The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-02-21
nsrNKrNc rHE MERRIMAC.v

to those aboard the Monitor has doubtless had much to do with 1t. The greater the deeds performed on that vessel, the greater the pension money. es- pecialiy to one whose eyes were damaged while in the turret during the fight This latter claim of damage done by and to the widely known officer in question is a matter of record.
 One of the greatest misstatements about this matter that has recently appeared was in an Associated Press dispatch from New York which appeared in a great many papers yesterday morning, The Ad- vertiser included.
 The statement in question is found in the notice of the death of certain Claude De Lorraine, of whom 1t Is said he was chief engineer of the Monitor when that vessel sank the Merrimac during the civil war" So at last the teachings of Northern histories, especially school his- tories. have borne fruit-the Monitor sank the Merrimacw Mirabile dictu. wouldn't there have been great oodles" of prize money for those aboard the Mon- itor if 1t had only been known sooner that the Monitor sank the Merrimac?" Oh, but wouldn't there thought It is pitiable to think of those poor fellows on the Monitor going to their graves with
 nothing but pension money, whereas they might have had great chests full of prize money as well, for sinking" that terrible Merrimac (virginia.)
 To read accounts emanating from certain section, one might fancy that the Virginia Casually known still as the Mer- rimac) was destroyed, or just about de- stroyed. by the Monitor, but was such the case? It was after the sinking of the Cumberland by the Virginia and the de- struction of the Congress, which after running up two white flags to half-mast as a token of surrender. after receiving the terrible fire of the Virginia, fired upon boats sent to her, and scattering conster- nation on all sides among the Federals, that the battle between her and the Mon itor took place. To describe it as an un- decided battle may be correct, but be it remembered by the boys of the South that it was the Monitor which first with drew. in the ending of that battle, get ting into shallow water where the Vir- ginia could not follow. and that the vir- ginia did not retire until after the Mon itor had done so, and then slowly, after failing to coax the Monitor again to com bat There was some damage done to the guns of the Virginia, but the records show that this was done during her pre- vious combat with the vessels of the Fed eral fleet, and not with the Monitor. It was a wooden vessel of the Federal fleet which did that damage and not the iron clad.
 Another fact which one is not apt to
 find in Northern histories is that after this combat the Virginia stood forth for several days. challenging the Monitor to another trial of strength--which the lat ter did not accept, and never did accept She seemed to find the guns of Fortress Monroe, under which she took refuge much more pleasant companions than those on the Virginia, so she stayed out there. If the Virginia was so badly in- jured, why did not the Monitor follow up the work when she had such excellent opportunities? Those in command found that 1t was much easier to claim than to demonstrate.
 The Virginia at a later date was blown up, but it was done by Confederate hands Co prevent her from becoming a trophy of war. No alien hand took part in her destruction. Anyone desiring fuller in formation upon these matters will find the document in 'The Confederate States Navy by J. T. Scharf, and also some thing about the evacuation of Richmond, and the blowing up of the Confederate vessels in Admiral semmes's thrilling book, Memoirs of Service Ahoat."
 There have really been three "sinhin0s of the Merrimac." The first was the sinking of the war vessel of that name bv the Federals to keep her from falling into the hands of the Confederates. These latter gentlemen who by the way were very enterprising and industrious and have about revolutionlsed modern naval warfare in giving ironclads,. torpedoes in their present efficiency and submarine boats to the world, did raise the Merri- mac. remodelled her and gave her the name Virginia, though the old name is best known. The second sinking of the Merrimac" was done by them. The third sinking of the Merrimac was done at Santiago, Cuba. in recent years, by Ala bama's splendid and chivalric son. Rich mond P. Hobson.
 It is significant of a reunited country that In the new warship Alabama, now in Alabama waters, will be found combined the form of armor in both the Virginia and the Monitor. Any one observing the picture of the vessel will see there carried out the idea of the defensive armor as found upon the sides of the Virginia and also the turrets of the Monitor type of vessel Each was effective. Combined. may they ever be more so In her case
 It is a revelation of the passage of time when We remember that the "Alabama' and the "Kearsarge." namesakes of the combatants in the fierce naval duel off Cherbourg harbor in 1864 are now sister
 ships in the United States navy, and it
 may not be without further interest to
 some to mention the fact that the chap
 lain. Rev. W. G. Isaacs, upon the ''Kear-