in his 

reply of 17th Jan—After explaining his design he says “I would prefer you should 

run no risk at all—&c”—“I think you will concur with me that in the anticipation of the movement of my army to the rear of the Coast, it will be unwise to 

subject your ships to the heavy artillery of the enemy or his sunken torpedoes”86

The great confidence which I knew must attach to the opinion of this distinguished officer,—his perfect knowledge of the localities about Charleston and his 

fearless truthfulness led me to seek his opinion on the subject as better calculated 

than any other to dispose of Gen. Gillmore’s assumption—

Gen. Sherman replied at length and as decisively as one of his own battles—I 

wish I could give his whole letter—it is conclusive & explicit on every point 

involved and will always be to me a never failing source of satisfaction—as it 

entirely confirms the course which I took—He does not believe that my passing 

Sumter would have caused the evacuation of the Forts & city—“but that the fleet 

would have been subjected to a terrific fire from the circle of batteries that would 

have crippled every ship and rendered the fleet useless for other purposes. The 

enemy could well have afforded to exchange the City of Charleston for the fleet.”

“To the second question I answer that of course the passage of the Ironclad 

fleet into the inner harbor before Gen. Gillmore had reduced battery Wagner 

would have been still more imprudent.”—

“To the third question I answer that had you run into Inner harbor and up 

Cooper river the enemy could easily have held all his works on James & Sullivan’s 

I. without trouble as the fire of your ships could not reach the road from the 

interior of those islands.”87

He also observes “that all the attacks from the front were playing into the 

hands of the enemy, who of course had reason to rejoice at every attack from that 

quarter”—88

These extracts are quite sufficient to dispose of the absurd notion which Gen. 

G. by his own account would was willing to impose of the ironclads, but which 

86 For the full letter, in which Sherman details his plan of operations, see OR 47, Part 2:67–69.

87 JAD: “Gen. Gillmore affirmed that if the ironclads were to run by the batteries, the rebels 

would abandoned these islands.”

88 See Appendix 1.
102 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

he was very far from venturing to touch himself

I am free to say that I do not believe that Gen. G. ever seriously entertained 

such a plan, until subsequent events made it useful to cover up his own failure to 

meet the expectations of others—whether tendered by him or not—

Nor do I believe that such a plan ever was entertained by the Navy Dep.—

for if it had been I should have been apprised of it—which I never was—

The opinions of the Council & Commo. Rodgers—and of Gen. Sherman 

effectually dispose of the value of the Plan—and it is also must be plain that 

nothing of the kind ever was agreed upon as stated in Gen. G.s official Report

Of the conduct of Gen. G. to myself in leading me to believe by word and 

writing that we had been acting harmoniously, up to the date of the letter, when 

he was permitting other impressions to find their way into the public prints and 

did substantially avow them afterward I leave to the consideration of every honorable man

It should be borne in mind that all these remarks are to defend myself against 

the scandalous and unfounded statements of Gen. G. in his official report—that 

I never made any attack upon him or his conduct,—but in my desire for the 

public interests and to sustain a comrade I sustained and praised him to an extent 

that I now find it difficult to justify—

On the 25th Octr. Gen. G. asked me by letter if I would “make a demonstration in his favor with the Monitors and the Ironsides,—in case he determined to 

attempt the occupation of Sumter within the next few days”—“If so I shall see 

you and arrange details.”89

I replied the same day—that I would “give him all the support in my 

power”—and would be pleased “at any time to see him in order to arrange the 

details referred to.”

Next day he came on board, but said not one word of that determination to 

occupy—but remarked that he was trying range on Sumter—I replied that I had 

heard of it from my own look outs and had ordered two Monitors to assist with 

Rifle Cannon—

The second cannonade of Sumter now began from the new land batteries—

it was continued with more or less steadiness for some weeks, and was assisted by 

89 The letter is not found, but Dahlgren makes note of it in his journal. Dahlgren, Memoir of 

John A. Dahlgren, 420. In another manuscript account of the siege of Charleston, Dahlgren 

quoted the same portions of the letter. He added afterwards that “this unconditional reply will 

exemplify the manner in which I believe I never failed to meet propositions of Gen. Gillmore 

that concerned the public interests.” John William Draper Family Papers, Box 2, Library of 

Congress.
Chapter Four | 103

the fire of the Monitors which I sent up daily for the purpose—Very frequently 

I went up in a gunboat to look at the work and felt at last compelled to abandon 

any hope that the rebels could be expelled by cannonade—It was also evident 

to me that the rifle cannon were quite ineffective against the massive rubbish of 

the fort—its brick walls had been pounded into ramparts of sand, on which the 

rifle shells made little penetration and exploded superficially—it was clear to me 

that the round shells from smooth bores would have done better work—But the 

bayonet was needed—the cannon would do no more than they had done.

About the middle of Novemr. in conversation with Gen. G—he seemed 

much inclined to a proposition looking to Sullivan’s I.—and mentioned that 

he would divert attention from the project—by means of the newspaper correspondents—I did not then appreciate his aptitude that way as fully as it deserved 

though I came to it afterwards—and so did Gen. Butler, when Gen. G. came 

to serve with him—(See Gen. Butlers pamflet in relation to Chaplain Hudson)—90Certainly it was a new branch of the engineering art. I could not but 

observe that on this day Gen. G. was very nervous—said he does not sleep—did 

not all last night—I remembered his being troubled so before but attributed it 

to critical operations—He remarked to-day that he had never been easy until the 

Monitors rode out a gale safely,—as he was uncertain till then of his own position.—rather in contrast with some opinions subsequently made known

On a couple of days afterwards the rebs. suddenly opened fire on our battery 

on Cummings Point—which seemed to call up the vision of a landing by the 

enemy—absurd as was such an idea; Gen. G. telegraphed me—“Will you have 

some of your vessels move up so as to prevent an attack by boats on the sea face of 

the point?”—91accordingly I ordered the Monitors on picket & the tugs on patrol 

to attend to the matter—that Capt. Bryson did this zealously and kept in as close 

90 Butler had ordered Chaplain Henry N. Hudson arrested, ostensibly because Hudson had gone 

on leave and failed to return to the army at the appointed time. Butler, however, also went after 

Hudson for “certain libellous publications,” as Butler termed them. He believed that Hudson 

had worked with Gillmore, then serving under Butler’s command, to write letters published in 

New York papers critical of Butler’s generalship. He further alleged that Hudson had gone on 

leave only to avoid an investigation into his authorship of the articles and ties with Gillmore. 

See Benjamin F. Butler, Official Documents Relating to a “Chaplain’s Campaign (Not) with 

General Butler,” but in New York (Lowell: Charles Hunt, 1865), 5. A thorough recounting of the 

affair, including Butler’s investigation, pamphlet, and the pamphlet Hudson wrote in response, 

is: Howard C. Westwood, “Ben Butler Takes on a Chaplain,” Civil War History Vol. 35, No. 3 

(September 1989): 225–38.

91 Gillmore’s full telegram included the sentence “The enemy have opened a heavy fire on 

Cumming’s Point” before the section quoted above, ORN 15:117. For the telegram and Dahlgren’s report of this action, see ORN 15: 117–19.
104 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

as he could, is best shown by the fact that his vessel in the darkness was unable to 

avoid the shoal and grounded; the heavy batteries on Sullivans I. at once opened 

very heavily on the Monitor—to extricate her I signalled the other ironclads to 

interpose—and went up in the Passaic—getting near the Lehigh, I found that the 

Nahant had approached more nearly and went to her in my barge—Capt. Cornwell skilfully obtained a position whence he could pass a hawser to the Lehigh—I 

have seldom witnessed a sight of greater interest—The Nahant was only 100 or 

150 yards from the Lehigh the shot & shell came in a storm from the rebel batteries, striking the two monitors or falling between them—amidst it—Dr Longshaw & two seamen92 passed in a small boat to carry a line—three hawsers were 

cut93—one by shot and two on the sharp iron edges of the deck—The Montauk

& Passaic were making fine practice at Moultrie to relieve us—But the Lehigh

would not stir—the tide was at its height—I ordered the Montauk ahead of the 

Nahant—both to steam steadily, while the Lehigh backed—it was a moment of 

intense interest for if not floated she must remain there twelve hours—every eye 

was bent on the hawser & the Lehigh—suddenly she came off as if launched—

and was safe—94

I had the satisfaction of promoting the seamen who went in the boat to 

be officers on the spot—under the fire of the enemy—shells & shot baptising 

them—

Though the Monitor had been thus risked to keep off those terrible rebel 

boats—Gen. G. never fired a shot from his batteries to help us. the Lehigh was 

badly hurt under water—and required great care to get her safely to Port Royal95

Novem. 24—so delighted to see my gallant son Ulric—who came down 

to visit me whilst his wound was getting well—how changed—wasted by suffering the loss of his leg—which nearly cost him his life,—his brave spirit was 

unquenched—I knew that he had lost his leg,—but when I realised it the pang 

92 Assistant Surgeon William Longshaw Jr. carried the hawser twice, rowed by Coxswain Thomas 

Irving and George W. Leland. All three men were from Lehigh. Dahlgren had Irving and Leland 

advanced in rate for their service; the Secretary of the Navy informed Longshaw that he could 

present himself for examination to passed assistant surgeon after he had completed two years of 

sea service. ORN 15: 120.

93 Three sailors from Nahant—Frank S. Gile, William Williams, and Horatio Young—carried the 

hawser over once. ORN 15: 120.

94Bryson’s report on Lehigh is found at ORN 15: 119. Initially, he believed that “no injury has 

been done the ship by grounding that can be perceived.” Nahant’s log of the episode can be 

found at ORN 15: 121–22.

95 Lehigh went to Port Royal in November to repair damages from enemy shot as well as a leak. 

ORN 15: 142–43.
Chapter Four | 105

was intense—96

Our batteries pummel Sumter lazily—evidently useless—

No reinforcements yet—hear that the Contractors cannot find workmen

Dec. 6th sorrowfully saw the Monitor Weehawken go down in a gale but a few 

96 For an account of Ulric’s trip to Charleston, see Dahlgren, Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren, 185–203.

Rear Admiral John Dahlgren standing next to a Dahlgren gun on the deck of Pawnee in 

Charleston Harbor. Glass negative, c. 1865.

Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-cwpb-02988.
106 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

hundred yards from my own vessel—it was a sad loss—97

We were now in the winter—the duty performed is of the most trying kind—

and falls with special severity on the Monitors—their decks would be some nine 

to 12 inches above water if it were still, but that is never the case in this open 

roadstead and the sea breaks or rolls constantly over,—the top of the turret alone 

is dry,—the crew if they mount to escape the close atmosphere between decks, 

cluster around the Stack for such warmth as it yields—no phase of life has less 

of comfort.—As the night comes,—there is duty at the front—watch and ward 

for the Monitor under the very batteries of the enemy—to check torpedo boats 

from coming out or English friends from running in the anchor is under foot, 

but the stream is ever ready, and the heavy cannon of the Turret—No duty has 

been done this war more grinding in its nature than that of the inner blockade of 

Charleston—none perhaps less appreciated—

So the writer proceeds—the blockade is perfect—but no reinforcements yet—

On Christmas day the rebels attempted a surprise in Stono—secretly established batteries and opened suddenly on the advance Gunboat—which however 

was not to be caught napping but returned the fire vigorously—

The unequal contest lasted until the veteran Pawnee got into position and 

opened her broadside of IXin guns—which quickly drove the rebels from their 

guns that we picked up next day—98

A few days afterwards had a sight of some of the obstructions from above, 

which had been driven down by late gales—they consisted of bars of Railroad 

iron, each 21 feet long, linked together, and each bar floated in an immense mass 

of solid timber—they had drifted on the beach and were being hauled up—as 

many as 33 had so far been counted—

97 Weehawken went down with the loss of four officers and 27 men. Vessels nearby reported that 

“she was settling fast by the head” around 2:40 p.m., and then “made a heavy roll to starboard, 

then righted and sank immediately.” ORN 15:170. Only five minutes passed between the time 

that Weehawken made her distress signal and when she sank. A court of inquiry found that 

open and improperly closed hatches allowed large amounts of water into the vessel. Dahlgren 

informed the Navy Department that “the mischief was really done by the entrance of too much 

water through hatches, hawse pipes, etc., before proper measures were taken.” Ibid., 169.

98 The Confederate attack on Marblehead, Cmdr. Richard W. Meade Jr., resulted in three men 

killed and four wounded. The schooner C. P. Williams, commanded by Acting Master S. N. 

Freeman, and Pawnee, Cmdr. George B. Balch, assisted in driving off the Confederate forces. 

Meade praised his crew: “Their courage was so well displayed that the enemy, who had doubtless counted on disabling us, were forced to retire (without effecting their object) in confusion 

and ignominy.” ORN 15:191. A landing party from Pawnee carried off two 24-pounder guns 

from the former Confederate position. The reports of Balch, Freeman, Meade, and others, are 

in ORN 15: 188–209.
Chapter Four | 107

In a conversation to-day with Gen. Gillmore he observed that he “never 

could perceive his ability to do anything if I went into the harbor, and thought 

it a great risk to our position to do so, which he was willing to say in writing”

Chapter Five | 109

CHAPTER 5

Siege of Charleston, 1864

1864

Towards the middle of January one of the newspaper correspondents informed 

me that Gen. Gillmore read their dispatches before sent and struck out what he 

chose—thus endorsing whatever abuse of me they chose to write—

I at once addressed a note to Gen. G. and asked if this was true—he answered 

by Telegraph denying the charge.

A few days afterwards he came on board and asserted that the charge made by 

the correspondent was a falsehood—The conversation was at length upon affairs 

generally—The Gen. said the War Dept. had refused reinforcements, and he gave 

up the idea of doing anything further—he authorised me to say to the Navy Dept.

that he could do nothing if I went in, and considered it hazardous for me to go in—

Early in February Gen. G. asked me to assist him in an expedition up the St

Johns—thither I went with vessels of such draft as could cross its Bar—troops and 

ships got as high as Jacksonville—the army landed, Gen. G. started it into the 

interior and then went back to Port Royal—presently the rebs. were encountered 

in force—a fight ensued and Gen. Seymour1 finding the enemy largely superior, 

fell back—

On the 17th Febr. lost another vessel by a torpedo-boat—The Housatonic—

not one of the converted merchant steamers but a fine new Steam ship of War; 

as before, the machine was close aboard, before seen—about 9OC at night, and 

anchored outside in the open sea, on blockade—orders were given and obeyed 

quickly but in vain—in less than five minutes the noble ship lay on the bottom—of 

1 Brig. Gen. Truman Seymour commanded a Union expedition to Florida in early 1864. Ezra J. 

Warner, Generals in Blue: Lives of the Union Commanders (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1964), 433–34.
110 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

the ocean—officers and crew floating around—2

These torpedoes have been much laughed at, but without reason—their operation would be damaging to any vessels, but almost certainly fatal to the thin-iron 

flat bottoms of the Monitors as was very conclusively shown afterwards—It is to 

be borne in mind that the Monitors off Charlestown were widely different from 

the Miantonomah—which has a wooden frame as massive as a Line of—battle 

ship—her lower deck almost as ample—defended from fouling by a copper bottom—double screw, which would turn her as well as drive ahead—and lastly two 

turret with four XVin guns

The previous narration almost loses sight of the general duties of the squadron—the work at Charleston engrosses all—however I had other cares—the “beat” 

covered some 300 miles of Coast—from Murrill’s Inlet S.C. to Mosquito inlet 

(Florida) including no less than 17 ports of the best description, requiring an effective blockade—the number of vessels in the squadron was seldom less than 70 and 

reached as high as 95 at one time—the labor needed to carry such an affair was 

immense & unremitting—The vessels particularly the steamers were always in want 

of something—the steam being always going,—the machines wore rapidly and the 

2 Housatonic had not been sunk by a Confederate torpedo boat, as Union officers widely 

believed, but by the fully submersible vessel CSS H. L. Hunley. Deserters had brought news of 

the Confederate submarine to the U.S. fleet earlier in January; after receiving news of what he 

called “the Diver,” Dahlgren had ordered additional measures to guard his ships against attack. 

ORN 15: 238.

“Destruction of Housatonic by a rebel torpedo Feby 17—1864—Charleston.” Housatonic fell 

victim not to a torpedo but to the Confederate submarine H. L. Hunley. Drawing on paper; 

Alfred R. Waud, 1864.

Morgan collection of Civil War drawings, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-ppmsca-21443.
Chapter Five | 111

establishment at Port Royal for repairs was 

very large, though far from sufficient—The 

Coal consumed was excessive—Provisions & 

supplies of all kind—Cannon, powder shells 

&c. Then the health of the men wore out 

too—the climate was unfavorable and the 

sick went North—making a perpetual drain 

illy replaced by men sent in return who had 

never seen a ship—The Officers wore out 

too, and there was not I believe one left in 

command when I departed, who was there 

when I took command—The correspondence was enormous—and required a large 

clerical staff—Then I labored under the disadvantage of losing several Fleet Captains 

(Chiefs of Staff)—one so great that it is difficult to be understood—

The first one became sick and had to 

go home,—the second (Capt. Rodgers) 

was killed in action on the 17th Aug.—the 

third (Capt. Badger) suffered a broken leg 

in action two weeks afterwards—and the 

fourth (Lieut. Preston) was taken prisoner 

in the assault on Sumter—Thus in two 

months of continued Naval operations I lost 

four Chiefs of Staff which almost entirely 

deranged the particular duties belonging to 

them and threw much of them on me—The loss was the greater, that they were 

able men—were my only confidential references—upon I necessarily relied much 

in such heavy responsibilities—With them too I lost evidences of proceedings, that 

became invaluable when it was my misfortune to encounter duplicity & meanness where it was least to be expected—They had been present with me in every 

action—one wounded—another killed—and one “Preston” was captured—one of 

the finest officer I ever knew—he was indeed extraordinary—uniting the judgeLieutenant Samuel Preston. Glass 

negative, c. 1863.

Brady Photograph Collection, National 

Archives, B-5983.
112 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

ment of 50 with the dash and years of 25—He fell at Fort Fisher—3

Towards the end of February the Navy Department wrote, desiring to see me, 

when I could leave without detriment to the public service—

Before leaving had an interview with Gen. G—on the usual friendly and unreserved terms—never suspecting for a moment what he meditated—on this occasion he expressed the opinion that Fort Johnson was complete when we landed on 

Morris I. but that the batteries between it and Secessionville—Simpkins, Hascall & 

Cheres were established afterwards— 

I turned the command over to Commodore Rowan and steamed North in the 

“Harvest Moon”—a side wheeler, just purchased4—On the 1st March got inside of 

Chesapeake Capes—and on the evening of the 2d March reached my Washington 

home—little dreaming that my beloved son Ulric was that night to close his eventful career on the banks of the Mattaponý—

The business at the Department related to the new Monitors which were 

designed to reinforce me at Charleston—the difficulty of obtaining mechanics had 

delayed their completion, and now that they were nearly ready it was desirable 

to divide them between the James & Mobile—where they seemed to be much 

more needed by the course of events than at Charleston—After concluding there, 

they should be sent to me off Charleston—Considering that this arrangement concluded all active operations at Charleston I asked the Depart. to relieve me, but was 

requested to remain—

Meanwhile a deep sorrow was gradually breaking in on me—The President 

in overflowing kindness—tried to break its force as much as possible—first a note 

then a message with hopeful news—then would have me to the Theatre with him, 

but I was too uneasy to go—then he came to my house himself with some hopeful 

rumor—but at last the certainty came and he sent for me—my first impulse was 

naturally to go to Fort Monroe Mr. Lincoln—at once said—“go—ask no one,—I 

will stand by you”—

On the 9th March I arrived there early—and the first to drift from the shore 

was a package of Richmond papers filled with such statements & comments of a 

fallen foe, as fiends only could indulge in— 

3 Flag Lt. Preston, along with more than 280 other sailors and Marines, was killed during the 15 

January 1865 attack on Fort Fisher at Wilmington, NC. Chris E. Fonvielle Jr., The Wilmington 

Campaign: Last Rays of Departing Hope (Campbell, CA: Savas Publishing Company, 1997), 

258.

4 Dahlgren explained to Rowan his general duties as “I. Strict blockade of the rebel ports, not 

even permitting foreign vessels of war to communicate. II. Cooperation with the army. III. 

Active operations against the enemy when the opportunity offers to do so with success and 

advantage.” ORN 15:345.
Chapter Five | 113

His only purpose had been to 

rescue the wasting captives from 

Libby and other horrible dungeons—and these savages could only 

see in it, harm to themselves,—the 

papers which they affirm were found 

on him could only be forgeries—for 

the signature was mispelled—it was 

impossible that he should ever have 

misspelled his own name—and thus 

the lie was disclosed—5

My efforts were now given to the 

recovery of his body—and a request 

was forwarded by Gen. Butler to 

the authorities at Richmond—6

who signified their assent—but 

afterwards sent word that they 

found his grave empty—the body 

had been removed—Meanwhile I 

was apprised that some persons of 

Union sentiment had set about to do so and had succeeded,—so the evidence on 

5 A cavalry raid under the command of Brig. Gen. Judson Kilpatrick and Col. Ulric Dahlgren 

had set out toward Richmond on 28 February 1864. Ostensibly, the raiders intended to free 

Union prisoners held at Libby Prison and other points in Richmond. The raid turned into a 

fiasco, and on the very early morning of 3 March 1864, Confederates found on Dahlgren’s 

body orders detailing the federal plans, including a message that ordered the raiders to burn 

Richmond and capture the Confederate president and his cabinet. The plan also suggested that 

any of the Confederate leaders who attempted to escape should be shot. The incendiary nature 

of these orders—contrary to the accepted conduct of war—created a stir among Confederate 

authorities. Union officials would not confirm the authenticity of the orders; debate still 

continues about whether or not these orders were authentic or a forgery. For a full discussion 

of the raid and the Dahlgren papers, see Bruce M. Venter, Kill Jeff Davis: The Union Raid on 

Richmond, 1864 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2016), 229–78.

6 Butler notified Dahlgren on 10 March 1864 that he would send a message to the Confederate authorities via a flag of truce the following day. Lincoln later asked Butler to “notify me 

instantly so that I can let the afflicted know;” the President wished to convey personally the 

sad news to his friend. On 23 March 1864, Butler informed the Secretary of War that the 

Confederate authorities were unable to turn over Ulric’s body. Private and Official Correspondence of Gen. Benjamin F. Butler During the Period of the Civil War, [ed. Jessie Ames Marshall] 

(Norwood, MA: Plimpton Press, 1917) Vol. 3: 504, 509, 547, and 571. Dahlgren’s body was 

buried secretly in Oakwood Cemetery in Richmond. Shortly thereafter Unionist sympathizers 

recovered the body for safekeeping until after the war. Venter, Kill Jeff Davis, 239–40.

Major General Benjamin Franklin Butler. 

Glass negative, c. 1863.

Brady-Handy Photograph Collection, Library of Congress, 

Prints and Photographs Division, LC-DIG-cwpbh-04894. 
114 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

both sides concurred on the removal—(Let me here refer to my letter in regard to 

my son, published in the Herald and the Army & Navy Journal;—A Memoir has 

also been prepared for publication which will contain a full account of his life).7 I 

send the discourse by Dr Sunderland his pastor—which outlines his career—

The middle of April had worn around—my time had been entirely taken 

up with efforts to regain my son’s body—the Depart. wished me to return to my 

Squadron and orders were sent to me—

On leaving the President, I observed that he must not expect me to do more 

than hold on with the force I had—he replied “Oh! yes, that is all I ask”—He had 

on a previous occasion when I spoke indignantly of the abuse levelled at me, said 

“Well, you never heard me complain did you?”—speaking with much earnestness

I was never to see my kind friend again—and the last token from him a warm 

pressure of my hand between his—the tears came in his eyes as he spoke of my 

gallant son—

All these little remembrances are treasured now—of the noble Martyr himself 

thinking of one who then too was a martyr—

On the 2d of May arrived at Port Royal—learned that Gen. Gillmore had just 

left—he takes a corps with him to join the army near Richmond—

I was surprised to learn from a General officer full confirmation of what the

correspondent had charged Gen. G. in relation to myself—

By the 8th I reached Charleston—and relieved Commodore Rowan of his 

charge, which he had now held for Ten weeks—Two days afterwards I convened a 

Council of Officers—The Ironsides would soon return North—I knew that for the 

present there would be no reinforcements—could anything at all be done before 

the force was reduced by the absence of the Ironsides8—?—The decision was Seven 

to two even against a serious attack upon Sumter9

I now concluded to look to some of the stations of the blockade and visited as 

far as Ossabaw.

Towards the end of May, Gen. Foster arrived as Commandr. of the Military 

7 The same letter from Dahlgren dated 24 July 1864 appeared in The New York Herald on 8 

August 1864 and the Army and Navy Journal on 13 August 1864. Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren. In 

the letter, Dahlgren claimed that the papers found on Ulric’s body were forgeries.

8 Gideon Welles directed New Ironsides to Philadelphia on 23 May. ORN 15: 439.

9 Dahlgren held a council of the ironclad captains on 10 and 12 May 1864. Present were 

Commo. Rowan of New Ironsides, Cmdr. George H. Cooper of Sangamon, Cmdr. Napoleon 

B. Harrison of Catskill, Lt. Cmdr. John L. Davis of Montauk, Lt. Cmdr. William Gibson 

of Sonoma, Lt. Cmdr. Stephen B. Luce of Canandaigua, and Lt. Cmdr. Edward Simpson of 

Passaic. Lt. Cmdr. Joseph M. Bradford of Dahlgren’s staff also attended. The council voted 7–2 

that it was not advisable to attack Sumter. ORN 15: 430–33.
Chapter Five | 115

force in place of Gen. Gillmore—10

In the middle of June came a 

copy of a letter from Gen. Ripley, 

Comdg inside—that 50 Union Officers had been sent to Charleston for 

confinement—the letter proceeds 

to state,—“These officers have been 

placed in my charge and will be 

provided with commodious quarters in a part of the city occupied 

by non-combatants, the majority of 

whom are women and children. 

It is proper that you should 

know, however, that the portion of 

the city, in which they are located is, 

and has been for some time exposed 

day and night to the fire of your 

guns.”

 

 Very Respectf. &c

 R. S. Ripley

 Brig. Gen. Comddg.”11

10 Maj. Gen. John G. Foster of New Hampshire graduated from West Point and served in the 

Mexican-American War. His earlier Civil War service had been with the Ninth Army Corps in 

North Carolina and Tennessee. Warner, Generals in Blue, 157.

11 Brig. Gen. Roswell S. Ripley, a native of Ohio, attended West Point and fought in the Mexican-American War before marrying into a South Carolina family. He served in South Carolina 

in the first year of the war, and then fought with the Army of Northern Virginia through the 

Battle of Antietam, where he was wounded. After recovery, he returned to serve in South Carolina. Ezra J. Warner, Generals in Gray: Lives of the Confederate Commanders (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1959), 257. Ripley passed on the information on behalf of Maj. 

Gen. Samuel Jones, commanding the Department of South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. 

Ripley’s letter of 13 June 1864 is in ORN 15: 528. As noted above, the Confederates sought to 

reduce Union attacks on Charleston by using Union prisoners as human shields. Union Brig. 

Gen. Alexander Schimmelfennig noted, “Charleston must be considered a place ‘of arms.’ . . . 

In my opinion the endeavor of the enemy to force us to give up the bombardment should be 

the reason for its continuation. At the same time, as a means to force him to give up his barbarous practices, the simple fact of retaliation can be made effectual, as I have many places where 

his shells fall as he has in Charleston where mine fall. I also think that the United States can 

furnish as large a number of Confederate generals and field officers as they can procure of ours.” 

OR 35, Part 2.

Major General John G. Foster. Glass negative, 

c. 1865.

Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, 

LC-DIG-cwpb-06720.
116 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

It seems incredible that any one would choose to record such an atrocity—12

but it is so, and the Charles. Mercury of June 14th gave the names of our Officers 

and explained at length where they were located and why—13

Little to be done now on this coast except maintain a blockade and strike 

when a chance offers—The Ironsides has gone home,14 the Monitors losing in 

speed from foulness and continued complaints of boilers suffering from foulness—the military force too is much reduced—

The Manhattan (Monitor) touched on her way to Adm Farragut—

Forwarded to the Committee on the Conduct of the War my reply to their 

query upon Operations about Charleston (which please see in their Report)15

The monotony of blockade was varied by an expedition to Stono, proposed 

by Gen. Foster—this was in the right direction—We entered the river on the 2d

June.16 I had two Monitors Montauk & Lehigh with the Pawnee, the Donough

&c17—the stream too narrow for more or heavier vessels—(details will be found 

in the official reports)18 I think that on this occasion we were nearer Charleston 

than ever before—If Gen. Foster had had more men, the results would have been 

important but they mustered heavily on his left wing—Schimmelfennig on the 

right did good work—In his quiet but vigorous way he pushed the rebels out 

of their lines and well back on the heavy works that commanded the river and 

the ground before him—and while they were thus occupied he struck boldly at 

Johnston far away on his right and must have taken it, but for the misconduct of 

12 Dahlgren wrote at the time that “I am also of the opinion that General Jones and General 

Ripley will be fully entitled to be hanged, if they are taken, for being guilty of the intent and 

threat to murder . . . We should not be bragged nor bullied out of any success in crushing the 

rebellion.” ORN 15: 530.

13 The article named the Union officers involved, including five generals and 11 colonels. The 

editors noted that “for some time past it has been known that a batch of Yankee prisoners, 

comprising the highest now in our hands, were soon to be brought hither to share the pleasures 

of the bombardment.” The Mercury (Charleston, SC), 14 June 1864, 1.

14 Following Welles’s direction of 23 May, Dahlgren ordered New Ironsides to Philadelphia on 8 

June, and she departed Port Royal on 16 June. ORN 15: 512, 526.

15 Dahlgren’s response to the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War was dated 20 June 

1864. See JCCW 6, “Miscellaneous,” 1–11.

16 Dahlgren wrote “June” here instead of “July;” these events took place starting on 2 July 1864.

17 Lehigh and Montauk crossed at the Stono Bar, along with Pawnee, McDonough, and Racer. Dai 

Ching, Wamsutta, and Geranium covered the Edisto River. ORN 15: 555.

18 The reports are found at ORN 15: 551–58.
Chapter Five | 117

some of the officers—such a result would have been brilliant19

The central stronghold of the enemy was Battery Pringle a heavy work, well 

armed—the shallowness of the river made it difficult to push the Monitors nearer 

than 2800 yards, without grounding—The Montauk & Lehigh did excellent service and the smooth bore XI inch gun of the former, well vindicated its superiority over the 8in Parrott Rifle of the Lehigh—it was a fair sample of competitive 

practice and I believe decided opinion clearly in favor of the XIin so far as the 

experienced officers were concerned—20

The service of the vessel was well appreciated ashore—Gen. S. wrote me on 

the 6th from the right—“I take pleasure in informing you of the excellent practice 

by your gunboats and Monitors in Stono river yesterday.”

“They drove the enemy out of his rifle pits and prevented him from erecting 

an earthwork which he had commenced”—21

On my left, I heard as follows:—

“Brig. Gen. Saxton requests me to tell you that your fire on battery Pringle is 

of great service to him and he desires a continuance of the same.”

On the 9th the Commd General decided to withdraw the troops, as the 

enemy were too much in force on his left—

Next day the embarkation began and was completed in the afternoon—My 

steamers remained until next day—to check any movement of the enemy, then 

got underway leisurely—and proceeded down the river in precise line—

Received news of the Alabama, sunk by the Kearsarge—marking unmistakably the superiority of my XI inch guns—pitted against the English rifle cannon 

and 68pdr.—they had bragged long on these two, and had run down the XIin—a 

fair fight settled the question fully—22

On repairing to Port Royal found there the Monitor Tecumseh—Capt. 

Craven bound to Mobile—where a month later this gallant officer ended his 

19 In his report, Foster mentioned that Col. William Gurney had been delayed in assaulting 

Fort Johnson, and as a “consequence . . . some of the boats got aground” and that Gurney did 

not use his reserve to support the Union troops that had captured Fort Simkins. As a result, 

the Confederates recaptured Simkins and preserved Fort Johnson. See OR 35, Part 1. Brig. 

Gen. Alexander Schimmelfennig, a Prussian officer who had emigrated to the United States, 

commanded a district in the Union Department of the South. Warner, Generals in Blue, 

423–24.

20 Dahlgren’s message on the relative effectiveness of the different types of naval ordnance can be 

found in ORN 15: 557–58.

21 Schimmelfennig’s letter to Dahlgren of 6 July 1864 is found at ORN 15: 557.

22 Dahlgren perhaps overestimated the efficacy of his guns here; Kearsarge went into battle with 

chains providing armor for the sides while Alabama had no such advantage.
118 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

career—we had been friends and comrades from boyhood—23

Aug. 3d—In Charleston roads—The enemy sent out the 50 Union officers 

whom they had had under fire—having been forced to it, by putting 50 officers 

of like rank, of their own, under their fire—I received our officers on board of 

my own steamer the “Harvest Moon” Gen. Foster, Gen. Sickles & Gov. Hahn24 of 

Louisiana on board and were present also I had our vessels dressed with flags and 

ordered the Pawnee to salute as the Fifty passed them—just as their steame[r] was 

near to mine they broke out in hearty cheers for the General and myself—then 

they rushed on board and much shaking of hands—The steamer Admiral25 took 

them on board for home,—there was a fine collation for them—and we had a 

happy time—26

I had received a photographic copy of the paper said to have been found on 

my son—it is a base forgery—the name mispelled in the signature—Dalhgren

when it should have been Dahlgren—I wrote a fitting reply to the slander,—it 

was published in Herald of 8th August.27

23 Tecumseh, commanded by Cmdr. Tunis A. Craven, arrived at Port Royal for repairs and coal on 

8 July 1864. ORN 15: 565. During the Battle of Mobile Bay on 5 August 1864, the ship struck 

a torpedo and sank with the loss of most of the crew, including Craven.

24 Maj. Gen. Daniel Sickles had been severely wounded at Gettysburg. After he recovered, Sickles 

embarked on a tour of conditions in the occupied South. Michael Hahn was the governor of 

Union-controlled Louisiana. Warner, Generals in Blue, 446–47.

25 Acting Volunteer Lt. William B. Eaton commanded Admiral, a screw auxiliary. Paul H. Silverstone, Civil War Navies 1855–1883 (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2001), 81; ORN 

15: 637.

26 As Schimmelfennig had suggested earlier, Union generals placed Confederate prisoners in 

a like situation, prompting the prisoner exchange. A list of 51 Confederate prisoners sent to 

Charleston is found in OR 35, Part 2. Foster reported the exchange of these 51 officers for the 

Union prisoners; OR 35, Part 2.

27 JAD: “also in the Army & Navy Journal of Aug. 13th.” Dahlgren’s letter appeared in the 8 

August 1864 issue of The New York Herald. In it, Dahlgren maintained that the copy of the 

documents he received demonstrated “that this document is a forgery—a barefaced, atrocious 

forgery—so palpable that the wickedness of the act is only equaled by the recklessness with 

which it has been perpetrated and adhered to.” Dahlgren also included sections of letters that 

attested to the character of his son, as well as Edwin Stanton’s praise for Ulric transmitted along 

with his commission as colonel. The paper announced the piece with the notice that remarked 

on Ulric’s “chivalrous character” and bemoaned that “It has remained for the father, Admiral 

Dahlgren, to trace the cowardly forgery to its source, and proclaim it to the world.” New York 

Herald, 8 August 1864, 1, 4.
Chapter Five | 119

By the middle of Aug. we have news of Farraguts Victory in Mobile—28

Soon after the Wabash was withdrawn from the squadron—to join that preparing to attack Fort Fisher—I am losing my ten vessels of force rapidly—29

In October among escaping prisoners were some from the wretched pens 

established South—Andersonville &c one who had been in several from 

28 On 5 August 1864, Rear Adm. David Glasgow Farragut led a Union squadron into Mobile 

Bay. As mentioned earlier, during the action the monitor Tecumseh struck a mine and sank 

with heavy casualties. After this incident, Farragut ordered his flagship, Hartford, to take the 

lead, reportedly proclaiming “Damn the torpedoes!” Once in Mobile Bay, the Union squadron 

engaged and defeated the ironclad CSS Tennessee.

29 Welles ordered Wabash to Hampton Roads on 22 September 1864. Wabash would later serve 

with the squadron attacking Fort Fisher, at Wilmington, NC. ORN 15: 684.

Major General William T. Sherman. Print, E. G. Middleton & Co., Cincinnati, c. 1865.

Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, LC-USZ62-101486.
120 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Belle-isle—30

Time occupied with the blockade and in keeping our vessels from breaking 

down entirely

Toward the end of Novemr Gen. Foster agreed upon a movement by way 

of diversion—for Gen. Sherman who was now known to have cut loose from 

Atlanta, and looking toward the coast—

I determined on organising a Fleet Brigade—collected the men—composed 

it of three battallions—One of Howitzers—One of sea-infantry and One of 

Marines—numbers not great—not exceeding 500 men—but it was very complete & won honor—I went ashore to direct the drill myself—never considered 

the practice of the Navy right they will mass the pieces as in the army whereas 

the Navy Howitzers when landed, I always designed to be used in skirmishing 

order—just as riflemen are scattered31

On the 29th Novem the expedition moved—I took a squadron of light draft 

war steamers and the Fleet Brigade Gen. Foster took 7000 men—

(The operation is fully described in my official Report—to be found in the 

Annual report of the Navy Depart dated 4th Dec. 1865 page 215)32

We landed at Boyd’s Neck in a branch of Broad River—After effecting a 

landing the Gen. advanced towards the Railroad by way of Grahamsville—

the rebels entrenched the road,—our men assaulted and were repulsed with 

severe loss—

Gen. Foster then concluded by a rapid movement to try the Railroad at 

another point—So on the 6th Dec. we made a feint towards the Coosawhatchie—

quickly turned up the Tullifinney33 and landed—

(Refer again to my statements in Navy Dept Annual Report—217—&c)

Here some sharp fighting ensued in which the Fleet Brigade was distinguished—and we were able to push the rebels back on the Railroad and fortify 

30 The Confederate prison at Andersonville, GA, was notorious for its poor conditions. Belle 

Island, in Richmond, VA, was another Confederate prison camp. Dahlgren noted in his diary 

that soldiers had escaped as they were transferred from Andersonville to Charleston, SC. 

Prisoners made their way to the Union squadron on 6, 8, and 11 October. Madeleine Vinton 

Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren: Rear-Admiral United States Navy (Boston: James R. 

Osgood and Company, 1882), 474. 

31 Cmdr. George H. Preble commanded the Fleet Brigade, which consisted of 30 officers and 463 

men. Summaries of its activities, strength, and casualties can be found in ORN 16: 104–11.

32 Report of the Secretary of the Navy, with an Appendix Containing Reports from Officers ([Washington, DC: Government Printing Office] 1865), 215–17. The same report can also be at 

ORN 16: 72–74.

33 The Tulifinny River.
Chapter Five | 121

position some 1300 yds distant—

On the 12th I had news from Gen. Sherman—was sitting conversing with 

Gen. Foster, when one of my tugs arrived from his army with Captain Duncan,34

a Sergeant and a private of the Illinois Cavalry—Capt. Duncan handed me a 

note from Gen. Howard35 Commdg Shermans advance—which was now near 

Savannah—It said “We have met with perfect success thus far. Troops in fine 

spirits and nearby—

Dispositions were made at once for this new state of things (See Annual 

Report of Depart pages 220 &c)

I had the pleasure to meet Gen Sherman on the 14th in Wassaw sound—He 

had brushed McAllister out of his way, and they completed the communication 

with my Fleet—It was agreed that Gen Sherman and myself should return to 

Ossabaw so he became my guest and we steamed out—It was dark when we 

reached Ossabaw—dinner followed and we talked over the whole subject—then 

we retired and had hardly settled down in the beds, when Gen. Howard was 

announced—Gen Osterhaus36 was with him—I turned out and Gen. Sherman 

hearing the voices came out too and a general talk followed till quite late—

Next day I went ashore with the Gen. and took a survey of Fort McAllister—

the rebel garrison was still there, cooking &c as if nothing had happened—Then 

I pulled up to the Rice mills and here the Gen. and myself parted for a while—

He took horse and I went back down the river

The rebels had buried large shells about the fort—some of which burst and 

killed some of our men after the capitulation—which naturally exasperated 

Gen. Sherman—

Savannah was now the object—I went round into the Vernon river on the 

19th Dec to arrange for an attack on the works there in connection with Gen. S. 

move—The evening brought himself,—in a small steamer tug—only an orderly 

with him—he thought of pushing Foster forward at the Tullifinney—while I 

demonstrated on Fort Beaulieu—and himself clasped Savannah—So the Gen. 

remained with me and we started for Port Royal—We got there before daylight 

and spent most of the day in arranging the various moves then Gen. Sherman 

& myself returned to my steamer and we started for Ossabaw outside found a 

34 Capt. William Duncan, of Company K of the 15th Illinois Cav. Regt. The other men were 

Sgt. Myron J. Emmick (or Amick) and George W. Quimby. They arrived on the tug Dandelion. 

ORN 16: 127

35 Maj. Gen. Oliver Otis Howard led one of the wings of Sherman’s army.

36 German-born Maj. Gen. Peter Joseph Osterhaus. Warner, Generals in Blue, 352–53.
122 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

gale—had to put into Tybee and take the inside passage—

The steamer grounded—would not float so I got into my Barge—with the 

General and we pulled for Ossabaw Sound—had nearly reached it when a little 

tug came along—looked like news—puffing under the fullest head of steam—

The Capt. held up a very small slip of paper, but it had big news—it was 

from our lines and announced that the enemy would not await even Sherman’s 

rapid strides—they had scampered out of Savannah and left it to us

(All fully told in my dispatches Report of Depart Dec. 1865. page 222)37

Tattnall too had blown up his Ironclads

On the 23d Decem had the pleasure of entering Savannah—full of our soldiers—lunched with the General and then drove round the city,—very pretty it is

The obstructions in the river are so effectual that it will be difficult to remove 

them at all—

In a few days came a scare from Charleston—the rebel ironclads were certainly coming out—So I was obliged to turn my attention that way,—it might 

be that instead of destroying their Ironclads at Charleston as they had done the 

Merrimac and the Savannah, they might choose the chances of battle and the 

certainty of some credit—The Ironsides had gone North long ago, and I had 

withdrawn some of the Monitors to assist in operations about Savannah—They 

had at least four ironclads—So I picked up the Monitors near Savannah and 

went with them to Charleston—No attempt was made however and thus ended 

the year 1864.

37 Report of the Secretary of the Navy (1865), 222.
Chapter Six | 123

CHAPTER 6

The Capture of Charleston and 

End of the War, 1865

1865

The first day of the year found me in Port Royal—where we had news of the 

first attack on Fort Fisher—next day I reached Savannah and met Gen. Sherman 

at his Headquarters

His plans for the move are all decided and he explained them to me—the 

right wing to be transported to Beaufort—to move from there,—the left directly 

from Savannah

Next day, went down St Augustine’s Creek to look at the embarcation and see 

that my vessels were there to assist—met the General there—rare sight—the narrow winding river.—the low but bluff banks—crowded by 20, or 30,000 men—

all gazing earnestly at the vessels and the scene—I could not help remarking to 

the General the perfect silence that prevailed—not a sound was to be heard—I 

said, “they seem to have no tongues”—the Gen. smiled & replied they could 

make noise enough when they chose—

Such steamers as I can collect and The Army transports very busy arranging 

transportation of troops round to Beaufort—30,000 men not to be moved in 

a day—

In the middle of January had the sad satisfaction of seeing Mr Michel 

Hogan—who acted as guide to my gallant son in his expedition to Richmond—

He had been imprisoned ever since,—had escaped three times, was retaken twice, 

at last got off though tracked by bloodhounds—It was Hogan who swam back 

over the Mattaponý, when he saw my son left there entirely alone, standing on 

his crutches, and under the rebel fire—

I now returned to Charleston—convened the Ironclad Captains and apprised 

them that Gen. Sherman would soon move and that the fleet must prepare to 

assist as much as possible—my views were defined by a Confidential order—
124 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

The removal of the obstructions to begin that night—Wearied with a day’s 

hard work—I had dropped asleep on the Sofa about bed time—suddenly was 

aroused—the Commander of the Monitor Patapsco stood before me—he briefly 

announced the loss of his vessel by a torpedo—it was the work of a moment—a 

low, dull explosion, a shock, and the Monitor settled so quickly as to be under 

water in one minute—one man below was saved he saw much in the fleeting 

moment allowing him to dart along the lower deck,—he happened to have his 

eyes directed to the Ward-Room—many officers were gathered about the table—

one was seated upon it—instantly the deck was blown open—the table & all 

about it dashed violently upward against the deck above that formed the ceiling 

of the apartment,—the lights were extinguished—he heard the men desperately 

striving to get up the hatch—vainly—he entered the engine room—made for 

the hatch—there, free—the sea was pounding over it—some one following was 

engulphed by these torrent of water,—he just freed himself gained the deck—

floated and was picked by some boats—In this event was pictured the fate of 

most of the Monitors if I had attempted to force the passage—with not even the 

calmness of the night, but under a storm of artillery—

I immediately got into my barge and pulled to the front—it was midnight—

not a sound was audible—quiet as death—it served little purpose to row over & 

arrived the spot the tale had been told—

In this instance no precaution had been omitted,—there were boats on each 

bow, and little steam tugs—carefully feeling ahead for these wretched contrivances—but in vain—

Next day—the spot was marked by the end of the tall pipe peeping above the 

blue water—beneath how many brave men were silent!—1

This incident clearly illustrated what might have been expected in event of 

forcing an entrance—one two or three Monitors might be destroyed in this way, 

or entangled in the floating ropes—leaving only the part of an insufficient force 

to engage batteries to which Wagner was insignificant—

Gen. Sherman was now about to commence that splendid movement which 

was to carry his army through both the Carolinas—and prostrate the last hopes 

of the rebellion,—it was to be the final and greatest act of a career undimmed 

1 Patapsco sank around 8 p.m. on 15 January 1865 after hitting a torpedo. Sixty-two officers and 

men went down with the ship; 43 survived. The tragedy occurred even though precautions 

against such dangers had been taken. Dahlgren wrote, “The Patapsco had her torpedo fenders 

and netting stretched as usual around her” and “three boats with drags had preceded her, 

searching to some depth the water they had passed over, while the steam tugs and several boats 

were in different positions on the bow beam and quarter.” ORN 16: 173, 174.
Chapter Six | 125

in brilliancy—

On the 17th Jan. he wrote me, saying—“You will have heard that we took 

Pocatoligo on the 15th according to my plans,—and we now have the 17th Corps 

Gen. Blair strongly entrenched on the Railroad. I would by this time also have had 

my left wing at Sisters ferry, but have been and am still delayed by the non arrival 

of our Stores necessary to fill our wagons. I will get all the Army in motion.—I 

would prefer you should run no risk at all. When we are known to be in rear of 

Charleston, about Branchville and Orangeburgh, it will be well to watch if the 

enemy lets go of Charleston, in which case Foster will occupy it, otherwise the 

feint should be about Bulls Bay—I think you will concur with me that in anticipation of the movement of my army to the rear of the Coast it will be unwise to 

subject your ships to the heavy artillery of the enemy, or his sunken torpedoes.”2

A week later the General was gathering up for the great swoop, and I was 

busy making arrangements to contribute whatever co-operation my force was 

capable of—On the 23d we met at Hilton Head for a few hours and he then 

returned to his Headqrs. in the field—On the 24th he wrote me

“Dear Admiral,

Weather is now fine and promises us dry land. I will go to-day to Pocataligo 

and Coosawhatchie,—tomorrow will demonstrate on Salkatchie and would be 

obliged if you would [go] up Edisto or Stono just to make the enemy uneasy on 

that flank and to develope if he intends to hold fast to Charleston and Columbia 

both. It will take five days for Slocum to get out of the savannas of Savannah, 

and during that time I will keep Howard seemingly moving direct on Charleston 

though with no purpose of going beyond the Salkatchie—

Yours

W. T. Sherman

 Maj. Gen.”3

A few days he wrote me that Gen. Slocum had got off from Sisters ferry on 

the 25th4

Meanwhile I was occupied in placing suitable forces in Edisto and Stono 

2 Dahlgren omitted the six sentences of this letter, in which Sherman requested that Dahlgren 

forward a letter to Adm. Porter and also discussed the situation at Fort Fisher. See ORN 16: 

180–81.

3 In ORN 16: 187–88.

4 Sherman’s letter of 27 January 1865 is in ORN 16: 203.
126 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

looking to the measures that might meet the views of Gen. Sherman—On 

the 26th in Stono myself then went to the South Edisto and from there to 

Port Royal—

On the 27th—to co-operate with Foster in the North Edisto, sent the Pawnee

there, and in the evening came the tidings that the “Dai Ching”—had grounded 

under fire of a rebel battery in the Cumbahee and after a gallant defence, 

destroyed [it]

—Gen. Howard with Shermans advance was moving to cross this river 

and had requested naval diversion—the “Dai Ching” was ordered—she was a 

purchase,—had been built for the Chinese—commanded by Capt Chaplin—

threading the river under steam, he came suddenly on a strong battery which 

opened on his vessel—he turned, narrow as the river was & had almost got clear 

when the black pilot becoming frightened at the sound of the passing shot ran 

below—the vessel grounded,—tide falling and Chaplin finding he could not save 

his ship cast loose his guns and began a vigorous return—after a stout defence 

of several hours the Dai Ching being dismantled and nearly a wreck, Chaplin set 

fire to what was left and brought nearly every man of his crew—It was late in 

the evening when he entered my Cabin and announced the disaster—there was 

nothing to say when the defence had been so gallant—

On the 28th I examined the S. Edisto myself—And from there to Port 

Royal—some of the ships from Porter’s fleet had joined me and required new 

guns instead of the rifle cannon—they had burst at Fort Fisher—I found the 

strongest feeling against any more of the same kind—they mounted my own IXin

and XIin guns instead

The events at Fort Fisher have pretty much settled the rifle question and the 

naval mind is coming to its right conclusions on the subject

Feb 1st nothing from Sherman—but “he is marching on” we know—

Little from my son Charley—he landed with the detachment from his vessel 

at Fort Fisher,—his Captain was wounded and the charge of the detachment fell 

on him—he wrote “I fired my rifle 34 times from a rest and you know father I 

never miss”—I did know that his hand was steady & his eye quick He had served 

in the Vally down to Vicksburgh—had charge there of a Naval Battery, IXinch

guns—did the good work which they are capable of—had a narrow escape from 

a bullet through his hat—kept up till the town was captured fell sick of the fever 

and barely reached home with life—

On the 4th Febr. I was in the N. Edisto found there the Pawnee & Sonoma

had been pounding the batteries and actively assisting our troops sent there to 

harrass the rebs—Next day in the Stono—and learned then Gen. Sherman had 

secured the passage of the Cumbahee, but his left had not yet joined him—
Chapter Six | 127

On the 6th a heavy N. Easter set in with rain and continued the next day,—

will be bad for our army if yet on the low grounds—

On the 8th went round by way of the Coosaw to St Helena sound to see what 

the gunboats had been able to do in approaching the wreck of the Dai-Ching in 

the Cumbahee—On the 10th sent two Monitors into the Stono to give weight 

to our operations there—and ordered three heavy steamers to Bull’s Bay—In the 

evening I steamed into the N. Edisto—and next day into the Stono—Here the 

move was being pushed in a manner so vigorous by that excellent officer Gen. 

Schimmelfennig as to alarm the enemy considerably—The Lehigh Wissahiccon

and a Mortar assisting by a flank fire—while the McDonough and a Mortar Schr. 

were delivering an effective fire from Folly River upon the rebels—the whole 

affair was very spirit & the enemy were hurrying up reinforcements—I steamed 

up to the Lehigh in the advance and gave further directions—

Soon after a dispatch from Gen. Foster announced to me that he had 

received a leave of absence and that Gen. Gillmore had arrived with instructions 

to “relieve him temporarily of the command”

It was unpleasant to be thrown thus into contact with a person for whom I 

had so little reason to think well of, especially as active operations required close 

co-operation,—however I determined that the public service should not suffer 

“Landing of General Potter’s and Admiral Dahlgren’s Troops at Bull’s Bay, South Carolina.” 

Engraving, 1865.

Naval History and Heritage Command, Photographic Collections, NH59175.
128 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

on that account—Following quickly Gen. Gillmore was announced as alongside 

of my Flagship—Every ceremonial which his rank demanded was observed,—

and I stood on the quarter Deck to receive him—But when he tendered me his 

hand, I declined

A conference followed in my Cabin at which Gen. Potter5 was also present, 

and the necessary measures were arranged to execute the demonstration at Bulls 

Bay which Gen. Sherman desired—I collected a number of my best vessels to 

give effect and in the evening left for Bulls Bay myself—It was a splendid night—

Moon full, water smooth and a gentle breeze—About One in the morning off 

Bulls Bay among the squadron which I had concentrated—Among them the 

Ticonderoga, Tuscarora Pawnee, Shenandoah and a number other Gunboats—

The transports with troops came along just before daylight—To Capt. Balch I 

assigned the charge of the vessels inside, and to Capt Stanley6 the boats and 

seamen to cover the landing Gen. Potter commanded the troops—While thus 

engaged an aid from Gen. Gillmore arrived bringing me a dispatch from Gen. 

Sherman—in cipher—It was dated the 7th five days ago7—at the Headqrs. on the 

Railroad at Midway—and stated that the weather was bad and the country full 

of water—which might force him to turn against Charleston—the Gen. thought 

Charleston would be abandoned lest the garrison would be captured as well as 

the guns

On the 15th Febr. I was in Charleston Roads and the next day at Bulls Bay, 

looking after operations—the troops and vessels were working hard to make 

ground against the enemy—In the evening steamed down to Stono; in passing 

Charleston observed two large fires—they denoted the preliminary moves for 

evacuating—though when was doubtful—

The end was now approaching Feb. 17—Friday—In Stono—In the after 

the indefatigable Schimmelfennig came on board,—feeble from disease that was 

to prove mortal8 he would not leave his duty while able to move—he was sure 

the rebels were about to evacuate—wished to feel them strongly to-night on 

James I. and asked me for aid,—I ordered the vessels in the Stono to cover his 

left flank and the McDonough his right from the Folly Branch—I also sent up an 

5 Brig. Gen. Edward E. Potter served most of the war with Foster. Ezra J. Warner, Generals in 

Blue: Lives of the Union Commanders (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1964), 

380–81.

6 Cmdr. Fabius Stanly. His report on the expedition to Bull’s Bay is in ORN 16: 239–40.

7 The dispatch is printed in JCCW 7, “Sherman,” 332.

8 Schimmelfennig had tuberculosis.
Chapter Six | 129

Aid to the Commd officer off Charleston to open the Naval Battery on Morris 

I. and to feel the enemy with the advanced Monitors—During the night the 

heavy booming of the Navy Guns I heard distinctly—loud & frequent—Febr. 

18th Saturday—In the morning comes a telegram to me from Capt Scott in the 

Charleston Roads—saying—

“The advance picket Monitor just reports that there are no indications of the 

presence of the enemy on Sullivan’s Island except a flag,—thinks it evacuated.”9

Soon after heard that James I. was being abandoned—I steamed round at 

once to Charleston—crossed the Bar and passed up the Roads—the Captains 

coming on board as I passed—the mate of a captured blockade runner was now 

put in requisition to pilot in clear of obstructions and torpedoes—he steers close 

to the heavy batteries on Sullivans I.—now deserted—then we turn sharp and 

face “Johnson” and so passing one battery after another arrive off the city—in a 

few minutes I land,—all the Captains are with me—the streets are silent—the 

houses shut—only a few men tugging at a fire engine—for some of the rebels had 

left the torch behind to do its work, and make us responsible for the work,—but 

we were too quick,—and the fires were put out—We walked over no ashes, and 

all we saw were alive—no one was buried under the ruins.

Their ironclad squadron was however destroyed—Three blown up & sunk 

two burned on the ways—and one just ready for sea bilged—10

Next day I listened to the painful story of Lieut. Bradford—He was one of 

my officers—was wounded mortally and taken in the assault on Fort Sumter 

died in a Charleston Hospital—was buried by a kind friend in the Magnolia 

Cemetery—when known caused great excitement in the city—the body was disinterred and turned over to the Potter’s field—the dust of the Union soldier was 

not worthy to lie with the best of Charleston!—I took the steps required to do 

9 Dahlgren received Capt. Gustavus H. Scott’s message at 10:45 a.m. ORN 16: 370.

10 The Confederates destroyed the ironclads CSS Charleston, CSS Chicora, and CSS Palmetto 

State. The ships on the ways have not been identified; the ship bilged was CSS Columbia, which 

had run aground near Fort Moultrie. Union forces also captured the steamers CSS Lady Davis, 

CSS Mab, and CSS Transport. J. Thomas Scharf, History of the Confederate States Navy from Its 

Organization to the Surrender of Its Last Vessel, 2nd ed. (Albany: Joseph McDonough, 1894), 

706. 
130 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

him & his cause justice—11

Meanwhile to give the enemy no breathing time, and dispossess them of 

their last port in my beat, I sent an expedition to take Georgetown—The Pawnee

and several other vessels with a Battallion of Marines—12

On the 25th I went round the harbor to look at the defences—they were too 

strong for any fleet that could get at them,—it would have been rediculous to 

attempt it—even if there had been no obstructions & torpedoes—which however were found abundantly (See my dispatch to Navy Dept

 with Map of Harbor—& forts—obstructions—torpedoes—published in Annual Report of Navy 

Depart. 1865. Dec)

13

With the inadequate force which I had such a measure would have been 

worse than ridiculous 

The expedition to Georgetown was successful,—as soon as the enemy perceived its approach they waited not to give battle, but evacuated—so the Navy 

had that honor to itself—

I visited the place on the 26th Febr. found its defence very strong and quite 

sufficient to repel a purely Naval force—Put the town under my own force and 

officers—who quickly restored order & confidence,—no one was hurt in person 

or property—14

Feeling obliged me to return to Charleston,—on the 1st March steamed 

out—passing down the channel—early in the morning,—awaiting breakfast and 

pacing the Cabin came a loud noise,—a shock, everything about me danced, 

11 Lt. Charles H. Bradford, USMC, had died on 13 February 1864. Edward W. Callahan, ed., 

List of Officers of the Navy of the United States and of the Marine Corps from 1775 to 1900: 

Comprising a Complete Register of All Present and Former Commissioned, Warranted, and 

Appointed Officers of the United States Navy, and of the Marine Corps, Regular and Volunteer

(New York: L. R. Hammersly & Co., 1901), 681. Details of his role in the 8 September 1863 

assault on Sumter are found in ORN 14: 628–30. See below for details of his reburial ceremony and reinterment.

12 After learning of the possible evacuation of Battery White at Georgetown, SC, Dahlgren 

ordered Cmdr. J. Blakeley Creighton and Mingo to take the fortification, and sent Marines and 

Pawnee to assist. Creighton wrote Dahlgren on 24 February that he intended to burn the gun 

carriages and woodwork at the fort in order to destroy it before pushing on to Georgetown 

itself. ORN 16: 261–62, 268.

13 Report of the Secretary of the Navy, with an Appendix Containing Reports from Officers ([Washington, DC: GPO,] 1865), 253–300. Dahlgren’s report of 1 June with diagrams and enclosures 

is also in ORN 16: 380–429.

14 Dahlgren wrote, “Battery White, a regular and very strong work . . . had often been represented as a small affair, easily taken . . . It is doubtful whether a strong naval force could have 

taken it without an ironclad and a land force in reverse.” Four companies of Marines occupied 

the town. ORN 16: 370–71.
Chapter Six | 131

that could move,—the front partition was blown in—I thought the boilers had 

burst,—then the smell of powder was suggestive of an accident to the Magazine—there was a rush of men for the boats—I put on my pea-Coat & Cap—

sallied out—there was much consternation—About to ascend the ladder to the 

upper deck, the great gap in the deck showed it to be the work of a torpedo—The 

vessel was sinking—a small tug in company to carry orders had paused at sight of 

the disaster,—was lashed alongside—men, and baggage hurried on board and in 

a few minutes the “Harvest Moon” of the Squadron had set forever—In her I had 

spent many anxious hours—15

Hoisting my flag in another vessel16 I pursued my way to Charleston and 

reached there, after some detention on the 4th March

Now the large force which I have commanded for nearly two years must 

dissolve,—the whole face of things is changed,—if there are enemies before us 

and around us, they are impotent—

One of another kind however showed its rattle—

On the 7th of February while Sherman & events were marching to a conclusion, and the fabric of rebeldom was falling to ruins around us—pride & joy 

to every loyal heart,—my eye fell on a copy of Gen. Gillmore’s book—I had no 

time to read,—the country had other work for every man’s head & hand—but 

in turning over its leaves hastily, I saw to my utter astonishment what appeared 

to me as full confirmation of all the suspicions & warnings that had reached 

me,—it seemed to me incredible—That and that only undeceived me and led 

me to decline his proffered hand on my quarter Deck17—so much time allowed 

to elapse after the events, yet every semblance of good feeling—even assurances 

were not wanting

However as I said,—the country first—there would be time for myself 

afterwards—

Reaching Charleston, my attention was drawn to a passage in the corre15 One sailor died in the incident. Dahlgren’s report, the log of Harvest Moon, and a court of 

inquiry into that vessel’s loss are in ORN 16: 282–84.

16 Dahlgren rode the tug to Nipsic; he sailed on it to Charleston Harbor and then made Philadelphia his flagship. ORN 16: 371.

17 When Gillmore visited Dahlgren on 11 February, Dahlgren refused to shake Gillmore’s hand, 

instead offering a bow. Robert J. Schneller Jr., A Quest for Glory: A Biography of Rear Admiral 

John A. Dahlgren (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1996), 307.
132 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

spondence18—so akin to previous compliments that its source was not to be mistaken—lauding Gen. Gillmore and depreciating myself I addressed at once a 

note to Gen. Gillmore on the subject and requested that the writer, being within 

the Military jurisdiction should “be required to refrain from such remarks or 

leave the Department”

The answer was as sophistical as might be expected,—but in its ceremonious 

& studied expressions, one only was important—Gen Gillmore saw nothing “in 

the paragraph which would seem to justify any interference on his part”

He took care to omit the passage laudatory of himself,—

My answer restored the whole as quoted by me—and after reciting as much 

of the previous letters as might be necessary to keep clear the point in question—I added,—“I feel constrained to say therefore of the remarks alluded to, 

that so far as they detract from and depreciate myself or the Naval operations they 

are false and hurtful to the discipline of the Squadron, and as far as they form part 

of a system of puffing-up and crying-down, are disgraceful to the perpetrator and 

to any who may seek to be benefitted thereby.

“As it is in your power to prevent the continuance of such remarks and as you 

decline to do so on the ground that you see nothing in the paragraph sent you to 

justify that interference, I feel that I have a right to add that whatever remarks of 

the above character may in future emanate from writers whom you can restrain 

you render yourself responsible for and can not avoid sharing in the demerit that 

may attach to them—”19

It would be unjust to the character of the reply not to give it in full

“Admiral

I have received your letter of the 7th inst. Although it does not require a reply 

from me I desire to renew the assurance contained in my letter of the 6th inst. that 

I hold myself ready at all times to restrain the liberties of correspondents within 

proper limits, and to ask whether in its execution you are satisfied that you will 

receive the protection and aid which you desire as expressed in your letter of Febr. 

27 or whether in addition thereto you wish me to describe the means I intend to 

adopt, or to prescribe those means yourself.

18 On 22 February, the New York Herald published an article critical of Dahlgren. The author of 

it had been attached to Gillmore’s staff, but Gillmore denied any involvement with the article. 

As seen below, Dahlgren believed that Gillmore had been behind the article, based on his own 

observations as well as a similar incident when Gillmore was under the command of Maj. Gen. 

Benjamin F. Butler. Ibid., 316–17.

19 Dahlgren wrote and crossed out here: “The jesuitical character of the reply.”
Chapter Six | 133

“The insinuations in which you have thought proper to indulge in the last 

part of your letter I am constrained to pass without notice.

“It is but justice to the officers of my Staff that I should say in their behalf 

that none of them knew anything of Mr----’s intention to write what he did, or 

knew that he had written until after its publication.

“It seems needless to add that I never saw or heard of the article until the 

papers arrived from New York; indeed I did not know that Mr--- continued to 

write to the New York----- but supposed him to be exclusively engaged in editing 

a newspaper in Savannah.

Very Respectfully

Your Obed Servt

Q.A. Gillmore Maj. Gen. Comd”

Note the reply,—my remarks were directed entirely to his saying that he saw nothing in the article to justify his interference—his letter would lead to the idea that he 

had said the contrary and intended to interfere—

I said nothing whatever of the officers of his Staff—why does he lug them in?—

However here was my answer

“Sir—In reply to the query contained in yours of the 19 inst.,—I have to say that 

it is indifferent to me what means you use to suppress the remarks of a public 

correspondent under your control which are equally at variance with truth so far 

as I am concerned and derogatory to yourself in permitting them.

“The estimation which attaches to these libels is derived entirely from the 

fact that the writer is known to be under your control, and therefore what ever he 

may write carries with it an acquiescence very little less than absolute approval.

“The revival of such remarks just as you resume the command here, has a 

significance not to be avoided, especially when it is remembered that this same 

writer and some others indulged in similar remarks during the term of your 

previous command and that a correspondent affirmed your knowledge and countenance thereof.

“When apprised of this, you entirely denied the allegation, and I frankly 

accepted that denial, as the charge seemed to me incredible.

“Since that however, this allegation has received confirmation by an officer whose rank and character convey an assurance not to be disposed of by a 

mere denial.

“In the present instance you say that you ‘never saw or heard of the article 

until the papers arrived from New York’—Perhaps so,—but when it was brought 

to your notice by me, what did you say then?,—that you saw—‘nothing in it to 
134 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

justify your interference’—thus giving more color to the imputations formerly 

made than I was prepared to expect.

“If this conveys to you the idea that I am seeking your protection, you will 

learn probably, that it appears differently to others,—my object is to protect 

myself.

Very Respectfully

Your Obed Serv

J A Dahlgren”

To this letter I never received any answer—the charges contained in it,—or 

as Gen. Gillmore’s previous letter termed such,—the insinuations—are of course 

unanswered—of course undenied—

This is not the only instance in which Gen. Gillmore has fallen under “insinuations” of a similar character—which too he has been “constrained to pass without notice”—

Gen. Butler’s pamphlet in which this subject has been treated, has not that I 

know of ever been noticed by Gen. Gillmore—The singular coincidence in proclivity to publications of a certain character which Gen. Butler mentions induces 

me to refer to this pamphlet, a copy of which was sent me by Gen. B.—I shall 

not attempt to go into the subject in detail—but briefly—

The gist seems to be given in the following passages:—page 12. “Before the 

order of Sept. 13th was sent, however you (Gen B.) had ascertained with certainty 

that Chaplain Hudson was the author of certain statements which first appeared 

in the columns of the N.Y. Evening Post on or about the 21st of May 1864, and 

which were copied into most of the leading journals of the country, which statements reflected very calumniously and unjustly upon your action in the command of your army at the battle of Proctor’s creek, in front of Drury’s bluff Va. 

and cited Gen. Gilmore as authority for the criticism.”

At page 17—occurs the following extract from the “phonographic notes” of 

the examination of Mr. Hudson by Gen. Butler.

Q. Do you not know that Gen. Gilmore denied all knowledge of that letter or 

its author?—

A. Yes sir; I am aware of Gen Gilmore’s note to you.

Q. Did not Gen. Gilmore know of your writing that letter before it was sent?

A. I don’t know (hesitatingly)

Q. Did he not know of it before it was sent?

A. I think so

Q. Do you not know that he did?

A. Yes Sir
Chapter Six | 135

Q. And was not the reason of his sending you away?

A. I can’t say that I know it was.

Q. Don’t you know that was the reason?

A. I thought at the time that it was.

Q. Had you any doubt in your own mind on the subject?

A. I did not know how necessary the business was that Gen. Gilmore professedly

sent me on. I thought that was the reason of his sending me away. I had but little 

conversation with Gen. Gilmore.”

&c &c

On page 18—the following occurs in course of this examination—the Q. I 

understand to be put like the others by Gen. B—

Q—“You wrote a letter to the press in which you undertook to give your opinion 

of the conduct of a campaign of which you knew nothing. Then, when stir was 

made about it, you was sent by Gen. Gilmore to New York on private business 

for him—yes on pretended business, of which there was no business whatever. 

There you remained without ever receiving any instructions as to business, nor 

had you any business there, yet still you remained away till General Gillmore 

was removed, as [the]—* should have been long before, because this transaction 

stamps him a —* in addition to being incompetent &c &c”20

My only object in referring to this is to show that Gen. Butler complained 

of Gen. Gillmore’ precisely as I have done—Both complaints he seems to have 

“passed without notice” What reliance then attaches to the unsupported statements of a person who permits such to remain unnoticed.

Of course when a person resorts to such means, his general course is more or 

less impeached by it,—his statements can never pass into History unless substantiated by other evidence than his own—

It is not my intention to make a full examination of all points made in 

Gen. Gillmore’s Book, or as he calls it—Report, particularly those which relate 

20 At the bottom of the page, Dahlgren wrote “* an epithet was used here more forcible than 

polished,” which phrase appears at the foot of the page in the original pamphlet, along with the 

asterisks.
136 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

to myself—21which I have always considered as untruly stated, as they have been 

meanly stated—And I was so occupied when my being assigned to command of 

the S. Pacific Squadron

That it was idle to attempt to capture Charleston with the force which I had, 

is indisputably shown by the written opinions of the Lieut. Gen—by that of 

Commodore Rodgers given on oath—and by the full deliberations of the Council of War—It is impossible to conceive that Gen. Gillmore had any other object 

in the course he pursued than to cover up his own shortcomings—so far from his 

undertaking being limited to the destruction of Sumter,—I know that the Navy 

Department was led to believe “Previous to Gen. Gillmore’s departure to assume 

his present command— that he being “once in possession of Cummings Point 

could thence reduce Forts Moultrie and Johnson”

The Navy Department informed me that he so stated—

As for the programme which he so clearly puts forth,—it was never received 

by me,—the orders of the Dep. were merely to cooperate with him and he admits 

this was done fully—The rest,—his opinion of what the fleet could have done 

is fully disposed of by the opinions of men, before which his own will not stand 

for a moment in the estimation of any one whose judgement is worth having—

I know that such discussions are a great scandal to a great cause, but the 

entire responsibility rests with Gen. Gillmore—not with me, I did my duty to 

him as a comrade fully, honestly generously,—he has done nothing but deceive 

me, and attempt to injure me.

On the 16th March, having made the proper arrangements, I had the 

body of Lieut. Bradford restored to the Cemetery from which it had been so 

brutally expelled—I sent previously an officer to select the finest site in the 

ground—service was performed over the body in St Paul’s Church by Rev. Mr. 

Blake the Chaplain of the Squadron—the escort was the largest that could be 

collected without reference to the rank of the deceased—The Comm. Gen. 

(Hatch) and myself attended with our numerous Officers of Staff—All the 

officers of the Army & Navy that could be spared from duty—detachments 

of Infantry—of Seamen,—a battallion of Marines—Band &c—from the 

21 See Q. A. Gillmore, Engineer and Artillery Operations Against the Defences of Charleston Harbor 

in 1863; Comprising the Descent Upon Morris Island, the Demolition of Fort Sumter, the Reduction 

of Forts Wagner and Gregg. With Observations on Heavy Ordnance, Fortifications, Etc. (New 

York: D. Van Nostrand, 1865). Dahlgren worked on various accounts of his career but never 

published any of them during his life. He did engage in a thorough and extensive examination 

of the siege of Charleston, along with point-by-point refutations of Gillmore’s account, for 

the historian John William Draper. John William Draper Family Papers, Box 2, Library of 

Congress.
Chapter Six | 137

Church to the Cemetery—and so the Union soldier was duly honored at last22

Next day a torpedo exploded under the Bibb and nearly did fatal damage—

Steam tugs & boats had been employed for some time in removing the rope 

entanglements & torpedoes,—but some of the latter defied every effort—the 

Bibb was the Coast survey vessel under Captain Boutelle and by my direction 

was engaged in marking a part of the Channel by which vessels could enter 

without danger—23

Quantities were found ashore ready for use, besides those actually in the 

water—a number of torpedo boats—

Among other incidents of the many that marked each day of my stay in 

Charleston I may mention one—The army not being strong enough to spare 

men I had sent gunboats up the various rivers to preserve order and protect 

defenceless women & children—this was done and effectually—one day however 

an occurrence illustrated this & and some of the consequences—best described 

by brief extracts from a letter from “many ladies of the place” it addresses me thus

“Dear Sir,

“We learn with the deepest regret of the capture of some officers of a tug 

boat in Cooper River while in the act of protecting and removing helpless 

women and children from the dangers to which they were exposed on their 

plantations to a place of safety in town,”—the letter goes on to ask that I will 

allow them to forward a petition to Richmond—adding “Many others besides 

ourselves who owe a debt of gratitude to the gunboats would be most happy to 

sign such a petition and to exert themselves to their utmost to accomplish the 

release of the gentlemen whose kind efforts to succor the helpless have met with 

22 Maj. Gen. John P. Hatch, a member of the class of 1845 at West Point and Mexican-American 

War veteran, commanded the District of Charleston. Generals in Blue, 216–17. John Blake, 

chaplain of the squadron, officiated. Further details of the ceremony can be found in Madeleine 

Vinton Dahlgren, Memoir of John A. Dahlgren: Rear-Admiral United States Navy (Boston: James 

R. Osgood and Company, 1882), 505.

23 Assistant Charles O. Boutelle, U.S. Coast Survey, reported that the torpedo “exploded under 

our port bow about midway between the port guard and fore channels . . . Sixty fathoms of 

studded mooring chains, 11⁄2 inch diameter, coiled upon the port side of the vessel forward, 

were thrown across the deck. The knees upon the port side are started out, and the joiner work 

shows signs of the blow received.” ORN 16: 295.
138 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

so unfortunate a return &c24

I mention this on my own behalf and of the Navy to show the kind of treatment which prisoners & families met with from me,—though laboring under the 

strongest provocation that could drive a man to forget himself, I never failed to 

extend to them the most humane treatment—

Towards the middle of April I had a letter from my friend Gen. Sherman 

then at Goldsboro. N.C. speaking at length of his progress—25

Gen. Schimmelfennig also took leave and I was happy to afford him a 

passage in the Navy Supply steamer—He is since gone to another life—peace 

to him he was a gallant & faithful soldier of the Union—highly skilled in his 

vocation—disease had stricken him hard,—but though hardly able to mount 

his horse he persevered to the last, and with myself was the first officer of rank 

to enter Charleston—May the Country not forget the family of this brave man, 

who from a foreign land, became one of us—honor to his memory—26

April 14th was a great day—the national flag which had been hauled down by 

rebels on that day, was again hoisted Rev. Mr. Beecher delivered a fine discourse 

Many were there,—none more deservedly than a remnant of the Naval Column which had endeavored to master it in Septem. 1863—I had them collected 

from the Squadron under the command of Capt. Williams27 who was at their 

head, was captured—kept close prisoner at Columbia, and even ironed for some 

weeks—so the right prevails at last—28

On the 19th came to us the sad news of the death of our noble President 

by the hands of a detestable assassin sorrow entered into every heart—God 

help those who are more guilty of this thing than the vile perpetrator,—who 

24 Four men had been captured on 22 March 1865 while “on shore for the purpose of assisting 

some of the white families against the negroes at Lewisfield.” The men captured were Acting 

Ensign Charles H. Hanson, Acting Master’s Mate Henry Lynch, Acting Third Assistant Engineer William H. Barclay, and Acting Third Assistant Engineer John Ryan. See ORN 16: 297. 

This letter likely references this episode.

25 Letter not found. 

26 Schimmelfennig, suffering from tuberculosis, took sick leave on 8 April 1865. He died on 9 

September 1865 in Pennsylvania. Warner, Generals in Blue, 424.

27 Lt. Cmdr. Edward P. Williams.

28 On the fourth anniversary of the evacuation of Fort Sumter, the same flag lowered before 

the evacuation was raised again by Maj. Gen. Robert Anderson, who had been in command 

during the evacuation. During the ceremony, portions of Psalms 126, 47, 98 and 20 were 

read, followed by the raising of the flag along with a salute of 100 guns from Sumter. After the 

salute, bands played the Star Spangled Banner and Reverend Henry Ward Beecher delivered an 

address. “Programme of the Order of Exercises at the Re-Raising of the United States Flag, on 

Fort Sumter, Charleston, S.C.,” John Adolphus Bernard Dahlgren Papers, Library of Congress.
Chapter Six | 139

have preached & talked of such a resort until their tool was nerved to his 

work—At once our flags drooped to half mast and I ordered minute guns 

from every ship—29

The same mail30 brought me tidings from the War Dept. that the remains of 

my gallant son had been recovered and would be brought to Washington May 

2d—we have official news that Gen Johnson has surrendered to Gen Sherman—

And so ends the great Drama—31

Next day much gratified at the appearance of Gen. Sherman who arrived in 

29 Dahlgren announced Lincoln’s assassination in General Order 39. In it, he gave instructions 

that “twenty-one minute guns will be fired from every vessel in the squadron, beginning with 

the senior vessel, each vessel following in order of seniority. The minute guns will be repeated at 

sunset.” He also ordered the officers of the squadron to “wear crape on the left arm.” ORN 16: 

318–19. He later wrote the Navy Department, informing them of “a sensation of indignation 

and grief as universal as it was profound and sincere, far exceeding anything I have before 

witnessed.” He also explained his course of action, noting that it “has been in excess of regulations.” ORN 16: 319–20.

30 The mail arrived aboard the steamer Fulton.

31 On 26 April 1865, Confederate Gen. Joseph E. Johnston surrendered his forces, the last major 

field army of the Confederacy, to Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman at Bennett Place, NC.

Admiral John A. Dahlgren and staff. Glass negative, c. 1865.

Brady Photograph Collection, National Archives, B-64.
140 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

a Steamer—after an interesting & private interview—and a peep ashore he left 

for the North—32

Soon after came tidings of capture of Jefferson Davis—he was sent North 

under convoy of one of my Steamers, the Tuscarora—33

On the 23d May I had the satisfaction of sending North the only and the 

finest Charleston Ram saved from the Rebels,—the Columbia: the other five at 

Charleston had been blown up or burned—The Columbia had been bilged and 

sunk—but I had her raised—fitted her and now she departs for Norfolk—34

May ends and the Navy Depart directs the scale of reduction of my force—

all right—When this is done I am to turn over what is left and return home—

On the 17th of June having made all the necessary arrangements and sent 

home nearly all the vessels of the squadron I transferred my flag to the Pawnee and departed—The Military Com. Gen. Hatch came alongside to say good 

bye—and I turned my back on the scene that for two years had evoked all my 

energies—

After a pleasant passage the Pawnee anchored in the Potomac off Washington—there the President35 with some of his Cabinet visited the Pawnee and on 

the 12th I struck my flag as Admiral of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron

The seal of official judgement was thus set on my command of two years—the 

most numerous command for the same length of time ever held by any US. 

Naval Officer—

The Navy Department in the order closing my command of the South 

Atlantic Blockading Squadron says:—

“In relieving you from a command which you have conducted with ability 

and energy for two years, the Department takes the occasion to express to you 

its appreciation of your services, and of the services of those who have been asso32 Sherman arrived aboard the steamer Russia. Dahlgren in his diary entry of 3 May noted, “His 

flag is a jack with ‘S’ in it.” ORN 16:373.

33 Capt. Charles W. Pickering, commanding Tuscarora, convoyed the steamer Clyde, which 

carried former Confederate President Jefferson Davis, his wife Varina Davis, former Vice President of the Confederacy Alexander H. Stephens, and former Confederate Postmaster John H. 

Reagan, among others. See ORN 16:334.

34 Fleet Engineer Robert Danby had raised the rebel ram on Dahlgren’s instruction. Dahlgren 

reported to the Navy Department that “the Columbia appears to be a finer and larger vessel 

than any of the rebel rams.” He noted her 6-inch plating, length of 216 feet, breadth of 51 

feet, and armament of 6 guns. ORN 16:336. In his diary entry of 26 March he described the 

Confederate vessel as “a remarkably fine, powerful vessel...a really formidable customer, and 

very strongly built.” ORN 16: 372.

35 Andrew Johnson.
Chapter Six | 141

ciated with you in the efficient blockade of the coast and harbors of a central 

and important position of the Union, and in the work of repossessing the Forts 

and restoring the authority and supremacy of the Government in the Insurgent 

States.”36

Now ought I to omit what I value equally the voluntary testimony of our 

distinguished Captain—Sherman—In his testimony before the Congressional 

Committee on the Conduct of the War he thus speaks with his characteristic 

unreserve:—

“On the morning of May 3d we ran into Charleston Harbor where I had the 

pleasure to meet Admiral Dahlgren, who had in all my previous operations from 

Savannah Northward aided me with a constancy and manliness that commanded 

my entire respect and deep affection.”37

I had aided Gen. Gillmore with the same spirit—Contrast the unbiased, 

voluntary testimony of the great genius & true man with the pitiful, sneaking 

evasions and meanness of the other!—the “king of shreds and patches”—38

My first duty on being freed from official duties, was to the remains and 

the memory of my gallant son Ulric Dahlgren—they had been brought from 

their resting place near Richmond as soon as within the lines of the U.S Army, 

to Washington by order of the War Department and placed in the Vault of the 

Congressional Cemetery—no doubt could exist in regard to their being really the 

true remains,—but to make sure I caused the Iron casket to be opened and the 

report satisfied me,—it was out of my power to be present myself—impossible 

to look upon the sad sight.

The heat of the weather made it advisable to defer the funeral rites until cool 

weather—

On the last day of October, the body reposed in the Council Chamber of the 

City—surrounded by good & true Union officers—covered by the flag which he 

had so well served—

It was but a short distance to the Church—every spot alive with memories 

of former days—every spot of the ground that was trodden by the solemn proces36 Annual Report of the Secretary of the Navy ([Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,] 

1865), 347. For the entire 23 June 1865 letter of Gideon Welles thanking Dahlgren for his 

efforts and relieving him of command of the South Atlantic Blocking Squadron, see Ibid., 

346–47.

37 From documents Sherman submitted to the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War. 

JCCW 6: “Sherman-Johnston,” 12.

38 From Hamlet, Act III, Scene 4. Hamlet uses the lines to refer to Claudius, his treacherous 

uncle who had murdered Hamlet’s father and married his mother, Gertrude.
142 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

sion had been pressed over and over by his young feet—his cold body was borne 

close by the door of the dwelling where he had passed most of his brief life—from 

the windows now crowded with sympathizing spectators, had been witnessed day 

by day his boyish outgoings and incomings—The Church which was to witness 

the parting services had held him each sabbath as it came—The occasion was one 

not easily forgotten—in the great assembly were, President & Cabinet—Officers 

of all degrees—fathers, mothers, daughters—Mr Beecher39 spoke with the fervor 

& eloquence that was so truly his own—

From Washington the body was transported to Philad. and laid in the 

Hall of Independence—few have that honor—the last before was the honored 

President Lincoln—There a discourse was pronounced by the Rev. J.P. Wilson 

remarkable & powerful—It was he who first bestowed the benediction of the 

Church in baptism—on Ulric Dahlgren then a little nestling infant and well he 

remembered it—

Followed the escort to the grave—amid notes of solemn music and glittering 

bayonets—The Com. General was there40—him that he now followed was one of 

his staff at Gettysburg—had captured dispatches from the rebel President in one 

of those bold swoops that he was wont to make like a young eagle and brought 

them to Headqrs—while the battle was going on—that night his way was across 

the battlefield, and his footsteps had been carefully guarded from the dying & 

dead that loaded the ground—now he has joined that great Army too!—

Softly he was laid, just by his mother—along the banks where the Schuylkill 

is loveliest—Noble boy you will not be forgotten—

I returned home and sat down to muse over the events of four years service 

against a mighty rebellion and to prepare such notes as seemed worth preserving—

39 Reverend Henry Ward Beecher.

40 Maj. Gen. George Gordon Meade.
Chapter Seven | 143

CHAPTER 7

After the War, 1866

1866

In Febry I was a member of a joint Board to consider the defences of our 

harbors—Gen. Gillmore had been detailed as a member—but I declined to serve 

with him—he was detached It was my misfortune to serve once with him,—it 

would have been my fault, a second time—

In May the Dept named me as President of the Board of Visitors to the Naval 

School at Annapolis

Towards the end of September the Department assigned me command of 

the South Pacific Squadron, for which I shall leave New York on the 1st Decem. 

next—

And so you have a hasty view of the events of my life—written in some haste,—

but more especially the latter part,—which I have been compelled to pass over 

too rapidly—

I should have mentioned that toward the end of 1863 The Union League of 

Philadelphia sent me their silver Medal with a handsome letter—

You will find much assistance in making your outline,—from various public 

Documents—

1st

The Annual Reports of the Navy Department to Congress 1861 to 1866—

2d

My official dispatches given with these Reports—there is a plan of Charleston 

Harbor in that of 1865—(the last) and drawings of its defences very complete—

3d

Report on “Heavy Ordnance” by Committee on Conduct of War made early 

in 1864—and made a great error too in one respect too—when they said “But 

the Dahlgren guns of the largest calibre are now being manufactured upon the 
144 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Rodman principle”1—because they would lead one to suppose that it applied 

to the Cannon forming the chiefly the Armament of the Navy, viz the XI inch 

and IX inch Cannon—whereas it applies only to the few XV inch cannon in the 

Monitors, which in the haste of arming during a Civil War, there was no time to 

test in any other way—

My views are however fully borne out in regard to Rifle Cannon & Wrought 

iron cannon—not by the Report but by facts—the bursting at Fort Fisher settled 

one and notwithstanding the conclusions2 of the Board on One wrought iron 

cannon, Gen. Gillmore being Chief of it, no other proved like it,—the ignorance 

of the subject being shown in drawing conclusions from one as to others that will 

serve for cast iron.—but not for wrought iron

4th

My Report on operations off Charleston made to Committee on Conduct of

War June 1864—in which it will be perceived I was still in the dark as to when 

Gillmore was burrowing3

5th

My Report on Monitors—Jan 1864 in the Navy Dept Report on Armored Vessels—1864.4

Writings of various professional men refer to my opinions and doings—Gen. 

Barnard (U.S) on Defences of New York5

Gen. Bormann (Belgian) to my Ordnance &c6

1 The report of the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War referenced here can be found in 

JCCW 5, “Heavy Ordnance,” 1-179. Rodman’s method involved casting the gun with water 

circulating in the core to cool the metal.

2 Dahlgren wrote and crossed out: “absurd” before “conclusions.”

3 Dahlgren’s letter to the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War concerning operations at 

Charleston is found in JCCW 6, “Miscellaneous,” 1-11.

4 Dahlgren provided a comprehensive statement on the merits of the Monitors to the Department of the Navy. Report of the Secretary of the Navy in Relation to Armored Vessels (Washington, 

DC: Government Printing Office, 1864), 579–88.

5 J[ohn] G. Barnard, The Dangers and Defences of New York. Addressed to the Hon. J. B. Floyd, 

Secretary of War (New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1859).

6 Charles G. Bormann, best known for his timed fuse designs. Spencer Tucker, Arming the Fleet: 

U.S. Navy Ordnance in the Muzzle-Loading Era (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1989), 

244. 
Chapter Seven | 145

Grivel (French)—also the principal Ordnance writers, French & English7

Engineer King inscribed to me his work on Steam8—Capt Parker of the 

Navy inscribed his work on Artillery9—(By the way I should have mentioned 

him on commanding the Naval Battery that I placed on Morris I. to help batter 

Sumter)10

I hope I shall be pardoned for this disquisition on myself and my service—11but you have asked me and I answer as if you had placed me on the 

witness Stand

7 Baron Louis Antoine Richild Grivel, a French ordnance specialist, wrote about floating 

batteries. His main work was Attaques et bombardements maritime avant et pendant la guerre 

d’Orient. Sébastopol.—Bomarsund.—Odessa—Sweaborg.—Kinburn, 2nd ed. (Paris: J. Dumaine, 

1857). English authority Sir Howard Douglas mentioned Dahlgren and his writings in a revised 

edition of his manual on naval gunnery. Sir Howard Douglas, A Treatise on Naval Gunnery, 5th 

ed., rev. (London: John Murray, 1860).

8 U.S. Navy Chief Engineer James Wilson King.

9 Parker dedicated The Naval Howitzer Ashore (New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1865) to Dahlgren.

10 On 22 July 1863, Dahlgren ordered then-Cmdr. Foxhall Parker to command a detachment of 

two Whitworth rifles and two Parrott rifles served by a naval crew. ORN 14:385.

11 Dahlgren wrote and crossed out: “egotism from one end to the other.”

Presentation copies of Dahlgren’s books: (L to R) Practice of the Experimental Battery, Shells 

and Shell Guns, and Boat Armament of the U.S. Navy.

Naval History and Heritage Command, Navy Department Library.

Appendix 1 | 147

APPENDIX 1

Letter of William T. Sherman to 

John A. Dahlgren

“Copy.”

 Headquarters Military Division

of the Mississippi

 St. Louis, Mo., Feb. 14. 1866.

Rear Admiral Dahlgren,

 U.S. Navy. Washington, D.C.

Admiral—

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of Feb. 

3, asking my judgments on certain points relating to the operations of our land 

and Naval forces about Charleston in the year 1863. I have before me the map 

you were kind enough to send, and from a residence at Fort Moultrie during the 

years 1842-3-4-5 and 6, I had acquired a knowledge of the water and land round 

about Charleston Harbor, and therefore feel competent to express an opinion on 

the points you make.

To your first question I answer,—I would not have advised you to run the 

Iron-clad Fleet past Fort Sumter into the inner Harbor of Charleston on the theory that by bringing the city under your guns, the enemy would have evacuated 

both City and Forts. I dont believe the Forts would have been evacuated, but that 

the Fleet would have been subjected to a terrific fire from the circle of batteries, 

that would have crippled every ship and rendered the Fleet useless for other purposes. The enemy could well have afforded to exchange the city of Charleston for 

the Fleet.

To the second question I answer that of course the passage of the Iron-clad 

Fleet into the inner harbor before Gen. Gillmore had reduced Battery Wagner 

would have been still more imprudent.
148 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

To the third question I answer that, had you run into the inner Harbor, and 

up Cooper River, the enemy could easily have held all his works on James and 

Sullivan’s Islands without trouble, as the fire of your ships could not reach the 

roads from the interior to these Islands. The enemy could have still held all his 

shore batteries, and you would have been compelled to run out for supplies.

When you and I were in Savannah about Christmas of 1864, we discussed 

freely all these points, and you will recall my opinions then expressed most 

emphatically.

1st, That Charleston was a place of no military importance at all,—that the labor 

spent in the attempt to reduce it was useless,—that all the attacks from the sea 

front were playing into the hands of the enemy, who of course had reason to 

rejoice at every attack from that quarter.

2nd, We had no use for Charleston unless an Army were at hand strong enough to 

act independently in the Interior, and when such an Army was at hand, Charleston was perfectly easy of capture, with all its torpedoes, land batteries and Sea 

forts by the occupation of the Interior, from Port Royal or Bull’s Bay.

3rd. That fleets, whether of Iron-clads or wooden ships, should only engage land 

batteries when they have a vast superiority of Artillery. Had you put your Fleet 

inside of Charleston Harbor, your twenty heavy guns would have been the target 

for some of the heaviest calibre in the world and of the most approved pattern. 

You would have lost the Fleet, and at best have only damaged the City of Charleston a little more than was committed by the rebels themselves on evacuation.

I now thank you in person for not having made the hazardous experiment, 

for when the time did come to act seriously, your fleet was perfect, well manned, 

and admirably suited to aid me in the execution of the plan which did accomplish the fall of Charleston, and more too.

With great respect,

Your friend,

 W. T. Sherman,

 Maj. Gen.

Copy, John Adolphus Bernard Dahlgren Papers, Library of Congress. Dahlgren 

also copied portions of this letter in a manuscript he sent to John William Draper; 

John William Draper Family Papers, Box 2, Library of Congress.
Appendix 2 | 149

APPENDIX 2

Description of Defenses of 

Charleston Harbor

Note Defences of Harbor

The general contour of Charleston Harbor may be likened to that of a bottle—

At its mouth are the Forts Moultrie and Sumter

Fort Moultrie with its adjacent batteries stands on Sullivans I, at the right 

when entering—

Fort Moultrie itself looks directly across the entrance while the batteries 

extending from its left overlap and not only cross fire with Moultrie but look 

down the channel by which vessels approach. The works extending from the 

right of Moultrie cross fire with the others upon the entrance and overlapping 

command the channel passing into the harbor from the entrance—

The whole length of these works is nearly one mile and a half along the beach 

of the island and as close to the water as practicable—

There are three principal batteries viz;—Fort Moultrie in the centre, Fort 

Beauregard on its left and Battery Bee on its right—

Fort Moultrie as it existed previously to the rebellion was built of brick and 

armed with 24 pdrs, 32 pdrs and some 10” Columbiads—unsupported by contiguous batteries. In that condition it was too feeble to resist any serious attack 

by ironclads.

But when the operations began on Morris I. in 1863—its brick walls had 

been encased with earth & sand nearly 25 feet thick—smooth & rifled cannon of 

the heaviest calibers mounted and protected by traverses of great thickness—Bee 

& Beauregard were not inferior in defensive power—and were heavily armed, 

the former with fewer guns—These three principal batteries were connected by 

lines which included other batteries such as Batteries Marion, Rutledge &c all 

powerfully constructed and armed—

As the shore line of Sullivans I. eastward of Beauregard was not approachable 

by vessels of force—it was only covered by some small detached batteries to inter-
150 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

dict landing. But the extremity of the island seaward being only separated from 

Long I. by a narrow inlet—was protected by a very heavy work known as Fort 

Marshall—which never came into play as no attack was made from this quarter, 

as might have been done if the General had been willing—

On the examination of these works after their capture in 1865 we found 

them to be most carefully and skilfully constructed nothing was wanting that 

could contribute to their defensive, capacity while 67 pieces of various kinds 

were mounted—smooth & rifled cannon, some of 8” and 10” calibre mortars &c

The powers of this line of works was thoroughly tested on the 8th of Septemr

1863, when I sent up the Ironsides and Monitors to cover the Weehawken then 

aground—the action last for three hours, until the Ironsides had but 30 shells 

left—There were three or four guns dismounted in Moultrie and some forty 

men killed or wounded, but no impression of importance made on the works, 

so that they renewed their fire on the Weehawken when she attempted to float a 

few hours later in the day—On the other hand the Monitors were much battered

Opposite to Sullivans I. with its formidable works stands Fort Sumter at 

a distance of about one mile—It is placed on the edge of the shoal water that 

bounds the channel on that side

At the first of the rebellion it constituted the principal defence of the 

entrance—as Fort Moultrie was then the only work on the opposite side and also 

very feeble for offense or defense—

This state of things was changed entirely at the time of the joint operation—Moultrie had been converted into an earthwork and extended on each 

side as already described until it was no longer susceptible of manpower—And 

the course of our operations in July & August 1863 worked no less important 

changes in the character of Sumter—

As soon as the Union forces had captured the works on the South end of 

Morris I. and occupied that island to musket shot of Wagner, the rebel authorities quickly discerned that the loss of the whole island must follow and in all 

probability Sumter would also fall into our hands—It was only a question of 

time when these events would occur and their purpose was to delay this as long 

as possible, so as to substitute for Sumter proper works inside, and also to remove 

from it, the numerous guns with which it was armed and which they could not 

afford to lose—

Gen. Ripley who was in immediate charge of the defences reports officially 

on the 21’ Aug. 1863—“the heavy guns and Mortars which have been received 
Appendix 2 | 151

and secured from Fort Sumter have been placed in position &c”1

General Gillmore’s opinions varied,—the published from the unpublished 

In a letter to me (official dated 23d August[)] he admits that “Some of the guns 

from the gorge and the adjacent face looking towards Cumming’s Points were 

doubtless removed to James and Sullivan’s I. before the bombardment commenced or during its progress”2

When he came to publish his opinions more than a year after the events 

to which they refer he found it convenient to say—“some time elapsed before 

any of its (Sumter’s) guns were mounted by the enemy at other points in the 

harbor.”3—He could not deny that they had been removed but with that jesuitical discrimination which he so constantly exercises, he only says they were not 

mounted. Now so far as reasoning on ordinary premises was concerned the difficulty lay in being able to remove them from Sumter—that once accomplished 

it was a mere question of labor to mount them in places less exposed. This was 

a matter which we were competent to judge of as probable from outside—And 

it appears from subsequent information contained in Gen. Ripley’s reports that 

the judgment was correct. Even the probable direction of our efforts, previous 

to actual development seems to have influenced the rebels to anticipate possible 

consequences; for a British officer who visited Sumter in June says,—“the guns 

have been removed from the casemates on the eastern face.”4

The success of the rebels in protracting the defence of Fort Wagner accomplished the main purpose and enabled them to effect a complete substitution for 

Sumter—In the two months elapsing between the day of our landing and Septr. 

6th they had given to Fort Johnson all the strength that was desirable and other 

works in system with it—

They also learned by experience that the loss of Sumter was not a necessary 

consequence to the loss of Morris I. and were able to hold it after losing its 

1 Ripley’s report has been published. For the quotation see OR 28, Part I: 390. The full report 

appears at Ibid., 284–92.

2 For the complete letter, see OR 28, Part 2: 56.

3 See Q. A. Gillmore, Engineer and Artillery Operations Against the Defences of Charleston Harbor 

in 1863; Comprising the Descent Upon Morris Island, the Demolition of Fort Sumter, the Reduction 

of Forts Wagner and Gregg. With Observations on Heavy Ordnance, Fortifications, Etc. (New York: 

D. Van Nostrand, 1865), 65.

4 The British visitor was Arthur James Lyon Fremantle, a lieutenant colonel of the Coldstream 

Guards. He also noted that “the lower tier of casements has been filled up with earth to give 

extra strength, and prevent the balls from coming right through into the interior of the work, 

which happened at the last attack.” [Arthur James Lyon] Fremantle, Three Months in the 

Southern States: April–June, 1863 (New York: John Bradburn, 1864), 182.
152 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

artillery power as a first class work—and to convert it into a species of outpost 

to Forts Johnson & Moultrie where a garrison could defend the obstructions of 

the entrance that were nearest, with musketry and light artillery—and even a few 

heavy cannon in the lower casemates—

Fort Johnson then offered itself to ships entering as the principal substitute 

for Sumter—

Supposing that our vessels succeeded in braving the fire of Sullivans I. and 

removing or forcing the obstructions, the Main channel would lead them to turn 

sharply to the left and steer nearly for Fort Johnson—receiving its fire ahead and 

that of Sullivans I. astern—Sumter being the pivot of the movement—On this 

track lay the three large torpedoes, with some 2000lbs of powder in each—

The Fort Johnson which our vessels were to encounter was a series of earthworks constructed like those of Sullivans I. in the best manner—with strong traverses and a large bomb proof—armed with 12 of the heaviest cannon, smooth 

and rifled, 8in and ten Inch; whilst near it on a sand spit running out towards 

Morris I. and armed with Six heavy pieces, were some detached batteries.

In view of the whole tenor of Gillmore’s book, his failure to represent these 

works properly, subjects him to the imputation of misrepresentation as to their 

real strength—

At page 10. §.9. after describing Fort Moultrie as a brick work with a tier 

of 24 pdr. 32 pdrs. and some 8inch Columbiads en barbette (that is looking over 

the top of the wall) he says—“Strong earthworks were erected on the upper and 

lower ends, as well as at intermediate points of both Morris and Sullivan’s islands. 

§ 10—Additional guns were mounted on Fort Moultrie and it was otherwise 

materially strengthened.”5

Compare this flippant statement with the impressions of Wagner which are 

conveyed generally in his Report but were particularly in §82 and §1686—and 

let any officer who has had to deal with these works say how far they are justified—Our ironclads almost silenced Wagner when they engaged it seriously—

while they could only quell the batteries of Sullivans I. at the cost of great damage to themselves and only attempted it under urgent necessity—Wagner was 

5 Dahlgren has garbled his citations here. The description of Moultrie appears in §5. The quotations come from §8 and §9. Gillmore, Engineer and Artillery Operations, 8–9.

6 In §82, Gillmore remarked on “the truly formidable character of the armament of Fort Wagner, 

its hidden resources, and the great strength and capacity of its bomb-proof shelter.” In §168, 

Gillmore wrote, “Fort Wagner was found to be a work of the most formidable character—far 

more so, indeed, than the most exaggerated statements of prisoners and deserters had led us to 

expect.” Ibid., 35, 74.
Appendix 2 | 153

insignificant compared to the Sullivan’s I. batteries and scarcely equal to any one 

of them singly—

Of Fort Johnson he says “Old Fort Johnson on James I. was rebuilt and 

armed with a few heavy guns and mortars.”7

The old Fort Johnson was never rebuilt—it was an affair of past times, and 

in 1826 the Chief Engineer speaks of “the few remains of old Fort Johnson.”8

Much less must have been extant in 1861, the new works were of earth, nearer to 

the shore line and conforming to its contour—heavily armed and protected by 

traverses with a large bomb proof—The character of the works was as dissimilar 

as their strength—The old Fort would have been knocked down in an hour by 

any respectable ship of war of this day—The new works would have matched our 

ironclads, and could not have been disabled by them—

About 1300 yds. above Johnson is battery Wampler, a small but very strong 

earth-work armed with two 10inch Columbiads

And at a like distance further was Battery Glover—a strong earth work 

armed with three 8 inch rifled Cannon—

Opposite to these works, and on the other side of the Main Channel were 

Fort Ripley—a crib-work on a shoal,—with two cannon—and Castle Pinckney 

with 3 of 10 inch and a seven inch rifle—

Forming with Battery Glover and Castle Pinckney the apex of a triangle was 

White Point—the extreme projecting point of the peninsula on which is located 

Charleston: bearing nearly the same relation to the Harbor that the Battery at 

N.Y. does to its harbor.

White Point was edged by a line of earth works, very strongly constructed,—

perhaps more so than any other in the harbor—and armed with an English 

700pdr—3 of 11inch. One ten Inch and an 8in rifle.

On either hand from White Point flows the Cooper and Ashly rivers. On the 

wharves at small distances are detached earth works known as Batteries Waring, 

Vanderhorst, Laurens, Calhoun, armed with the heaviest calibres, among them 

the other 700pdr rifle, for which we were indebted to the kindness of our English 

friends—

It is not merely the individual power of these works that conveys a fair 

impression of their capacity to defend the harbor—but the manner also in which 

they were bound up into a system, so that no one of them could be attacked with7 From §11. Ibid., 9.

8 From Chief Engineer Totten’s report of 1826, portions of which were reprinted in a report of 

the House Committee on Military Affairs on fortifications in 1862. “Permanent Fortifications 

and Sea-Coast Defences,” House Report 86, 37th Congress, 2d Session, 43.
154 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

out being subjected to the fire of others from different directions and at effective 

range—and as the vessels proceeded this network of batteries became closer—

On arriving at the edge of the shoal extending from White Point where the 

main channel branches into the Ashley and Cooper Rivers a vessel would be 

under fire from Batteries Wampler and Glover—Fort Ripley—White Point—

Castle Pinckney—Batteries Vanderhorst and Frazier,—coming from all directions ahead, astern and abeam and at effective distances—with no alternative 

except,—to go on so as to pass beyond the fire, or to withdraw from the harbor 

or to silence the batteries—

1. To pass beyond the batteries, it would be necessary to go up the Cooper River 

some distance—leaving it in the power of the enemy to block the channel behind 

so as to cut off all chance of return—

2d To withdraw, would be to effect nothing after the loss and exposure of entering—

3d To silence the batteries, would require more ships than were at my command 

or perhaps at that of the Navy Department.

This is not mere opinion—the resistance of Fort Wagner furnishes facts—

Its offensive power bore no comparison to that of Moultrie, Bee, Beauregard, 

Johnson, White Point &c But its construction was of the same character and 

material—Now let us note what it endured. On the 10th July four Monitors 

began by pounding it all day at fair range—they continued next day, and on 

the 18th the Ironsides frigate and five Monitors battered the work, whilst 41 light 

pieces assisted from the land batteries—an assault in force by Gillmore followed 

and was repulsed with severe loss to us. By the 23d of August, the ironclads and 

Gunboats had cannonaded Wagner on twenty five occasions, besides the work 

done by the cannon of the land works.

The work was abandoned on the 6th of Septem. immediately previous to 

which it was subjected to a heavy fire from our batteries and ships.

Col. Turner Chief of Artillery reports to Gillmore that on the 5th Septr. Fort 

Wagner was opened on from the land batteries with one 10 inch (300)pdr. Rifle, 

four 8inch (200pdr.) rifles, nine 100 pdr. rifles, Ten 30 pdr. rifles, Ten 10inch Mortars &c which continued all day and next day—At the same time the Ironsides

and Monitors maintained a flank fire from Six XVinch–Eleven XIinch guns and 

three 8inch (150pdr.) rifles—

Gillmore himself thus describes this cannonade;—“These final operations 

against Fort Wagner were actively inaugurated at the break of day on the morning of Septr. 5th. For forty two consecutive hours the spectacle presented was of 

surpassing sublimity and grandeur. Seventeen siege and coehorn mortars unceasingly dropped their shells into the work over the heads of our sappers and the 

guards of the advanced trenches: 13 of our heavy Parrott Rifles, 100, 200 and 
Appendix 2 | 155

300 pdrs, pounded away at short though regular intervals at the SW. angle of 

the bomb-proof while during the day time the New Ironsides with remarkable 

regularity and precision kept almost incessant stream of XI inch shells from her 

8-gun broadside.”

What was the condition of Wagner after all this?

Col. Turner reports (146)—“Notwithstanding the heavy fire of this bombardment together with all the fire Fort Wagner had been subject to since the 

commencement of our attack from land and naval batteries, its defences were 

not materially injured”—“Our fire of rifle shells on the 5th and 6th insts. at the 

bombproof did little or no damage.”9

General Seymour who gallantly led the assaults on Wagner on the 11th and 

18th of July says,—“the effect of the firing ashore as well as afloat, was practically 

nothing in disturbing the defensive capacities of Wagner”—“The symetry of the 

work was somewhat disarranged,—nothing more &c”10

The armament of Wagner suffered as little permanent injury as the work 

itself—

Gen. Gillmore thus expresses himself §240. page 118—“It reflects no discredit upon our Navy, to say that Fort Wagner, with its garrison covered as it was 

by a secure bombproof and with facilities for keeping its supplies of men, ammunition and guns unimpaired, could never have been reduced by a naval force or 

any other means than those adopted viz;—by sapping up to the ditch of the work 

and then assaulting or threatening an assault from the advanced trenches.”11

Now compare the advantages of any of the principal interior works of the 

harbor with those of Wagner—the latter was the outermost work of the rebel 

position—with no support except such as was possible from the distant fire of 

James I. or of the gorge of Sumter—The vessels could approach and leave at pleasure—The works inside formed a system with each other; no one of them could 

be reached except at great risk and withdrawal might be impracticable after defeat

To attack any one was to be subjected to the fire of several others—and 

under the circumstances this was to have been done by the vessels alone; the army 

was avowedly powerless to draw a line against a single one of these numerous 

batteries—or to land one man or all upon Sullivans I. or James I. Together, the 

troops & ships had reduced an isolated outpost in two months,—what could the 

9 Gillmore includes Turner’s entire report of 8 September 1863 in his book. Gillmore, Engineer 

and Artillery Operations, 135–47.

10 Dahlgren quoted these statements in his official report of 16 October 1865. ORN 16:437.

11 Gillmore, Engineer and Artillery Operations, 118–19.
156 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

vessels alone effect against a series of more powerful works individually sustaining 

each other!

Col. Freemantle of the British Army looking from Fort Sumter on the 9th

June 1863—says—“In fact both sides of the Harbor for several miles appear to 

bristle with forts mounting heavy guns.”12

Besides the Main Channel there were two others, Hog. I and Folly I. 

Channel, but they were shallow narrow & winding among shoals so as to 

be impracticable for the ironclads or for any vessel of War—Yet they were 

obstructed by piles, by obstructions and covered by batteries at Mr. Pleasants 

and Haddwell’s Point—

The mouth of the Ashley was obstructed by a frame of heavy timber pointed 

with torpedoes—not removeable under fire—

In addition to these defences there were three ironclad rams, mounting in 

all 14 heavy guns, most of them rifled—These vessels were like the rebel Ram 

Merrimac—and quite as powerful though perhaps not so long—They were 

not to be omitted as a serviceable element in the defence in connection with 

the batteries—

With this description of the works about the Harbor of Charleston may be 

associated the opinions of officers already cited in this paper—particularly that 

of the Council of Officers in October 1863—Unanimously that “Forts Moultrie 

& Johnson could not be reduced by the force present of ironclads, unsupported 

by the Army”

May 10th 1869—

12 Fremantle, Three Months in the Southern States, 184
Bibliography | 157

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archival Sources

Library of Congress, Washington, DC

John Adolphus Bernard Dahlgren Papers, 1794–1889.

John William Draper family papers, 1777–1951.

Navy Department Library, Washington, DC

John A. Dahlgren Autobiography

Published Sources

Abbott, John S. C. “Charles Ellet and His Naval Steam Rams,” Harper’s New Monthly 

Magazine No. 189 (February 1866) :295-312. 

Acts and Resolutions of the Third Session of the Thirty-Seventh Congress, begun on 

Monday, December 1, 1862 and Ended on Wednesday, March 4, 1863. Washington, 

D.C.: Government Printing Office, (1863).

Barnard, J[ohn] G. The Dangers and Defences of New York. Addressed to the Hon. J. B. 

Floyd, Secretary of War. New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1859.

Beale, Howard K., ed. The Diary of Edward Bates 1859–1866. Washington, DC: 

Government Printing Office, 1933.

Browning, Robert M., Jr. Success Is All that Was Expected: The South Atlantic Blockading 

Squadron during the Civil War. Washington, DC: Brassey’s, 2002.

Butler, Benjamin F. Official Documents Relating to a “Chaplain’s Campaign (Not) with 

General Butler,” but in New York. Lowell, MA: Charles Hunt, 1865.

Callahan, Edward W., ed. List of Officers of the Navy of the United States and of the 

Marine Corps from 1775 to 1900: Comprising a Complete register of All Present and 

Former Commissioned, Warranted, and Appointed Officers of the United States Navy, 

and of the Marine Corps, Regular and Volunteer. New York: L. R. Hammersly & 

Co., 1901.

Cheng, Eileen Ka-May. The Plain and Noble Garb of Truth: Nationalism and 

Impartiality in American Historical Writing, 1784–1860. Athens: University of 

Georgia Press, 2008.

Clay, Cassius M. Cassius Marcellus Clay: Memoirs, Writings, and Speeches. Volume 1. 

Cincinnati: J. Fletcher Brennan & Co., 1886.
158 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Coston, Marth J. A Signal Success: The Work and Travels of Mrs. Martha J. Coston: An 

Autobiography. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1886.

Cutrer, Thomas W. Ben McCullough and the Frontier Military Tradition. Chapel Hill: 

University of North Carolina Press, 1993.

Dahlgren, John A. An Account of the Experiments Made in the French Navy for the Trial 

of Bomb Cannon, etc. By H. J. Paixhans, Lieut. Colonel of Artillery. Philadelphia: E. 

G. Dorsey, 1838.

———. Boat Armament of the U.S. Navy, 2nd Ed. Philadelphia: King and Baird, 

1856.

———. Memoir of Ulric Dahlgren. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1872.

———. Naval Percussion Locks and Primers, Particularly those of the United States 

States. Philadelphia: A. Hart, 1853.

———. “A Report of the Superintendent of Ordnance of the Washington Navy 

Yard on Rifled Cannon and the Armament of Ships of War.” 36th Congress, 2d 

Session, Executive Document 25.

———. Report on the Thirty-two Pounder or Thirty-two cwt. To Commodore 

Warrington, Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance and Hydrography, by Lieut. Jno. A. 

Dahlgren. Washington, DC: C. Alexander, 1850.

———. “Rifled Cannon and the Armament of Ships-of-War.” 36th Congress, 2d 

Session, House of Representatives, Ex. Doc. No. 43.

———. Shells and Shell Guns. Philadelphia: King and Baird, 1856.

———. A System of Boat Armament in the United States Navy: Reported to Commodore 

Charles Morris. Philadelphia: A. Hart, 1852.

Dahlgren, Madeleine Vinton. Memoir of John A. Dahlgren: Rear-Admiral United States 

Navy. Boston: James R. Osgood and Company, 1882.

Davis, W. W. H. History of the 104th Pennsylvania Infantry Regiment, from August 

22nd, 1861 to September 20th, 1864. Philadelphia: James B. Rodgers, 1866.

De Kay, James Tertius. Chronicles of the Frigate Macedonian: 1809-1922. New York: 

W.W. Norton and Company, 1995.

Douglas, Sir Howard. A Treatise on Naval Gunnery. 5th Ed. London: John Murray, 

1860.

Dudley, William S. Going South: U.S. Navy Officer Resignations & Dismissals on the Eve 

of the Civil War. Washington, DC: Naval Historical Foundation, 1981.

Dudley, William S., ed. The Naval War of 1812: A Documentary History, Volume 1. 

Washington, DC: Naval Historical Center, 1985.

Du Pont, Samuel Francis. Samuel Francis Du Pont: A Selection from His Civil War 
Bibliography | 159

Letters. Vol. 3, The Repulse: 1863-1865. Edited by John D. Hayes. Ithaca, NY: 

Published for the Eleutherian Mills Historical Library by Cornell University 

Press, 1969.

Fabian, Ann. The Unvarnished Truth: Personal Narratives in Nineteenth-Century 

America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000.

[Falconer, William.] A New Universal Dictionary of the Marine..., ed. William Burney. 

London: Joyce Gold, 1815.

Fonvielle, Chris E., Jr. The Wilmington Campaign: Last Rays of Departing Hope. 

Campbell, CA: Savas Publishing Company, 1997.

[Francis, Theodore Augustus.] History of the 71st Regiment, N.G., N.Y. New York: The 

Veterans Association, 71st Regiment, N.G.N.Y., 1919.

Fremantle, [Arthur James Lyon]. Three Months in the Southern States: April–June, 1863. 

New York: John Bradburn, 1864.

Fuller, Howard J. Clad in Iron: The American Civil War and the Challenge of British 

Naval Power. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2008.

Gienapp, William E. and Erica L. Gienapp, eds. The Civil War Diary of Gideon Welles, 

Lincoln’s Secretary of the Navy: The Original Manuscript Edition. Urbana: The 

Knox College Lincoln Studies Center and the University of Illinois Press, 2014.

Gillmore, Q[uincy] A. Engineer and Artillery Operations Against the Defences of 

Charleston Harbor in 1863; Comprising the Descent Upon Morris Island, the 

Demolition of Fort Sumter, the Reduction of Forts Wagner and Gregg. With 

Observations on Heavy Ordnance, Fortifications, Etc. New York: D. Van Nostrand, 

1865.

Grivel, Louis Antoine Richild. Attaques et bombardements maritime avant et pendant la 

guerre d’Orient. Sébastopol.—Bomarsund.—Odessa—Sweaborg.—Kinburn. 2nd. 

ed. Paris: J. Dumaine, 1857.

Hassler, F[erdinand] R[udolf]. Principal Documents Relating to the Survey of the Coast of 

the United States, Since 1816. New York: William van Norden, 1834.

Headley, J[oel] T[aylor]. Farragut and Our Naval Commanders. New York: E. B. Treat 

& Co., 1867.

Hoptak, John David. “The Union’s First Defenders,” Pennsylvania Heritage Vol. 39 No. 

3 (Summer 2013): 5–15.

Joinville, Prince de. Memoirs (Vieux Souvenirs) of the Prince de Joinville, translated by 

Lady Mary Loyd. London: William Heinemann, 1895.

Kahan, Paul. Amiable Scoundrel: Simon Cameron, Lincoln’s Scandalous Secretary of War. 

Lincoln, NE: Potomac Books, 2016.

Keehn, David C. Knights of the Golden Circle: Secret Empire, Southern Secession, Civil 
160 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

War. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2013.

 “Letter from the Secretary of War in Reference to Fortifications,” 11 December 1851. 

32d Congress, 1st Session, House Executive Document No. 5.

Long, David F. Sailor Diplomat: A Biography of Commodore James Biddle, 1783-1848. 

Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1983.

 [Marshall, Jessie Ames, ed.] Private and Official Correspondence of Gen. Benjamin F. 

Butler During the Period of the Civil War, Vol. 3. Norwood, MA: Plimpton Press, 

1917.

Miers, Earl Schenk and C. Percy Powell. Lincoln Day by Day: A Chronology 

1809–1865. Dayton, OH: Morningside, 1991.

Morgan, William James, David B. Tyler, Joye L. Leonhart, and Mary F. Loughlin, eds. 

Autobiography of Rear Admiral Charles Wilkes, U.S. Navy 1797–1877. Washington, 

DC: Naval History Division, 1978.

Nicolay, John G. and John Hay. Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, New and 

Enlarged Edition. Volume 7. N.p.: Lincoln Memorial University, 1894.

Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion. 31 vols. 

Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1894–1922.

Parker, Foxhall. The Naval Howitzer Ashore. New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1865.

Paullin, Charles Oscar. Paullin’s History of Naval Administration 1775–1911: A 

Collection of Articles from the U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings. Annapolis, MD: 

U.S. Naval Institute, 1968.

Peck, Taylor. Round-Shot to Rockets: A History of the Washington Navy Yard and U.S. 

Naval Gun Factory. Annapolis, MD: United States Naval Institute, 1949.

 “Permanent Fortifications and Sea-Coast Defences.” 23 April 1862. 37th Congress, 

2d Session, House Report No. 86.

Pohanka, Brian C., and Patrick A. Schroeder, eds. With the 11th New York Fire Zouaves 

In Camp, Battle, and Prison: The Narrative of Private Arthur O’Neil Alcock in The 

New York Atlas and Leader. Lynchburg, VA: Schroeder Publications, 2011.

Potter, David M. The Impending Crisis 1848–1861. New York: Harper and Row, 1976.

Report of the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War. 8 vols. Washington, DC: 

Government Printing Office, 1863–1866. Reprint; 9 vols., Wilmington, NC. 

Broadfoot Publishing Company, 2002.

Report of the Secretary of the Navy. [Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,] 

1858.

Report of the Secretary of the Navy in Relation to Armored Vessels. Washington, DC: 

Government Printing Office, 1864.
Bibliography | 161

Report of the Secretary of the Navy, with an Appendix Containing Reports from Officers. 

[Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,] 1865.

Scharf, J. Thomas. History of the Confederate States Navy from Its Organization to the 

Surrender of Its Last Vessel. 2nd ed. Albany, NY: Joseph McDonough, 1894.

Schneller, Robert J., Jr. A Quest for Glory: A Biography of Rear Admiral John A. 

Dahlgren. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1996.

Scott, Winfield. Memoirs of Lieut.-General Winfield Scott, ed. Timothy D. Johnson. 

1864. Reprint, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 2015.

Silverstone, Paul H. Civil War Navies 1855–1883. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute 

Press, 2001.

Slotten, Hugh Richard. Patronage, Practice, and the Culture of American Science: 

Alexander Dallas Bache and the U.S. Coast Survey. New York: Cambridge 

University Press, 1994. 

Smith, Gene A. Thomas ap Catesby Jones: Commodore of Manifest Destiny. Annapolis, 

MD: Naval Institute Press, 2000.

Spencer C. Tucker. Andrew Foote: Civil War Admiral on Western Waters. Annapolis, 

MD: Naval Institute Press, 2000.

———. Arming the Fleet: U.S. Navy Ordnance in the Muzzle-Loading Era. Annapolis, 

MD: Naval Institute Press, 1989.

Venter, Bruce M. Kill Jeff Davis: The Union Raid on Richmond, 1864. Norman: 

University of Oklahoma Press, 2016.

Warner, Ezra J. Generals in Blue: Lives of the Union Commanders. Baton Rouge: 

Louisiana State University Press, 1964.

———. Generals in Gray: Lives of the Confederate Commanders. Baton Rouge: 

Louisiana State University Press, 1959.

The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and 

Confederate Armies. 128 vols. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 

1880–1901.

Weddle, Kevin J. Lincoln’s Tragic Admiral: The Life of Samuel Francis Du Pont. 

Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2005.

Westwood, Howard C. “Ben Butler Takes on a Chaplain,” Civil War History Vol. 35, 

No 3. (1989): 225–38.

Index | 163

INDEX

Admiral, 118, 118n

Alabama (state), 26, 26n

Alabama, CSS, 10, 10n, 117, 117n

Alexandria, VA, 39–40, 40–41, 45, 45n, 54–55, 55n

American Association for the Advancement of Science, 65, 65n

Ammen, Daniel, 99–100, 99n

Anacostia River, 9, 9n, 39

Anderson, Robert, 30, 30n, 38–39, 138n

Andersonville, GA, 119, 120n

Annapolis, MD, 36, 143

Antietam, battle of, 60, 60n, 115n

Aquia Creek, VA, 41, 42

Aquia Landing, VA, 57n

Armstrong, William, 20–22, 21n

Bache, Alexander Dallas, 65, 65n

Badger, Oscar C., 70, 70n, 88, 88n, 111

Baker, Edward, 50, 50n

Balch, George B., 80n, 106n, 128

Ball, M. Dulany, 40–41, 41n, 42, 42n

Ball’s Bluff and Edward’s Ferry, 49–51, 50n

Baltimore, 34, 34n, 55n, 56n

Baltimore, MD, 31, 31n, 38

Barclay, William H., 137–38, 138n

Barron, James, 15, 15n

Bates, Edward, 55n

Battery Beauregard, SC, 85, 86

Battery Bee, SC, 85, 86, 149

Battery Calhoun, SC, 153

Battery Frazier, SC, 154

Battery Glover, SC, 153, 154

Battery Gregg, SC, 83

Battery Laurens, SC, 153

Battery Marion, SC, 149

Battery Pringle, SC, 117

Battery Rutledge, SC, 149

Battery Vanderhorst, SC, 153, 154

Battery Wampler, SC, 153, 154

Battery Waring, SC, 153

Battery White, SC, 130n

Beaufort, SC, 123
164 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Beecher, Henry Ward, 138, 138n, 142

Belle Island, Richmond, VA, 120, 120n

Bennett Place, NC, 139n

Beverly Ford, VA, 68, 68n

Bibb, 137, 137n

Biddle, James, 2, 2n

Bishop, T. H., 98n

Blair, Francis P., 125

Blake, John, 136, 137n

Bormann, Charles G., 144, 144n

Boutelle, Charles O., 137, 137n

Bradford, Charles H., 129–30, 130n, 136

Bradford, Joseph M., 114, 114n

Brasschaat, Belgium, 21, 21n

Breese, Samuel L., 6, 6n

Broad River, SC, 120

Brooklyn, 20, 20n

Brown, George William, 31

Bryson, Andrew, 99–100, 99n, 103–4, 104n

Buchanan, Franklin, 29, 29n, 31, 31n, 32, 32n, 34n

Buchanan, James, 26, 26n

Bulls Bay, SC, 127, 128–29

Bunker, Mary C., 5, 5n, 17, 17n

Burnside, Ambrose E., 53, 53n, 61, 61n

Butler, Benjamin F., 36, 103, 103n, 113, 113, 113n, 134–35

Cairo, IL, 65

Cameron, Simon, 52, 52n, 54n

Canandaigua, 77–78, 78n, 114n, 127

Cannon, Walker, 98, 98n

Capitol, the, Washington, DC, 37

Castle Pinckney, 153, 154

Catskill: captain of, 99n, 114n; at Charleston, SC, 84; forces blockade runner to

ground, 77–78, 78n; and operations at Charleston, SC, 73–74, 76–77, 82, 82n, 83; 

repairing, 94

Cavalli, Giovanni, 20–21, 21n

Cedar Point, MD, 35n

Chancellorsville Campaign, 67, 67n

Chaplin, James C., 126

Charleston, CSS, 129, 129n

Charleston and Charleston Harbor, SC, 72, 73, 81, 84; blockade runners at, 77–78; 

Confederate defenses of, 66n, 73, 149–56; Confederate ironclads at, 74–75; 

Confederate obstructions at, 85, 85n, 87, 106, 124, 130; John A. Dahlgren 

lands at, 129; defenses of, 147–48; exchange of prisoners at, 118, 118n; operations at, Confederate, 63, 63n; operations at, Union, 65–66, 66n, 86–88, 

147–48; operations at, Union plans for, 65, 65n, 71, 71n; reports of Confederate 
Index | 165

sortie at, 122; William T. Sherman arrives at, 139–40; strength of US Navy at, 

80; treatment of Union prisoners at, 115–16, 115n, 116n

Chartres, Robert, duc de, 55n

Chase, Franklin, 19, 19n, 20n

Chase, William H., 14, 14n

Cherbourg, France, 10n

Chicora, CSS, 63, 63n, 129, 129n

Cilley, Greenelaf, 99–100, 99n

Cincinnati, OH, 65

Clay, Cassius, 37, 37n

Cluss, Adolf, 20, 20n

Clyde (steamer), 140n

United States Coast Survey, 2–4, 2, 2n, 3n, 4n, 65n

Cobb, Howell, 25, 25n

Colhoun, Edmund R., 99–100, 99n

Colorado, 16n

Columbia, CSS, 129, 129n, 140, 140n

Congress, 53, 54n

Congress, House of Representatives, 14–15, 14n, 15n, 46, 46n

Congress, Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War, 50n, 100, 100n, 116, 116n

Congress, Senate, 13, 13n, 15, 22–23, 23n, 64

Congress, US, 53, 53n, 63–64, 64–65, 64n, 65, 65n

Conrad, Charles M., 14–15, 14n

Cornwell, John, 99–100, 99n, 104, 104n

Cossawhatchie River, SC, 120

Coston, B. Franklin, 7, 7n, 8–9, 9n

C. P. Williams, 106n

Craney Island, 51

Craven, Thomas T., 49, 49n

Craven, Tunis A., 117–18, 118n

Creighton, J. Blakely, 130n

Cumbahee River, SC, 126–27

Cumberland, 5–6, 6, 6n, 54n

Cumberland Landing, VA, 55, 55n

Cunningham, Robert B., 14n

Dahlgren, Bernhard Ulrik, 1, 1n

Dahlgren, Charles B., 5n, 68–69, 69n, 78, 78n, 126

Dahlgren, Elisabeth, 5n

Dahlgren, Eva, 17n, 55n

Dahlgren, John (son of John A. Dahlgren), 17n

Dahlgren, John A.: aboard Pawnee, 105; aboard Weehawken, 87, 88; administers oath

of allegiance to workers at Washington Navy Yard, 42; advises Abraham Lincoln on 

funeral for Elmer Ellsworth, 41–42; applies for sea service, 6; appointed Chief of 

Bureau of Ordnance, 58; appointed midshipman, 1, 1n; and armament of Merrimackclass frigates, 16–17; and armament of Niagara, 17; arrives at Port Royal, SC, 70, 114, 
166 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

117; arrives in Washington DC, 140; asked to join board on harbor defense, 143; asks 

for command of Monitor, 54n; and assessment of monitors, 74–75; assigned to 

command South Pacific Squadron, 143; assigned to Ordnance Department, 7; 

assigned to ordnance duty, 6; to assist Quincy A. Gillmore, 79–80; assists US citizens 

in Mexico, 19–20, 21n; and attack on Fort Wagner, SC, 74–75, 76–77; and attempts 

to recover Ulric Dahlgren’s body, 113–14; attends burial service for Charles H. 

Bradford, 136–37; attends memorial service for Ulric Dahlgren, 141–42; attends party 

at the Dutch ministry, 51–52; attends party hosted by Mary Todd Lincoln, 52–53; 

boards Lodona, 93, 93n; boards Nahant, 104; boards Passaic, 104; books of, 9, 9n, 11, 

11, 15–16, 16n, 18, 18n, 145; born, 1, 1n, ix; builds foundry at Washington Navy 

Yard, 20; builds new facilities for Bureau of Ordnance, 8, 8n; builds ordnance facilities, 16; buries Ulric Dahlgren, 142; changes flagship, 131, 131n; children of, 17, 17n 

(see also: Dahlgren, Charles Bunker; Dahlgren, Elisabeth; Dahlgren, Ulric); on climate 

at Charleston, SC, 80; to command ironclads at Charleston, SC, 67, 67n; comments 

on coast defenses, 14–15, 14n; on condition of Fort Sumter, SC, 87–89; on 

Confederate torpedoes, 110; confirmed as rear admiral, 64; and conflict with B. 

Franklin Coston, 9n; constructs range at Washington Navy Yard, 9, 9n; consulted by 

Abraham Lincoln regarding Virginia, 54; convenes council of officers, 99–100, 99n; 

converts steamers to vessels of war, 47; and cooperation with William T. Sherman, 

101; criticizes Quincy A. Gillmore’s book, 136, 136n; and cruise of Plymouth to 

Europe, 18; and death of wife, 17; decides not to attack Fort Sumter, SC, 114, 114n; 

decides not to force Charleston Harbor, SC, 100, 100n; decides to attack Fort Sumter, 

SC, 92; on defenses of Washington, DC, 31; departs Charleston, SC, 140; deploys 

Navy forces to defenses of Washington, DC, 45; describes Fort Sumter, SC, 85–86; 

and design of rifled guns, 21; designs boat howitzers, 11; designs shell gun, 13, 13n; 

designs XI-inch gun, 13–14; dies, xiv; dines with Prince de Joinville, 51; discusses 

Second Manassas with Abraham Lincoln, 59; dispatches Perry to Alexandria, 44, 44n; 

dispatches sailors to Fort Ellsworth, VA, 47, 47n; and disputes with Quincy A. 

Gillmore, 74–75, 75n, 89–91, 96–97, 101–2, 109, 132–34, 132n, x; eats dinner with 

George B. McClellan, 49; embarks on sea service, 5; ends service as commandant of 

the Washington Navy Yard, 58; escapes sinking Harvest Moon, 131; examines remains 

of Ulric Dahlgren, 141; and exchange of prisoners at Charleston, SC, 118; and expedition to Alexandria, VA, 39–40; and farm in Bucks County, PA, 5, 5n; father of, 1, 1n; 

flagship of, 81; formally given command of the Washington Navy Yard, 46, 46n; 

friendship with Tunis A. Craven, 117–18; given sword by 71st New York Infantry, 

52n; gives orders to captains at Charleston, SC, 123–24; gives recommendations to 

Senate Naval Affairs Committee, 15; goes to Fort Monroe, VA, 112; on hardship of 

service aboard monitors, 106; has monitors repaired, 95; health problems of, 4–5, 4n; 

holds council of ironclad captains, 114, 114n; inspects ships building at Philadelphia 

and New York, 58; instructions for, 79, 79n; instructions of for Stephen C. Rowan, 

112n; instructions of Gideon Welles for, 116n; on Kilpatrick-Dahlgren raid, 118, 118n; 

lands at Charleston, 129; last meeting with Abraham Lincoln, 114; leaves Bureau of 

Ordnance, 69; leaves command of South Atlantic Blockading Squadron, 140; leaves 

New York for Charleston, SC, 70; made second assistant in United States Coast 

Survey, 4; on manpower to defend Washington, DC, 27; marries Mary C. Bunker, 5, 

5n; and mathematical proficiency, 2, 3; meets Robert Anderson, 38–39; meets Elmer 
Index | 167

Ellsworth, 40; meets Andrew H. Foote at New York, 69–70; meets Abraham Lincoln, 

29, 29n; meets Abraham Lincoln at the Navy Department, 63; meets William T. 

Sherman at Hilton Head, 125; meets William T. Sherman at Savannah, 123; meets to 

discuss countermeasures for Virginia, 54, 54n; meets with Ulric Dahlgren, 39, 60, 

104–5; meets with Samuel Francis Du Pont, 70–71; meets with John Ericsson, 58; 

meets with Andrew H. Foote in New York, 67–68, 67n; meets with John G. Foster, 

121; meets with José de la Garza, 19, 20n; meets with Quincy A. Gillmore, 71–72, 76, 

98–99, 109, 112; meets with Quincy A. Gillmore and Edward E. Potter, 128; meets 

with Andrew Johnson, 140; meets with Abraham Lincoln, 37–38; meets with 

Alexander Schimmelfennig, 128; meets with William T. Sherman, 121, 148; and 

membership in National Academy of Sciences, 65; and membership in the American 

Association for the Advancement of Science, 65; midshipman cruise of, 1–2; mother 

of, 1, 1n; named to board of visitors of the Naval Academy, 143; Navy’s evaluation of, 

140–41; offered appointment as sailing master, 3; offered command of Bureau of 

Ordnance, 46, 46n; office at Washington Navy Yard, 8–9; office of at Washington 

Navy Yard, 37; operates against Fort Wagner, SC, 80–82; and operations against Fort 

Sumter, SC, 84–85, 87–88; and operations against Fort Wagner and Fort Sumter, SC, 

83–84; and operations in Charleston Harbor, 86–88; and operations in the Edisto 

River, SC, 126; and operations near Charleston, SC, 127; and operations near 

Savannah, GA, 121–22; opinion of on Andrew Hull Foote, 6; opinion of on George 

Willmuth, 35; opinion of on Quincy A. Gillmore, 95–96, 127–28; opinion of on 

Ferdinand Rudolf Hassler, 2; opinion of on Samuel Jones, 116n; opinion of on 

Abraham Lincoln, 29; opinion of on Samuel Preston, 111–12; opinion of on Roswell 

S. Ripley, 116n; opinion of on Alexander Schimmelfennig, 138; opinion of on George 

Steers, 17; and opinions of on ironclads, 22–23, 23n; opinions of on rifled guns, 

20–22, 22n; opinions of on the US Exploring Expedition, 3; opinions of on torpedoes, 

98; opposition to ideas of, 16; opposition to ordnance ideas of, 11, 15, 15n; orders 

honors after death of Abraham Lincoln, 139, 139n; orders operations against Battery 

White, SC, 130, 130n; on ordnance for defense of Washington, DC, 33; on ordnance 

mishaps, 12–13, 13n; ordnance plans of, 13, 13n; ordnance system of, 11–12; organizes defense of the Washington Navy Yard, 26–27, 34–37; organizes Fleet Brigade, 

120, 120n; others dedicate books to, 145, 145n; placed in command of naval forces at 

Charleston, SC, 69, 69n; placed in command of the Washington Navy Yard, 31–32, 

32n; places Benjamin H. Porter in charge of removing obstructions, 87; and plans for 

Bull’s Bay, SC landing, 128; and plans for joint operations at Charleston, SC, 76–77; 

plans for ordnance, 12; at Port Royal, SC, 123; postwar writings of, xii–xiv; and 

potential appointment to command Bureau of Ordnance, 17–18; praised by Alexander 

Schimmelfennig, 117; press coverage of, 96n; promoted to admiral, 6, 6n; promoted to 

commander, 17, 17n; promoted to lieutenant, 4; provides howitzers to Quincy A. 

Gillmore, 80, 80n; publications of, 4–5; published writings of, 15; reaches Charleston, 

SC, 114; reacts to Battle of Manassas, 44–45; reads Quincy A. Gillmore’s book, 131; 

receives letter of thanks, 137–38; receives warrant of Pass Midshipman, 2; reinforcements for, 83n; release Confederate prisoners, 42, 42n; renders honors to body of 

James H. Ward, 44; reorganization plan for Bureau of Ordnance, 8, 8n; replies to 

Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War, 116, 116n; reports trials of naval ordnance, 22, 22n; requests to be relieved, 112; returns from trip to Fredericksburg, VA, 
168 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

57, 57n; returns to Washington, DC, 68; returns to Washington DC, 69, 69n; sea 

service of aboard Plymouth, 18–20; on secessionist plans for Washington, DC, 38; and 

service aboard Cumberland, 5–6; William T. Sherman comments on the Charleston, 

SC operations of, 147–48; William T. Sherman’s evaluation of, 141; on Southern officers in the Navy, 25–26; and staff, 139; staff officers of, 70; on state of affairs in 

Washington, DC in early 1861, 32; on Stono River expedition, 116–17; on strength of 

Navy at Charleston, S, 80; suggests armament for vessels, 15; suggests ship design, 13, 

13n; supervises attack on Fort Sumter, SC, 93–94; supports Quincy A. Gillmore, 

102–3, 103–4; takes monitors to Charleston, SC from Savannah, GA, 122; takes trip 

to Washington, DC, 112; takes trip with Abraham Lincoln on Pensacola, 51, 51n; 

thanked by Congress, 63–64, 64n; tours Savannah, GA, 122; travels to Alexandria 

with Abraham Lincoln and Edwin Stanton, 54–55, 55n; travels to France, 4–5; and 

views on outbreak of the Civil War, 26; visits Fredericksburg, VA with John A. 

Dahlgren, 56–57, 57n; visits George B. McClellan at Cumberland Landing with 

President and Cabinet, 55, 55n; visits New York with Gustavus Vasa Fox, 67, 67n; 

visits western naval posts, 65; and visit with Percival Drayton, 48–49; works on the 

US Coast Survey, 2–4; writings of, 143–44, 144n

Dahlgren, Lawrence, 17n

Dahlgren, Paul, 17n

Dahlgren, Ulric, 38; as aide to Foxhall Parker, 45, 45n; birth of, 5, 5n; body recovered

and brought to Washington DC, 139; buried in Philadelphia, 142; and KilpatrickDahlgren raid, 112–13, 113n, 123; meets with John A. Dahlgren, 39, 104–5; meets 

with Abraham Lincoln and Edwin Stanton, 57, 57n; memorial service for, 141–42; 

military career of, 57, 57n, 60–61, 61n, 67, 68; remains arrive at Congressional 

Cemetery, 141; serves with Naval Battery at Harper’s Ferry, 57, 57n; and service near 

the Washington Navy Yard, 47, 47n; wounded and leg amputated, 78, 78n

Dai Ching, 116n, 126, 127

Danby, Robert, 140n

Dandelion (tug), 121, 121n

Daniels, Charles H., 57n

David, CSS, 97, 97–98, 97n, 98n

Davis, Charles Henry, 63–64, 64n

Davis, Jefferson, 28, 28n, 53, 53n, 140, 140n

Davis, John L., 94n, 99–100, 99n, 114, 114n

Davis, Varina, 140n

Davis, William W. H., xiii–xiv

Decatur, Stephen, 2, 2n

Delafield, Richard, 14, 14n

Department of the Treasury, 30

De Russy, Réne Edward, 14, 14n

Diadem, HMS, 18, 18n

Dictator, 67, 67n

Dobbin, James Cochrane, 17–18

Douglas, Stephen A., 29

Draper, John William, xii–xiii

Drayton, Percival, 48–49, 49n, 67, 67n
Index | 169

Drewry’s Bluff, VA, 55–56, 56n

Duncan, William, 121, 121n

Du Pont, Samuel Francis: departure of from Charleston, 79, 79n; flagship of, 70, 71n;

Abraham Lincoln’s instructions for, 66, 66n; meets with John A. Dahlgren, 70–71; 

and operations at Charleston, SC, 65–66, 66n, 75n; and plans for operations at 

Charleston, SC, 65, 65n, 71, 71n; press coverage of, 96n; relieved, 67n; rumors about, 

67; staff officers of, 71, 71n; surveys coast defenses, 14, 14n, 15

Duvall, Marius, 77, 96n

Eaton, William B., 118n

Elizabeth River, VA, 53

Ellsworth, Elmer, 39n, 40, 40n, 41, 42

Emmick, Myron J., 121, 121n

Emmons, George F., 99–100, 99n

Epervier, HM brig, 7, 7n, 10

Ericsson, John, 58, 59, 67, 67n

Excellent, HMS, 18

United States Exploring Expedition, 3, 3n

Fairfax, Donald M., 76, 76n

Farragut, David Glasgow, 119, 119n

Faxon, William, 55n

Florida (state), 26, 26n

Floyd, John B., 25, 25n

Folly Island, SC, 73, 95

Foote, Andrew Hull, 48; captures Fort Henry, 53, 53n; John A. Dahlgren dedicates

book to, 18; death of, 6, 48n, 69–70, 70n; and friendship with John A. Dahlgren, 

6; health of, 68, 69, 69n; meets with John A. Dahlgren in New York, 67–68, 67n; 

promoted to admiral, 6, 6n; to replace Samuel Francis Du Pont, 67, 67n; requests men, 

51; service of aboard Cumberland, 6; services of in West, 48

Forsyth, John, Jr., 19, 20

Fort Beauregard, SC, 149–50

Fort Donelson, TN, 53, 53n

Fort Ellsworth, VA, 45, 45n, 47, 47n, 51

Fort Fisher, NC, 82, 112, 112n, 119, 119n, 123, 126

Fort Henry, TN, 53, 53n

Fort Johnson, SC, 116–17, 117n, 129, 151, 152, 153

Fort Lafayette, NY, 52

Fort McAllister, GA, 121

Fort Monroe, VA, 112

Fort Moultrie, SC, 83, 85, 86, 104, 147, 149–50

Fort Pickens, FL, 29–30, 30n

Fort Ripley, 153, 154

Fort Simkins, SC, 117n

Fort Sumter, 86; condition of, 85–86, 87–89, 88n, 89n, 91, 92; defense of, 29; descrip-
170 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

tion of, 85–86, 150, 151, 151n; Powhatan departs for, 30; relief effort fired upon, 26; 

relief of, 29–30, 30n; surrenders, 30, 30n; Union flag raised at, 138, 138n; Union 

operations against, 83–84, 84–85, 87–88, 92–94, 102–3

Fort Wagner, SC, 86, 147; captured, 90; description of, 150–51, 152–53, 152n,

154–255; strength of, 78, 78n, 80; Union operations against, 74–75, 76–77, 83–84, 

89–90, 92, 154

Foster, John G., 115; career of, 115n; meets with John A. Dahlgren, 121; operations of

in South Carolina, 116–17, 117n, 120–21, 126; and prisoner exchange at Charleston, 

SC, 118; receives leave of absence, 127; takes command of Army forces at Charleston, 

SC, 114–15

Fox, Gustavus Vasa, 55n, 65n, 67, 67n

Fredericksburg, VA, 56–57, 57n

Fredericksburg, VA, battle of, 61, 61n

Freeman, S.N., 106n

Fremantle, Arthur James Lyon, 151, 151n, 156

Frémont, John Charles, 52, 52n

Fulton (steamer), 139n

Galena, 55–56, 56, 56n

Garza, José de la, 19, 19n

Georgetown, SC, 130, 130n

Georgia (state), 26, 26n

Geranium, 116n

Gettysburg, battle of, 78

Gibson, William, 114, 114n

Giesborough Point, 39

Gile, Frank S., 104n

Gillis, John P., 49n

Gillmore, Quincy A., 68; asks John A. Dahlgren for support, 102–3, 103–4; and

attack on Fort Wagner, SC, 74–75; and casualties at Fort Wagner, SC, 77, 77n, 79; 

on condition of Fort Sumter, SC, 87–89, 88n, 89n; John A. Dahlgren’s opinion of, 

95–96; John A. Dahlgren to assist, 79–80; departs for Richmond, 114; describes 

Confederate defenses at Charleston, 151; describes Fort Sumter, SC, 85, 92; describes 

Fort Wagner, SC, 154–55; and disputes with Benjamin F. Butler, 103, 103n, 134–35; 

and disputes with John A. Dahlgren, 74–75, 75n, 89–91, 96–97, 101–2, 109, 132–34, 

132n, x; fails to assist attack on Fort Sumter, SC, 93–94, 94n; fortifies Morris Island, 

SC, 95; meets with John A. Dahlgren, 68, 71–72, 76, 98–99, 109, 112; as member 

of board on harbor defense, 143; negative opinions of, 82–83; orders attack on Fort 

Wagner, SC, 77; placed in temporary command, 127; and plans for Bull’s Bay SC 

landing, 128; and plans for operations at Charleston, SC, 71, 71n, 75n, 76–77, 92–93; 

press coverage of, 96; publishes book, 131; reinforced, 82–83, 83n; relocates headquarters, 95; requests delay in attack, 72, 73; requests naval howitzers, 80, 80n; requests 

naval support against Fort Wagner, SC, 80–82

Glassell, W. T., 98, 98n

Goldsborough, Louis M., 53, 53n, 55n

Graham, William A., 11n
Index | 171

Grahamsville, SC, 120

Grant, Ulysses S., 53, 53n, 68, 68n

Green, Joseph F., 78n

Gregory, Francis H., 67, 67n

Grivel, Louis Antoine Richild, 145, 145n

Grow, Galusha, 65, 65n

Gurney, William, 117n

Hagerstown, MD, 78n

Hahn, Michael, 118, 118n

Halleck, Henry W., 82–83, 83n

Hampton Roads, VA, 119n

Hanover Junction, VA, 57

Hanson, Charles H., 137–38, 138n

Harper’s Ferry, VA, 31, 57, 57n

Harris, Thomas, 5n

Harrison, Napoleon B., 114, 114n

Harrison’s Landing, VA, 59n

Hartford, 20, 20n, 119n

Hartford-class, 20n

Harvest Moon, 112, 127, 131, 131n

Hassler, Ferdinand Rudolf, 2, 2, 2n, 3–4, 3n, 4, 65n

Hatch, John P., 136–37, 137n, 140

Headley, Joel T., xi–xiii

Hilton Head, SC, 125

H.L. Hunley, CSS, 109–10, 110n

Hogan, Michael, 123

Hooker, Joseph, 66–67, 66n, 67n, 68, 68n, 69

Hornet, 2n

Housatonic, 109–10, 110n

Howard, Oliver Otis, 121, 121n, 125, 126

Hudson, Henry N., 103, 103n, 134–35

Hughes, Patrick, 94n

Hunter, David, 66, 66n, 75n

Independence Hall, Philadelphia, PA, 142

Irving, Thomas, 104, 104n

Jackson, James, 40n

Jackson, Thomas J. “Stonewall,” 57, 57n

Jacksonville, SC, 109

James Guy, 40, 40n

James Island, SC, 148

James River, 112

Jamestown Island, VA, 55n
172 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

John Adams, 12

Johnson, Andrew, 140, 142

Johnston, Joseph E., 36, 36n, 139, 139n

Joinville, François, Prince de, 47, 47n, 51, 52, 55n

Jones, Samuel, 115n, 116n

Jones, Thomas ap Catesby, 3, 3n

Juárez, Benito, 19

Juniata, 127

Kearsarge, 10, 10n, 117

Keystone State, 63n

Kilpatrick, Judson, 113n

King, James Wilson, 145, 145n

Lady Davis, CSS, 129n

Lancaster, 20, 20n

Lancaster, William, 20–21, 21n

Lane, James Henry, 37, 37n

Lanham, Joseph, 14n

Lee, Robert E.: and battle of Antietam, 60, 60n; and battle of Fredericksburg, 61, 61n;

and battle of Second Bull Run, 59, 59n; and Chancellorsville campaign, 67n; moves 

into Pennsylvania, 69; resigns from US Army, 36, 36n

Lehigh: assists Union Army, 127; captain of, 99n; at Charleston, 94; grounding of,

104, 104n; participates in attack on Fort Sumter, 93; participates in Stono expedition, 

116–17, 116n; to reinforce John A. Dahlgren, 83n; travels to Port Royal for repairs, 

104, 104n

Leland, George, 104, 104n

Libby Prison, Richmond, VA, 113

Lincoln, Abraham, 28; advice for John A. Dahlgren, 114; assassinated, 138–39, 139n;

and attempts to recover Ulric Dahlgren’s body, 113n; attends concert at Washington 

Navy Yard, 39; calls for blockade of the South, 37–38, 38n; calls for troops, 30; 

consults John A. Dahlgren regarding Virginia, 54; discouraged at course of the war, 

65; discusses Ulric Dahlgren with John A. Dahlgren, 112; discusses Second Manassas 

with John A. Dahlgren, 59; fears blockade of the Potomac River, 39; inaugurated as 

President, 29; issues amnesty proclamation, 53, 53n; lies in state at Independence 

Hall, 142; meets with John A. Dahlgren, 29, 29n, 37–38; meets with Ulric Dahlgren, 

57, 57n; meets with Ulric Dahlgren and John A. Dahlgren, 60; meets with George B. 

McClellan in Alexandria, 54–55, 55n; orders Quincy A. Gillmore reinforced, 82–83, 

83n; plans funeral for Elmer Ellsworth, 41–42; returns from trip to Fredericksburg, 

VA, 57, 57n; and Samuel F. Du Pont’s operations at Charleston, 66, 66n; takes trip 

with John A. Dahlgren, 51, 51n; travels to Washington, DC, 28; visits Fredericksburg, 

VA with John A. Dahlgren, 56–57, 57n; visits George B. McClellan at Cumberland 

Landing, 55, 55n; visits Navy Department, 63; visits Washington Navy Yard, 29, 44, 

52, 58

Lincoln, Mary Todd, 52–53
Index | 173

Lincoln, William W., 53, 53n

Lodona, 93, 93n

Longshaw, William, Jr., 104, 104n

Louisiana (state), 26, 26n

Luce, Stephen B., 114, 114n

Lynch, Henry, 137–38, 138n

Lyons, Richard Bickerton Pemell [Lord Lyons], 51, 51n

Mab, CSS, 129n

Macedonian, 1–2, 2n, 3, ix

Manassas, battle of, 44–45, 44n

Manassas, second battle of, 59–60, 59n

Manhattan, 116

Mansfield, Joseph K. F., 44, 44n

Marblehead, 106n

Marines: attend burial service for Charles H. Bradford, 136; dispatched to Alexandria,

VA, 45, 45n; and expedition down the Potomac River, 49, 49n; and operations against 

Battery White, 130, 130n; participate in attack on Fort Fisher, NC, 112n; as part 

of Fleet Brigade, 120; sent to Norfolk, 33, 33n; strength of in Washington, DC, 27; 

Washington, DC barracks, 33

Marshall House, Alexandria, 40n

Mason, John Y., 7, 7n, 10, 10n, 51, 51n

Massachusetts Troops, 31, 31n, 77, 77n

Mathias Point, 43, 44n

Maury, Matthew Fontaine, 14, 14n

McClellan, George B.: attends party hosted by Mary Todd Lincoln, 52, 52n; and

battle of Antietam, 60, 60n; eats dinner with John A. Dahlgren, 49; at Hanover 

Junction, VA, 57; meets to discuss countermeasures for Virginia, 54, 54n; places 

Fort Ellsworth under Navy command, 47, 47n; and Rich Mountain campaign, 45n; 

summoned to Washington, 45; urges promotion of Ambrose Burnside, 55n; withdraws 

to Harrison’s Landing, VA, 59, 59n

McCullough, Ben, 30, 30n

McDonough, 116, 116n, 127

McDowell, Irvin, 44n, 45n, 57

McKnight, James, 37, 37n

Meade, George Gordon, 142

Meade, Richard W., Jr., 106n

Meigs, Montgomery, 54, 54n

Mercedita, 63n

Merrimack, 6n, 16, 16n, 18, 47–48, 48n. see also Virginia (CSS)

Miantonomah, 110

Mines. see Torpedoes

Mingo, 130n

Minnesota, 16n

Mississippi (state), 26, 26n

Mobile and Mobile Bay, AL, 20, 112, 118n, 119, 119n
174 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Monitor, 54, 54n

Montauk: attacks Fort Wagner, 76–77; captain of, 76n, 99n, 114n; at Charleston, 94;

fires on Fort Moultrie, 104; in need of repairs, 94, 94n; and operations at Charleston, 

SC, 73–74; participates in Stono expedition, 116–17, 116n; undergoes repairs, 71–72, 

72n

Montgomery, AL, 28, 28n

Morris, Charles, 14, 14n, 15n, 17

Morris, Henry W., 52n

Morris Island, SC, 70, 71–72, 75n, 83n, 86, 92, 95, 99

Mount Vernon, 34–35, 34n, 35, 35, 35n

Munson’s Hill, 47, 47n

Nahant, 71–72, 72n, 73–74, 74n, 94, 99n, 104, 104n

Nantucket, 76–77, 94

National Academy of Sciences, 65, 65n

Navy, British, 19, 19n

Navy, Confederate, 63, 63n, 74–75, 122, 129, 129n, 156

Navy, Secretary of, Gideon, Isaac; Welles, John Y.; Southard, Samuel; Toucey, William

A.; Mason, see: Graham

Navy, US: Board of Commissioners, 5; Bureau of Navy Yards and Docks, 7n; Bureau

of Ordnance: John A. Dahlgren appointed chief of, 58; John A. Dahlgren assigned to, 

7; John A. Dahlgren leaves, 69; John A. Dahlgren offered command of, 46, 46n; facilities of, 8, 8n; opposes John A. Dahlgren’s ideas, 15, 15n, 16; plans for reorganization 

of, 8, 8n; Fleet Brigade, 120, 120n; Mediterranean Squadron, 5, 5n; Naval Academy, 

143; Navy Battery, 45, 45n, 57, 57n; South Atlantic Blockading Squadron, 63, 63n, 

71–72, 72n, 78, 80, 110–11, 140, x; South Pacific Squadron, 143

Nevassa, 19, 19n

New Ironsides, 76; attacks Fort Wagner, 76–77; building at Philadelphia, 58; captain

of, 99, 99n; at Charleston, 80, 94; Confederate attack on, 97–98, 97n; damage to, 98, 

98n; departs Charleston, 114, 116, 116n, 144n; draft of, 88; and operations against 

Fort Wagner and Fort Sumter, 83; and operations against Sullivan’s Island, 150; plans 

for use at Charleston, 75; returns north, 122

New Orleans, LA, 55, 55n

New York, NY, 58, 67–68, 67n

New York Navy Yard, 39n, 43

New York Troops: 11th Infantry, 39, 39n; 71st Infantry, 36, 36, 36n, 39, 42, 44–45

Niagara, 16n, 17, 58–59, 59n

Nicolay, John G., 54n

Nipsic, 131, 131n

Norfolk, VA, 55, 140

Norfolk Navy Yard, 33, 33n

North Edisto River, SC, 126–27

Onondaga, 83n

Ordnance, British, 5, 7, 7n, 10, 20–21, 20–22, 21n
Index | 175

Ordnance, French, 4–5, 5n, 21, 21n

Ordnance, Italian, 20–21, 21n

Ordnance, US: 12-pounders, 11; 24-pounders, 11; 32-pounder, 7, 9–10, 9n, 10, 10n,

43, 43; 32-pounders, 12–13; 40-pounder, 21; 42-pounders, 12; boat howitzers, 10–11, 

12, 12n, 15–16, 84; Dahlgren guns, 10, 10n, 13–14, 13n, 15, 16–17, 18, 18n, 20, 39, 

56, 60, 60n, 74, 78, 78n, 84, 105, 117, 117n, 126, 143–44, 144n; John A. Dahlgren’s 

plans for, 12, 13, 13n; for defense of Washington, DC, 33–34; fuses, 7–8; locks, 16; 

mishaps with, 12–13, 13n; primers, 9n, 16; results of trials of, 22, 22n; rifled guns, 21; 

rockets, 7, 7n, 8; sights of, 10, 10n; system of, 10, 11–12

Ossabaw Sound, 121

Osterhaus, Peter, 121, 121n

Paixhans, Henri Joseph, 4–5, 5n

Palmetto State, CSS, 63, 63n, 129, 129n

Paris, France, 4

Parker, Foxhall, 45, 45n, 145, 145n

Passaic: 49, captain of, 99n, 114n; damage to, 66, 67n; design of, 67n; disabled, 94, 

94n; fires on Fort Moultrie, 104; inspected by John A. Dahlgren and Gustavus 

Vasa Fox, 67; John A. Dahlgren boards, 104; and operations against Fort Wagner 

and Fort Sumter, 83

Passaic-class, 60, 60n

Patapsco: attacks Fort Wagner, 76–77; captain of, 99, 99n; casualties aboard, 124n; at

Charleston, 94; engages Confederate batteries, 71; in need of repairs, 94, 94n; operates 

against Fort Wagner, 82, 82n; and operations against Fort Wagner and Fort Sumter, 

83; sunk, 101, 124, 124n

Patent Office, 30

Paulding, Hiram, 33n

Pawnee, 33; assists Marblehead, 106n; at Bulls Bay, 127; carries John A. Dahlgren

to Washington DC, 140; carries Marines, 49, 49n; John A. Dahlgren aboard, 105; 

engages Confederate batteries at Aquia Creek, VA, 41; and expedition to Alexandria, 

VA, 40; and operations at Charleston, SC, 80, 106, 106n, 128, 130, 130n; and 

operations on North Edisto River, 126–27; participates in Stono expedition, 116, 

116n; renders salute to exchanged Union prisoners, 118; sent to Norfolk, 33, 33n; sets 

off torpedo, 80, 80n

Penguin, HM brig, 2, 2n

Pennsylvania Troops, 37, 37n, 68, 68n

Pensacola, 20, 20n, 50, 51, 52, 52n

Penton, Abner C., 83–84, 84n

Perry, 44, 44n

Perry, Matthew C., 14–15, 14n

Philadelphia, 34, 34n, 81, 131n

Philadelphia, PA, 1, 4, 5, 58, 142

Philippe, Louis, comte de Paris, 55n

Pierce, Franklin, 17

Pittsburgh, PA, 65

Plymouth, 18, 18n, 19, 19n, 20
176 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Pocahontas, 40n, 48–49, 49n

Pope, John, 59, 59n

Port-au-Prince, Haiti, 19, 19n

Porter, Benjamin H., 87, 87n

Porter, David Dixon, 63–64, 64n, 78, 78n

Port Royal, SC, 70, 114, 117, 123

Potomac River, 39, 48–49, 54

Potter, Edward E., 128

Powhatan, 30, 34, 34n, 36, 42

Preble, George H., 120n

Preston, Samuel W., 77, 82–83, 82n, 83n, 92–94, 111, 111–12, 112n

Princeton, 58

Quimby, George W., 121n

Racer, 116, 116n

Reagan, John H., 140n

Richmond, 20, 20n, 83n

Ripley, Roswell S., 115–16, 115n, 116n, 150–51

Roanoke, 16n

Roanoke Island, NC, 53, 53n

Rodgers, Christopher Raymond Perry, 71, 71n

Rodgers, George W., 77–78, 78n, 83–84, 84n, 94, 111

Rodgers, John, 56, 56n, 100, 100n

Rowan, James, 1, 1n

Rowan, Martha, 1, 1n

Rowan, Stephen C., 64; attends council of ironclad captains, 114, 114n; attends

council of officers, 99–100, 99n; describes death of James H. Ward, 44n; instructions 

for, 112n; takes temporary command at Charleston, 112; thanked by Congress, 

63–64, 64n

Ryan, John, 138n

St. Augustine’s Creek, GA, 123

St. Johns River, FL, 109

St. Louis, MO, 65

Sangamon, 83n, 114n

San Jacinto, 51

San Juan, Puerto Rico, 19

Saratoga, 19, 19n

Savannah, CSS, 80, 94

Savannah, GA, 121–22, 123, 148

Saxton, Rufus, 57n, 117

Schimmelfennig, Alexander: dies, 138, 138n; health of, 128, 128n; meets with John A.

Dahlgren, 128; and operations near Charleston, 127; participates in Stono expedition, 

116–17, 117n; praises John A. Dahlgren, 117; suggest prisoner exchange, 118; takes 
Index | 177

leave, 138, 138n; and treatment of prisoners, 115n

Schleiden, Rudolf Mathias, 52, 52n

Scott, Winfield, 27, 27n, 30

Seminole, 48–49, 49n

Seward, Frederick, 55n

Seward, William H., 51, 51n, 54n, 56, 56n, 63, 63n

Seymour, Truman, 109, 109n, 155

Shaw, Robert Gould, 77, 77n

Shenandoah, 127, 128

Sherman, William T., 119; accepts Joseph E. Johnston’s surrender, 139, 139n; arrives

in Charleston, 139–40; comments on Charleston operations of John A. Dahlgren, 

147–48; cooperates with John A. Dahlgren, 101; on ironclads, 148; marches through 

the Carolinas, 124–25; meets with John A. Dahlgren, 121, 123, 125, 140, 148; 

moves from Atlanta, 120; plans of, 125, 128; resides at Moultrie Island, 147; secures 

Cumbahee River, 126–27; views of on John A. Dahlgren, 91, 141

Sichel, Julius, 4, 4n

Sickles, Daniel, 118, 118n

Simms, Williams, 3n

Simpson, Edward, 94n, 99n, 114n

Slidell, John, 51, 51n

Slocum, Henry W., 125

Smith, Joseph, 5, 5n, 6, 6n

Sonoma, 114n, 126–27

Southard, Samuel L., 1n

South Carolina (state), 22, 22n

South Mountain, MD, 60n

Stanly, Fabius, 128

Stanton, Edwin M., 54–55, 54n, 55n, 57, 57n, 113n

Stanton, Frederick P., 15, 16–17

Steers, George, 17, 17n

Stephens, Alexander H., 140n

Stevens, Thomas H., 99–100, 99n

Stone, Charles Pomeroy, 49–50, 52–53, 53n

Stono River, SC, 106, 106n, 116–17, 116n, 117n

Stringham, Silas, 63–64, 64n

Strong, George, 68, 68n

Sullivan, James, 98n

Sullivan’s Island, SC, 86, 148; Confederate defenses on, 85, 104, 149–50; description

of, 149; evacuated, 129; fires on Union ships, 88; Union Navy operations against, 71,

150; Union vessels near to, 77–78

Talbot, Thomas, 37n

Tampico, Mexico, 19

Tatnall, Josiah, 122

Tecumseh, 83n, 117–18, 118n, 119, 199n

Tennessee, CSS, 119n
178 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

Thomas Freeborn, 39n, 41, 43, 44n

Thompson, Jacob, 26, 26n

Ticonderoga, 128

Tomb, J. H., 98n

Torpedoes: at Charleston, 130, 148, 152, 156; John A. Dahlgren on, 98, 110; sink

Bibb, 137, 137n; sink Harvest Moon, 130–31, 131n; sink Patapsco, 124, 124n; sink 

Tecumseh, 118n, 119n

Totten, Joseph G., 14n, 153n

Toucey, Isaac, 18n, 19

Transport, CSS, 129n

Trent, British mail steamer, 51n

Troughton, Edward, 3, 3n

Truscott, Peter, 83–84, 84n

Tulifinny River, SC, 120

Turner, J. W., 154–55

Tuscarora, 128, 140, 140n

Van Nostrand, David, xi, xin

Vera Cruz, Mexico, 19

Vicksburg, MS, 69n

Virginia (state), 31, 31n

Virginia, CSS, 6, 6n, 53–54, 54n, 55

Virginia Troops, 40–41, 42, 42n

Vosburgh, Abram, 36, 36n

Wabash, 16n, 70, 71, 71n, 119, 119n

Wainwright, Richard, 47, 47n

Wamsutta, 116n

Wanda, 127

Ward, James H., 39, 42–43, 43, 44n

Warrington, Lewis, 7, 7n, 8, 10, 11, 13–14

Washington, DC: alarm over secession in, 27; Congressional Cemetery, 141; John A.

Dahlgren arrives at, 140; Ulric Dahlgren’s body brought to, 139; John A. Dahlgren 

visits, 112; defenses of, 31; defenses of after Battle of Manassas, 45, 45n; number of 

Union troops in, 44; William H. Seward returns to, 56, 56n; suspected secessionists 

plots in, 38, 38n; Union troops arrive at, 36, 37

Washington Navy Yard: converts steamers to vessels of war, 47; John A. Dahlgren ends

service as commandant of, 58; John A. Dahlgren formally given command of, 46, 

46n; John A. Dahlgren organizes defense of, 34–37; John A. Dahlgren placed in 

command of, 31–32, 32n; Ulric Dahlgren recovers at, 78n; John A. Dahlgren’s office 

at, 8; defenses of, 26–27, 36; Prince de Joinville visits, 47, 47n, 51; Abraham Lincoln 

visits, 29, 39, 41, 44, 52, 58; and manning of in 1861, 25–26, 26n; ordnance facilities 

at, 8, 9, 11, 16, 20; Powhatan at, 36; skirmishes near, 47, 47n; Southern officers at 

resign, 31, 31n; Thomas Freeborn arrives at, 39; troops arrive at, 39, 44; troops depart 

from, 44; James H. Ward’s body arrives at, 43; workers take oath of allegiance, 42
Index | 179

Wassaw Sound, GA, 80, 94

Weehawken: captain of, 99n; damaged and leaking, 94; damaged in battle, 93;

grounds, 85; and operations at Charleston, SC, 73–74, 76–77, 83, 87, 88, 150; sinks, 

105–6, 106n; undergoes repairs, 71–72, 72n

Welles, Gideon, 46; discusses Confederate attack at Charleston, 63n; gives Percival

Drayton command of Pocahontas, 49n; instructions of for John A. Dahlgren, 31–32, 

32n, 35n, 79, 79n, 116n; instructions of for Andrew H. Foote, 48n, 67n; meets to 

discuss countermeasures for Virginia, 54, 54n; offers John A. Dahlgren command of 

Bureau of Ordnance, 46, 46n; orders of for Wabash, 119n; private views on John A. 

Dahlgren, ix; refuses John A. Dahlgren command of Monitor, 54n; on reinforcements 

for John A. Dahlgren, 83n; thanks John A. Dahlgren, 141n; urges Samuel Francis Du 

Pont to attack Charleston, 65n

West Hills, Long Island, 3, 3n

Whelan, William, 55n

White House, 42

White Point, Charleston, 153, 154

Wilkes, Charles, 3, 3n, 51n

Williams, Edward P., 138, 138n

Williams, William, 104n

Willmuth, George, 35, 35n

Wilson, J. P., 142

Winona, 127

Wissahickon, 127

Woodbury, Josiah G., 83–84, 84n

Worden, John L., 54n

Yorktown, VA, 55, 55n

Young, Horatio, 104n

Yulee, David, 13n

Letters in bold are photographs—28

“n” following number is footnote—28n9
180 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren

About the Editor

Peter C. Luebke earned his PhD from the University of Virginia, where he 

studied United States military history. Before joining Naval History and 

Heritage Command (NHHC), he worked in historic preservation at the Virginia 

Department of Historic Resources and authored or coauthored several National 

Register of Historic Places nominations, including that of USS Wisconsin (BB64). He was an associate editor for A Grave Misfortune: The USS Indianapolis 

Tragedy, a recent NHHC publication. Currently, he is an editor for the Naval 

Documents of the American Revolution project at NHHC.
1 | The Autobiography of Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren 1 | The Autobiography of Rear A