New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1863-07-29
DU POINTS ATTACK on CHARLES
TGN.
rou,A !, hive been Reuewcde

Il "a no longer necessary TO keep back report Oh
such Of the proceedings az may interest tao public
The subject Immediately before tho Cou'' ""'
personsl difference between Admir-" Du ons anu
Chief. Engineer Sinners. In investisanng IT, now
aver several important facts relative to the value OF
our on.cad vesses were elected snd we subjon
. repor, Of the evidence relating to them. IL may
no, be out of place say that nearly all the proes-
sional Testimony given corroborates the views Of
Capts. Drayton and W orCen, the only witness ma
terialy differing with them being gentleman con-
nected with the press, whose evidence has already
been printed in tbe New-Yogk papers. Annexed is
the most interesting portion of the unpublished
record:
Ihursdoy, June ll--Capt. John l.. Worden, who
Commanded the original Monitor III her hsh. with
tue Merrimac, was examined.
TESTIMONY o. CAPT. woRDEN
Question. Were yCu engaged III the attack on the
batteries aud forts 9t Charleston 3. e., on the 0h
day OF April, 1868
Answer. / was commanding the U. S. ron-clsd
steamer Noniauk.
O. Who SO ne time was the Commander in Chief
Of the South Blockadng Squadron; and WAC was
the commander Of the naval ioreeo that made the AT
tack on Charleston
A. Rear-Adplral s. +. Dr. Pont.
Q. Dovo1 know Chief EOglueer Alban r.. S,i-
mers; and il yea, how long lave YOU known him
A 90 kboW LIN, anu INV hno"u ii'" "'0a'
two years.
Q. Have YOU ever slid to Mr.. Sinners that The a.
tack of tie 7th Of April 1862 ought u have been re-
pewei, or words TO that effect
4. No, Sir, never.
.. pIa you OF ever state TO Mr.. Sinners thai the
iron-clad vessels engaged In making the ATTACK on
the iorta 81 Charleston the 9Th of April, 1903,
were in tt conGiton 10 renew the attack. or words
10 tbe' effect
A. NJ Sir; never said ANYTHING OF the kind
Nv. hat A "A 10
the attack Ii ordered 20 do so; but never made
that statement 10 Mr. sinners, that recolieot.
O Did YOU ever say 10 Dir. sinners, or IN his
presence, that tue cOmman deTs OF the sa IFon'!ao
vessels were after the attack Aforesaid, bot for re-
newiDg the eng cement, or WORDS TO that elect
A. No, Sir, newer. 81
@. Were, or not, the monitors or iron-clad We sells
10 as good condition on Wednesday, the 9Th day OF
Aprl 1863 after they mad undergone some slignt re-
pairs t. renew the attack they had been 10 COM
nence Il the day before
A. didn't snow anything about The condition OF
the other vessels from ny own observation; II was
reported by TIE commanders OF some OF them tho'
their vss7els were very considerably camaged-that
some OF their guus disabled; tie impression
left upOn INV mind was thai they were not ia con
dition 20 renew the attacl the next day; AIN con-
viuced. however, that with tie batterlnC they he'd
received thew could not have been III rs good con-
dion sier repairs 10 resist shot rs they were be-
fore they went into the engagement on the 9Th; cv
erv shot received by vessel OF that doscDpton
must weake. her to q greater or less degree, and
render IL less CAPABLE Of resisting shot might ssy,
however ttat went ABOARD the Weehawkcn for
very few moments; did lot examine her critically
In was within dsy or two after The lights she had
received shot the side upper woIks-the side
armor-vbich had penetrated the five thickDesses o.
iron and striped them off, leaving the wood back.
co. b3re: and also shot which had penetrated
t1rough tho nrmor OF the deck and partially broken
through the wood; ana the jacket OF Ter smoke
stack had been peuslrcted by shot: mean by the
Jacket the lDpregbaDe Dart Of the smoko-s1ick
these are ali the Injuries l examined rs lar - Sc
was concerned; size had received otber shot, winch
had affected other parts OF her armor somewhat, but
not 30 decidedly as those have mentioned
O. Had he injuries TO the W eehaw Ken which you
snuaerate been repaired ct the time you were On
board of her
A. No, Sir. | think not.
O. Was on not the attack rads on the forts and
batteries of Charleston On the 7th OF April last an
sarnes: one
A. Very decidedly. 1 should cay.
O. Conld or not in your opinion, the Monitors
have gone into Charleston spite Of guns torpedoes
and distinctions either on the 7th Gay o. April last
or on the following dag, had The attack been re-
newed 2
A.. think not, Sir.
@. State If you know any reasons why the attack
of the 7ih Of April loG3, the iorts Of Charleston
should not have been renewed on The s'hi
A. an and was Of the opinion that renewal OF
the al lack Oh the 9Th would have been likely 10 have
resu;ed in very Ferrous dsaster 10 the iTou-csdf
after feeling the weight OF the eneuys lire on tire
7th, and looking 81 the distractions, winch were q
Q very formidable character, thought that any al
tempt break through the obsiructlors would have
got the propelers OF the ships involved IN the net
works Il was known the enemy had there; they
would have become interchangeable and 20 injured by
sorpeioes that they would have sunk Al the harbOr
OF have ID len into the euemys hands ana cd not
think the risk Of such disaster as justin .ble IN
der the circumstances; Rebel iron cisds were lying
behind the obstruc ions; any OF our vessels that had
become disabled would have been exposed 10 attack
from them.
@. Did Rear Admiral Du Pon, do or say anything
which ed yon 10 think he was prejudiced agains.
item on the 7ih OF April isft1 II yea, relate what
he then said did which led you 10 think bin preju'
diced against them
A. He has mover said or done anything which
would lead me to believe hs had any Gdcc against
them.
q. We're or not the various commanders Of the
iropclads engaged in the attack OF the 'tn Of AQr
last called together board the lronsdss on the oh
OF April laS: by AdGiral Du Pont for any purpose I
A. They were Lot, 70 my knowledge.
q. BY tie sccused.-You have stated that upon
the side OF the Weehsw ken tho shot had pens-
tratsd through all the i've inch plates, exposing
the wooden backing. Will you please state whether
you Observed particularly whether more than one
sho. had struck 90 near this torn place as 10 have
had Al eec. upon it. and will you explain how near
the TOP Of the vessel this shot shots struck, aud
wheeler 10 your opinion, another shot striking the
same place would lave penetrated the vesse
A. did not see taat tkere was mole than one
sho, supposed it 20 Do the eftec. o; only one shot,
wilton, examining cri.icaily u struck near the top
OF the eide srno. gear .ho deck; don't think all
o,hyr sho, striEidg on the same place wolld have
rshetrsied. il would 20: hsvo broken through tic
sit, Of tho -essel; Tho pans are too we'll braced 1t
would have probably penetrated sufficiently to have
toiu up the deck plating TO Considerable extent.
q. BY the sccused.-Wss there "a informal meet
In0 q tie Commanders OF the Iscn-cads on board
ths AdmirAgs weasel CT toe evening Of April 9TH I