The Civil War Naval Campaign for Memphis

To Retain Command of the Mississippi To Retain Command of the Mississippi The Civil War Naval Campaign for Memphis Edward B. McCaul Jr. University of Tennessee / Knoxville u Copyright © 2014 by The University of Tennessee Press / Knoxville. All Rights Reserved. Manufactured in the United States of America. First Edition. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data McCaul, Edward B., 1951- To retain command of the Mississippi : the Civil War naval campaign for Memphis / Edward B. McCaul Jr. — First edition. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-62190-135-8 1. Memphis, Battle of, Memphis, Tenn., 1862 2. Mississippi River Valley—History—Civil War, 1861-1865—Naval operations. I. Title. II. Title: Civil War naval campaign for Memphis. E473.5.M33 2014 973.7'32—dc23 2014023334 To my father, Edward B. McCaul, who served in the United States Navy during World War II. Contents Preface xi Acknowledgments xxi Chapter 1. The Importance of the Mississippi River 1 Chapter 2. The Confederate River Defense Fleet 9 Chapter 3. The Union Fleets 27 Chapter 4. The Situation 77 Chapter 5. The Battle of Plum Point 95 Chapter 6. The Fall of Fort Pillow 115 Chapter 7. The Battle of Memphis 127 Chapter 8. The Aftermath 145 Chapter 9. Rams versus Guns 155 Conclusion: The Impact of the Battle of Memphis 163 Appendix A. History of the Boats 167 Appendix B. Biographies 173 Appendix C. Acting Volunteer Lieutenant Commander William R. Hoel 179 Notes 185 Bibliography 233 Index 241 Illustrations Figures USS General Bragg 20 Monarch Ramming the General Beauregard during the Battle of Memphis 21 USS General Price 22 General Beauregard and the General Jeff Thompson after the Battle of Memphis 23 General Van Dorn, General Sumter, General Beauregard, and the General Jeff Thompson after the Battle of Memphis 24 Construction of One of the City Class Gunboats 52 USS Benton in 1864 53 USS Cairo 55 Bow View of the USS Cairo at the Vicksburg National Military Park 55 Interior View of the Cairo’s Forward Starboard Gun 56 Starboard Side of the Cairo 56 Cairo’s Vulnerable Unarmored Stern and Its Paddlewheel 56 Ellet’s Ram Fleet from a Drawing by Alexander Simplot 65 Mortar Boat and the Timberclad USS Tyler as Drawn by J. Muller 72 Battle of Plum Point, Present Day 96 Battle of Plum Point, Flooded River Bank, Present Day 97 Battle of Fort Pillow, 1st Position 104 Battle of Fort Pillow, 3rd Position 106 The Great Naval Battle before Memphis, June 6, 1862 143 View of the “Battlefield” from the Memphis Bluff 144 Rear Admiral Charles Henry Davis 173 Charles Ellet Jr. 175 Commodore Joseph Edward Montgomery 177 Acting Volunteer Lieutenant William R. Hoel 180 Acting Volunteer Lieutenant Commander William R. Hoel’s jacket 184 Maps Plum Point and Fort Pillow, 1891 xiv Plum Point and Fort Pillow, 1986 xv Memphis, Tennessee, 1891 xvi Memphis, Tennessee, 1986 xvii Mississippi River and Tributaries 3 Battle of Plum Point: Sighting of the Confederate Fleet 99 Battle of Plum Point: Initial Phase 100 Battle of Plum Point: Ramming of the Cincinnati by the General Bragg 102 Battle of Plum Point: The Union Flotilla Reacts 103 Battle of Plum Point: Ramming of the Mound City by the General Van Dorn 105 Battle of Plum Point: Arrival of the Main Union Force 106 Battle of Plum Point: Withdrawal of the Confederate Fleet 107 Battle of Memphis: The Thompson and Lovell Open Fire 133 Battle of Memphis: Queen of the West and Monarch Charge the Confederate Fleet 136 Battle of Memphis: Queen of the West Rams the Lovell 137 Battle of Memphis: The Confederate Fleet Reacts to the Attack of the Ellet Rams 138 Battle of Memphis: The Confused Melee 140 Battle of Memphis: Defeat of the Confederate Fleet 142 Preface Take the battle [Battle of Memphis], together with its results, it was one of the handsomest achievements of the war, but it did not receive that general notice which it deserved. —Admiral David D. Porter1 A number of battles were fought for control of the Mississippi River, and much has been written about them. The Battle of Memphis was one such battle; however, this battle was pivotal, as the results deter- mined the course of the Civil War on the Mississippi. Unfortunately, as Admiral David Dixon Porter acknowledged, the Battle of Memphis has never received the notice it deserves—a belief that remains true today. Although most authors writing about naval warfare on the Mississippi do in fact discuss the battle, no one—in my opinion—has given it ad- equate attention. Two reasons account for this lack of critical consider- ation: the battle was decided very quickly and was very one sided. Had it been a longer, bloodier fight with substantial losses on both sides, the battle would have received more attention; but it was not. Because the battle was so one sided, the results appear to have been foreordained and, thus, are considered by many to be insignificant. However, the battle could have easily been a Confederate victory—or, if the battle had never occurred, the Confederate River Defense Fleet could have survived as a “fleet in being.” In either case, future Union operations in the Mississippi River valley would have been severely hindered. But, the battle was a decisive Union victory that allowed the Union to continue its march down the Mississippi. As with many historic events, the Battle of Memphis and its im- mediate predecessor, the Battle of Plum Point, have been subjected to many misconceptions over the years. Unfortunately, many of these in- accuracies endure as fact. Information about the battles is available in the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion, The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, autobiographies, biographies, letters, newspaper reports, as well as books written about the history of the war on the Mississippi. Despite all of this information, some major issues arise when researching these battles. First, the Navy’s xii Preface Official Records has described the volume of information from the Con- federates as “very scant.”2 Also, the precise time at which certain ac- tions occurred can be very confusing, as different individuals reported varying times for the same event, although the general time of day is not in question. In addition, conflicting reports and statements present a challenge that all historians confront. For my part, when facing different times or conflicting information, I chose the source I believed to be correct and articulate my rationale in a footnote. Three fleets were involved in the Battle of Memphis, all of which were under United States Army or Confederate States Army control.3 Consequently, some—but not all—of the pertinent reports and messages can be found in the Army’s Official Records. Duplicates, as well as messages and reports not found in the Army’s Official Records, can be found in the Navy’s Official Records. This distribution may cause confusion, as researchers may assume that all pertinent reports and information are in the records (Army’s or Navy’s) they are reviewing. One result of this archival arrangement has been that many researchers have not read Confederate Commodore Joseph E. Montgomery’s report on the Battle of Memphis. As such, some books that address this battle assert that his report cannot be found, and that he disappears from history; however, his report on the Battle of Memphis can be found in the Army’s Official Records in Series I, Volume LII, Part I. Beyond information on the battle are details regarding the construction of the boats in the Confederate River Defense Fleet. In addition, Montgomery’s obituary and photograph can be found in Volume 10 of the Confederate Veteran, although the obituary greatly exaggerates his wartime achievements. Backing up Montgomery’s official report on the Battle of Memphis is an overlooked article in the Houston, Texas Tri- Weekly Telegraph newspaper. The article was written from information provided by First Assistant Engineer William H. Reeder, who was on the Confederate flagship Little Rebel, and who, unfortunately, disappears from history.4 From these two overlooked sources—along with the better-known sources—one may closely determine the disposition of the Confederate fleet before the Battle of Memphis. Not surprisingly, the disposition is very different from what official Union reports, news- papers, and reminiscences described. Two issues with Montgomery’s name that have likely confused many researchers are its commonplaceness and that both the Navy’s and Army’s Official Records refer to him as James Montgomery in their indexes. However, James was not Commodore Montgomery’s first name; it was Joseph. There was a Union pilot on board the Queen of Preface xiii the West by the name of James Montgomery, which may have led peo- ple to use of the wrong first name.5 Compounding this issue is that Montgomery’s first name does not appear on any of his reports, as they are signed J. E. Montgomery; and reports written by other individuals refer to him as Montgomery—again, with no first name. In addition, Commodore Montgomery’s obituary in the Confederate Veteran only refers to him as Commodore J. E. Montgomery, whereas the Army’s Of- ficial Records confuses Commodore James E. Montgomery with Cap- tain James E. Montgomery, United States Army.6 Compilers of the Na- vy’s Official Records missed one source of Montgomery’s first name in a series of messages, dated July 1865, between Joseph E.

Load more