The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1898-01-07
NoRFoLB VIRGIN "a 81: FRIDAY. sJAN UAFY y. 1sss


making an iron-clad vessel OF her.
What meant to say in the remarks
referred TO and still maintain Is that
TO Colonel John NJ. Brooke and TO him
alone the South is Indebted for the
Merrimac such as she was.
AIter arrived in Richmond in NAV.
1851, and while hating between two
opinions as to whether to so into the
navy or army, was sent for and Offer
ed "a commission the same In rank I
mad resigned In the United States navy
ana told when said, "the Confedersacy
had no navy" that lieutenant Com
inander Brooke had ben appointed the
head of n board TO rebuild the Merit
mac and make a ram. of her, according
70 ms plans. which were described to
me, ana that as l had made a cruise
IA me snip during her last voyage), 1
could DC OF more service In connection
with the rebuilding of this vessel than
In any other way, and Commander
Brooke would have me ordered to the
vessel at once. AT that time nv rccol
lection is that Lieutenant Commander
Brooke was the head and front of nj,
enterprise connected with the navy de-
parement and next to the Secretary
unset ana 1t was very apparent that
Mr. Ma,aory' In common with all the
naval officers, had the greatest cor
ndence In this officer. When I reached
the Norfolk navy yard, where I was
directed TO report Immediately on re-
celving my commission, I found Ma ior
WIN. p. Williamson, chief engineer of
the yard. He was soon afterward re-
ilered and ordered to Richmond as tho
,leau OF the bureau of steam engineer
ing just organized. -
The general design of tho A1nrr;n,,c
was all right, to whomever Tho honor
belongs, but I will say here that some
ol the details were not carried out
Wfth the intelligence they might have
oeen. Ihe engineer officers particularly
criticised the short clump OF cast-iron
placed on her bow, and ] rccoIloct
chiet Engineer Quinn, of the navy
progressing when he saw it being at
tachea 10 the vessel, that the very
LIME would happen that did, i.e, that
IL would be knocked off in her first
collision" Had the design of q wrought
IRON peak as Mr.. Quinn suggested and
WIS afterwards attached to the YES
sell 'been built Into her in the first
pace on the second days fight with
the Monitor Captain Jones, when he
rammed the Monitor. would have had
no fears for his prov, and would have
driven into her with force as Buchanan
ula IN the case OF the Cumberland the
DAY before. l would be sorry TO rive
marks. but 1t Is time the history of these
events should he written, If for no other
reason, to Vindicate the action OF those
Two great naval heroes, Franklin pu
chanan and Captain II. Jones. or the
former 1t has been said he was fool
nardy for driving so hard into the
Guniherlanu as to break off the bcall
on his vessel. and of Captain Jones that
he did not strike the Monitor hard
prov on the Merrimac there would
nave been no need fer such criticism.
me Merrimac could easily have been
eNtricated from the Cumberland without
the loss or her metallic prov and ac
cordinE to the opinion expressed nv olu
the officers of the AIerrimac regarding
the second days fight the Monitor would
nave Deen sent to the bottom when
Jones struck her. He did have the oppor
tunlty once and only once; but, as
stated before, having nothing but his
wooden stem left to burt with il nat,,r-
ally made him cautious, as he was
AFRAID OF damaging his own shin.
W nile writing the foregoing | am in
receipt of copy OF the drawings. speci-
ications, claims and letters patent
granted to John NJ. Brooke ihy the Con
iederate States Patent Office, signed
ny i. II. Watts, attorney general and
hulus IA. Rhodes, commissioner of pat
ents. Tine drawing shows the case
mated and submerged ends of n ynssn,
ana Is an exact counterpart of the
Merrimac. also copy of the drawing Of
me plans proposed by Mr.. Porter.
winch shows simply a shield over a huIl
CUT OF abruptly at the end, and with
out the submerged bow and STERN
adopted and used in the case of the
Merrimac. The advantages of the
Bfooke over the Porter plan Is first
ny extending the bow under water and
bringing II to fine point. finer lines
are given to the vessel, making bie-b
speed possible. and secondly I'm the cas-
OF ramming, the point OF actual colli-
SION Is remote from the cascmate and
battery, and. again, the exact locality
Of the prov is concealed from the enc
my. The Mcrrimac would proba bly
never have had an opportunity IN
strike the Monitor had 1t not been that
inc Prov of the former vessel was out
OF slght. II records are worth anything.
ana all records referred to here are on
me al the naval record Office in Wash
inEton. 1t seems TO me this question has
been settled
Regarding the other statements Of
your correspondent, would only say
mat SIMPLY repeated what 7 had been
told regarding the sinking of the shin
nut IL Is imma;crial whether the
vessel was scuttled by holes being
bored into her or otherwise. The facts
remain that she was scubtIed and also
mat her upper works We're burnt Off
The object of the interview quoted from
was simply to get description cf the
tight from one who had ben engaged
in 1t on the Mcrrimac and singular TO
say, though the article appeared in the
leading papers all over the country, and
nave received good many letters
rom those who wore the blue as well
as those who wore the gray. the ONLY