The U.S. Brig Oneida: a Design & Operational History
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The War of 1812 Magazine Issue 19 December 2012 The U.S. Brig Oneida A Design & Operational History by Gary M. Gibson “A perfect slug, even going free, and could hardly be persuaded to beat to windward at all.”1 “A warm little brig, … but as dull as a transport… and would not travel to windward.”2 The U.S. Brig Oneida A Design & Operational History .................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 2 Origin .............................................................................................................................. 2 Design.............................................................................................................................. 4 Development ................................................................................................................... 6 Construction .................................................................................................................. 10 Armament ...................................................................................................................... 13 Out of Service................................................................................................................ 17 Preparing for War .......................................................................................................... 28 Mrs. McCormick’s Trunks ............................................................................................ 31 Woolsey’s War .............................................................................................................. 33 Press Wars - Oneida vs. Royal George ......................................................................... 38 Fighting the Provincial Marine ..................................................................................... 39 The Oneida’s Impact on the War in 1812 ..................................................................... 45 Operational History 1813 .............................................................................................. 47 Operational History 1814 .............................................................................................. 59 Post-War ........................................................................................................................ 63 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... 66 Reference Abbreviations ............................................................................................... 67 References ..................................................................................................................... 68 The War of 1812 Magazine Issue 19 December 2012 Introduction The United States Navy brig Oneida saw more combat with the British than any other American warship during the War of 1812.3 In 1808, following HMS Leopard’s attack on the frigate Chesapeake the previous year and the resulting laws prohibiting trade with the British, President Thomas Jefferson and Secretary of the Navy Richard Smith decided a small naval force was needed on lakes Ontario and Champlain. This led to the construction of an 18-gun brig, the Oneida, at Oswego, New York. This was the start of a naval arms race on Lake Ontario between Great Britain and the United States that did not end until after the War of 1812. By 1815 both sides were building ships-of-the-line as large or larger than any on the Atlantic. Origin In December 1807, reacting to the increased tensions between the United States and Great Britain and a fear that war may result, Congress authorized the president to Cause to be built, or purchased, armed and equipped, a number not exceeding one hundred and eighty-eight gun boats, for the better protection of the ports and harbors of the United States, and for such other purposes as in his opinion the public service may require.4 This act was the result of a lengthy debate that the first session of the tenth Congress had been conducting since it convened in October.5 Throughout the debate the need to expand the navy focused on the Atlantic and Gulf ports such as New York and New Orleans. The situation along the border with British Canada was referred to only twice, on 30 November, when Representative Gordon Mumford of New York The Oneida as built, with 18, 24-pound carronades and no told members of the House that pivot gun, as it might have appeared sailing off Sackets the British in Canada had “the Harbor in November 1812. Painting by Peter Rindlisbacher. whole of their naval force on the lakes prepared for war.” Later that same day, New York Representative Barent Gardenier, in response to a feeling that there was still hope war could be averted, asked Could gentlemen indulge in hope, when they heard that the British vessels on the Lakes had been armed? That the British forces in Canada were increased and concentrated? That the fortifications at Quebec were repairing? 6 On 18 November 1807 Secretary of the Navy Robert Smith presented Congress with a list of the number of gunboats needed at various ports, stating that a deficiency of 188 gunboats existed. None of the ports mentioned by the secretary were on the lakes.7 Subsequently, the act to authorize construction of these gunboats at a cost of up to $852,500 passed both the Senate and the House of Representatives by wide margins.8 Page 2 The U. S. Brig Oneida – A Design & Operational History The War of 1812 Magazine Issue 19 December 2012 This act, however, failed to specify where these gunboats were to be built, where they were to be stationed afterwards, or even a definition of the term “gunboat.” At the same time Congress was considering additional gunboats they were debating an embargo act, prohibiting commerce with foreign nations. Section 7 of the new act provided That the commanders of the public armed vessels and gunboats of the United States shall, as well as the commanders or masters of the revenue cutters, and revenue boats, be authorized, and they are hereby authorized, to stop and examine any vessel, flat or boat, belonging to any citizen of the United States, either on the high seas, or within the jurisdiction of the United states, or any foreign vessel within the jurisdiction of the United States, which there may be reason to suspect to be engaged in any traffic or commerce, or in the transportation of merchandise, of either domestic or foreign growth or manufacture, contrary to the provisions of this act.9 This gave the United States Navy authority to enforce the embargo act everywhere, including on the lakes. In effect it required them to do so. In the course of this debate, Representative William Kirkpatrick of New York, whose home was in Salina (present day Syracuse) read a petition from a citizens’ committee from Jefferson County, along the Canadian border, stating the dangers the petitioners would be exposed to in case of incursions by hostile Indians or troops from the British provinces of Canada, and asking that a military station be established “at some convenient place on the River St. Lawrence, and such other measures adopted for their protection and safety as, in the wisdom of Congress, the urgency of the case may require.”10 In addition, beginning in 1808 the customs collectors at ports on lakes Ontario and Champlain began complaining to Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin that the lack of revenue cutters or boats on those lakes was making it very difficult to prevent goods from being smuggled into or out of Canada in violation of the new embargo law. While some collectors, such as Augustus Sacket at Sackets Harbor, were authorized to purchase small boats which would suffice close to shore or on the St. Lawrence River, on the open lake something much larger was needed. 11 By the spring of 1808 it was clear to President Jefferson and Navy Secretary Smith that some attention had to be given to the naval defense of the border with British Canada. If this was not done, war with Great Britain would leave the northern frontier too vulnerable to attack. The upper Great Lakes had one armed vessel, the army transport brig Adams built near Detroit in 1797, but lakes Ontario and Champlain had none. Unfortunately, at this point the written record loses focus. Subsequent events make it clear that the Jefferson administration decided to use part of the money appropriated to build gunboats to provide for “public armed vessels” on lakes Ontario and Champlain. Lake Champlain, being long but very narrow, would be best served by building two small gunboats on that lake. Those gunboats, however, would have the same limitations on Lake Ontario as the small boats already authorized by the Treasury Department “on a lake as turbulent as the ocean.”12 While Congress never specifically approved constructing a regular warship on Lake Ontario, President Jefferson and Secretary Smith concluded that the gunboat act was vague enough to allow it to be built and paid for. The U. S. Brig Oneida – A Design & Operational History Page 3 The War of 1812 Magazine Issue 19 December 2012 There is, however, nothing yet found in the written record that details how, or even exactly when, this decision was reached. If Jefferson and Smith gave any thought to how the British in Canada would react to this shipbuilding plan, history has not recorded it. If Secretary of State James Madison’s advice was solicited, that too is unrecorded. Lake