102 CONFEDERATE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR FARRAGUT’S SUCCESS.

stated that fire-barges would be sent down regu-larly every two hours throughout the night, andas none had been sent up to that hour (9 : 30 P. M.),he left, informing these officers that the matterwould be attended to as soon as he arrived onboard. Hour after hour passed, and not a bargewas lighted. In consequence of this neglect, theriver remained in complete darkness the entirenight. The bombardment continued all night, andtoward morning grew furious. At 3 : 30 A. M. thelarge vessels of the enemy were observed in mo-

tion. General Duncan then made this, his lastand final appeal to Captain Mitchell:

“Fort Jackson, La., 3:30 a. m., April 24th, 1862.—Captain : As I anticipated, and informed you yesterday,the enemy are taking up their positions at the presentmoment, with their large ships, on the 8t. Philip shore,to operate against Fort Jackson. They are placingthemselves boldly, with their lights at their mast-heads.You are assuming a fearful responsibility if you do notcome at once to our assistance with the Louisiana andthe fleet. I can say no more.”

Mitchell did not come, but Farragut did.

II.— BY JOHN K. MITCHELL, COMMODORE, C. S. N.

T he article by Admiral D. D. Porter, entitled“The Opening of the Lower Mississippi,”published in “The Century” magazine for April,1885, is open to adverse criticism, and particu-larly where he indulges in personal reflectionsupon the officers of my command. He claims that

“one fact only was in our [Farragut’s] favor, and thatwas the division of their [the Confederate] forces underthree different heads, which prevented unanimity of ac-tion. In every other respect the odds were against us.”

But taking Admiral Porter’s own showing of thearmaments, it appears that the weight of one en-tire round of projectiles was approximately: Con-federate, 7139 pounds ; Union, 20,224 ; makinga difference in favor of the Union force of 13,085pounds, or nearly 3 to 1 in weight of projectiles.

The weight of one entire round of all the Confed-erate forces afloat (including the 10 guns of theLouisiana that could not be used) was 1700 pounds,and did not equal one round of an y one of 4 of the firstclass United States sloops of war, as, for instance,the Pensacola, which was I860 pounds. The ord-nance of the United States fleet was the heaviestknown to any navy of that day; her vessels wereinferior to those of no othernationin construction,equipment, and speed, and were manned by offi-cers and crews of unsurpassed courage, skill, train-ing, and discipline. The Confederate armamentwas composed of the old discarded guns of theUnited States army and navy, many of whichwere old smooth bores, rifled or reamed out to alarger caliber; or, if newly east, made from scrapiron, insufficiently tested and inspected, and so,with good reason, distrusted by the crews thatworked them. Admiral Porter further says :

“ It is generally conceded by military men that 1 gunin a lort is about equal to 5 on board of a wooden ship,especially when, as in this case, the forces afloat areobliged to contend against a 31^-knot current in a chan-nel obstructed by chains and fire-rafts.” [See note, p. 76.]

Nowhere is it shown that any obstructions wereencountered by the fleet in its passage by the forts,and it appears that the Hartford was the only ves-sel that got foul of a fire-raft. As to the Louisiana ,Admiral Porter states:

“ The Louisiana remained tied up to the bank, whereshe could not obstruct the river or throw the Union fleetinto confusion while passing the forts.”

The fact is that the Louisiana , being immovable,could use only her 3 bow guns and 3 of her star-board broadside guns, and those only as the ves-sels of the enemy passed directly in front of them,for they could be trained but 5 degrees either way.

Her heterogeneous crew was sent on board in lessthan four days before the action; there was notime for the men even to know each other at thesame gun, no time for training or practice, butthey were occupied during this brief period inmounting or remounting their guns, few of themhaving ever seen a cannon fired.

In his account of the capitulation in the cabinof the Harriet Lane, Admiral Porter says:

“As we were about to sign the terms, I was quite sur-prised to find that, it was not expected that the vesselsof war were to be included in the terms agreed to bythe Confederate officers.”

“Surprised,” indeed! when that very morningColonel Higgins had sent his letter of the same day(April 28th), offering the “ surrender of these forts ”(Jackson and St. Philip), which he commanded;and closing with the words, ‘ ‘ we have no control overthe vessels afloat.” [See note, p. 51.] Moreover, inthe terms presented to Duncan when he went onboard, which the Admiral says he had preparedbefore, nothing is said of the surrender of the navalforces. Such a contradictory statement, however,has its parallel in the assertion as to the effect ofthe explosion of the Louisiana , that it“fairly shook us all out of our seats and threw theHarriet Lane over on her side, but we finished the terms.. . . The Louisiana was blown up just before reachingthe flotilla.”

Lieutenant William M. Bridges, Adjutant of PortJackson, now (1887) aresident of Richmond, Va. ,was present in the cabin at the signing of thecapitulation, and he denies, most emphatically,that such an effect was produced on the HarrietLane and on those seated in her cabin.

My belligerent rights were not impaired or sus-pended by the surrender of General Duncan and theflying of a flag of truce, to which I was not a party;and had the effect of the explosion been to destroythe Harriet Lane and the entire Federal force, thelaws of w'ar would have justified it.

As to my difference of opinion with GeneralDuncan: naval officers ought surely to be consid-ered better judges of how the forces and appliancesat their command should be managed than armyofficers. The conduct of the naval forces, by thefinding of a Confederate court of inquiry, was fullysustained, and the court prolonged its session twomonths, vainly waiting for the appearance ofGeneral Lovell and Lieut.-Colonel Higgins, whowere summoned to testify before the court at myinstance, they being the most prominent complain-ants against the Navy , General Duncan having died.