The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-06-03
mo. 10.

tered at no earlier date is the subject OF ano.
Their subsequent specification, and will be no.
| ticed hereafter.
| 4. 1t is admitted by the said Charles Cor
don as is before stated, that the crew of tho
| said frigate Chesapeake were not called to
quarters more than three times prior to her
sailing for sea. And the court have ALREADY,
stated, that the said Charlie Gordon was not
bound to call them to quarters oftener than
this after they were quartered. The court
are therefore of opinion that this fourtl,
specification is not proved, again repeating,
that the fact of the ships company not be-
| ing quartcred at an earlier date is the SUI
lject of another subsequent specification, and
VIII be duly noticed when they come TO speak
| of that -
$. It is admitted by the said Charles Cor
don, that from the first day of May to the sixth
day OF June. 1907, the crew of the said fri
gate We're not quartered But it appears
| ec INC eourt ~ the evidence as is before sta
ted, that daring this period there were bur
twelve guns on board the Chesapeake. IL
moreover appears that her complement of
men was not complete. And various other.
circumstances also appear to the court, that
| they viii notice hereafter, which the conre
are OF opinion are sufficient to absoive the said
Charles Gordon from all censure OH this ac-
Count While therefore the court are of o.
| pinion that this fifth specification is fully pro-
to the said Charles Gordon on this aoonnt.
g. 1t is admitted by the said Charles Cor
| don, that the crew of the said fripate Ches..
apeake were quartered out few DAYS be-
tore she proceeded to sea. But it appears
to the court by the evidence, that the crew
OF the Chesapeake as allowed by the 90
| Fs'a:aeat was never Completed even when
she did proceed to sea. That in order to
get her full complement of men her rendez-
vous were Kept open, and new recruits were
received almost daily, up to the period other
saiiing. nat her crew were uncommoplv-
Sickly; and that from the particular sitnati-
on OF the ship at that time many desertions
might nave been expected, and actually did
happen. Under such circumstances the
I oouit are,o OF oI,inon there was 40 obligation
upon the said Charles Gordon to Quarter his
men earlier thanhe did. While therefore the,
court are OF opinion that this sixth spcci6ca-
toms iully proved, they do not impute any
neglect OF duty 10 said Charles Gordon on
this account.
z. 1t is admitted by the said Charles Cor
| dQp as mas been before stated, that the crew
OF the said friSate were not quarterc,l until
the 18th day OF June three davs before She,
sailed for sea. But under all the circumstan-
ccs stated IN the remarks of the court ui5oi,
the preceding specification, the court are of o.
pinion that neither the regulations of the navy
OF tnc usage IN such cases, made it the duty
Iot the said Charles Gordon to have omar
4 tered the crew more early. And therefore.
we'd.
g. 1t is admitted by the said Charles Cor
aon, that he did not see that the guns of the,
SAID trigate were securely fitted in their car
ages. But the conrt are far from acknoIedr.
ing that 1T was the duty of the commander of a
ship OF war personally to see to things of this
sort. 1t would be impossible for him to per-
form all such minute duties as this. The duty
Oh d coihmanderis to give proper orders to- tho
proper ofncers toperform such duties who arr,
to report to him what they have done. and
when done, 1t is the duty ofthe commander.
TO VISIT and generally examine the manner.
OF the execution. If there are defects. it is
the duty OF the particular officer who has
the work In charge to report them. Tho
! commander is not responsible for such neg
I iects, unless they are reported to him. or are,
Oh nature which ought to be observed by
2 a general superintendent. In this instance
t some OF the guns of the Chesapeake were
not securely and properly fitted. But it app
4 pears to the court by the evidence, that the
t quarter deck guns were fitted after plan
f devised at the navy yard, and adopted by
= the said James Barron, and that these guns
were htted under his own immediate insDec-
ton. OF course the court Cannot consider
the said Charles Gordon as Responsible for
4
The defects in the firing of the main deck
f guns were OF a nature which would not be OF.
served by visiting officer, without mi
$ mute examination. II appears to the Court
that the said Charles Gordon ordered them
t to be fitted by the gunner, whose particular
duty it was to fit them.--That these euDs
were fitted b. that officer, under the SUPER
attendance OF the first lieutenant. That aIl
OF them had been tried before the shin pro-
ccedca &c sca. That the ore, had been cal
, led to quarters three times before she sailed
and that no defects in their fitments were
/ then ever observed by any person, or ever
, reported to the said Charles Gordon. While
r therefore the court arc og opinion that this
eighth specification is fully proved, they do
not impute any neglect OF duty to the said
Charles Gordon on this account.
: 9. Itappears to the court, that the spurce.
l OF the trigate Chesapeake were originally
too large. That this was discovered oF
7 Monnt Vernon, as the ship came down the
= Potomac--and that the spunges were imme-
dlately reduced by order ofthe said Charles
, Gordon, and made of the proper size. That
the wads, some few of them possibly were
; rather to large, but that these wads wero
} made at the Navy Yard for the guns of the
Chesapeake, aud received ON board bv her.
NNN