From the Early Settlements to Reconstruction
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Laird Rams: Warships in Transition 1862-1885 Submitted by Andrew Ramsey English, to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Maritime History, April 2016. This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. (Signature) Andrew Ramsey English (signed electronically) 1 ABSTRACT The Laird rams, built from 1862-1865, reflected concepts of naval power in transition from the broadside of multiple guns, to the rotating turret with only a few very heavy pieces of ordnance. These two ironclads were experiments built around the two new offensive concepts for armoured warships at that time: the ram and the turret. These sister armourclads were a collection of innovative designs and compromises packed into smaller spaces. A result of the design leap forward was they suffered from too much, too soon, in too limited a hull area. The turret ships were designed and built rapidly for a Confederate Navy desperate for effective warships. As a result of this urgency, the pair of twin turreted armoured rams began as experimental warships and continued in that mode for the next thirty five years. They were armoured ships built in secrecy, then floated on the Mersey under the gaze of international scrutiny and suddenly purchased by Britain to avoid a war with the United States. Once purchased, they were largely forgotten. Historians rarely mention these two sister ironclads and if mentioned at all, they are given short shrift. Built with funds obtained in part through the Confederate Erlanger loan, these ironclads were constructed at Lairds shipyard in Birkenhead and represented an advanced concept of ironclad construction through new proposals involving turrets, the ram, heavy guns and tripod masts on an armoured ship, as advocated by Captain Cowper Coles, R.N. They proved too much of a leap in one design but when their roles caught up to the revised designs, the ships were modified to meet new requirements. After several mission and design changes they then performed to standard. This belated success occurred when the concept of the ideal armoured warship was in flux throughout the middle Victorian years. 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I must thank my first supervisor Professor Jeremy Black for his support, suggestions and editing advice for this thesis. His encouragement and patience with my misspelled words, rewrites, and changes have been an essential part of my efforts to hammer the myriad of official reports, journal notes, newspaper accounts, ships log entries, etc. into an account of these overlooked defenders of the Empire. I am grateful to other facility members of the University of Exeter for their support including Dr. Nicholas Terry and Dr. Roger Morriss for their kind and patient editing advice, Dr. Laura Rowe for her support during my presentation on the Laird rams given at the ‗Nautical Lives Conference‘, at the University of Exeter on 25 January 2014, my second supervisor Dr. Marc-William Palen for his encouragement, and my mentor Dr. Matthias Reiss for his guidance. I also appreciate the support and editing advice given by Dr. Howard J. Fuller of the University of Wolverhampton, who kindly sat on my August 2016 exam board with Dr. Morriss. Their advice, suggestions, and reinforcement made a tremendous difference. I would also like to thank Francesca Anyon, Martin Cleaver, Julia Homes, and William Meredith of the Wirral Archives in Birkenhead who patiently unearthed a treasure of records from the construction of the Laird rams to greatly aid my research. Andrew Choong Han Lin, Curator, Historic Photographs & Ships Plans, National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, went above and beyond to provide the detailed plans of the extensive refit carried out on the second Laird ram circa 1878-1880, as well as related photographs and illustrations of the two ships. Ellen Jane Hollis of the Bermuda National Library provided very useful information and newspaper accounts of the Royal Navy on the North American and West Indian Station from the 1850s-1900s. I must thank staff at the RAF 3 Alconbury Base Library, Paul Charman, Patricia Hinkle, Mari Mayer and Annette Short, as well as Stacy Compton, and Daniel Holley of the Education Office on the same Royal Air Force Station, for providing invaluable service, both in terms of computer access, and library loan materials which proved essential for this thesis. Saving the best for last, my wife Sara, who ‗learned more about ironclads than I ever wanted to know‘, deserves my eternal thanks for her support, encouragement, and advice. 4 Table of Contents 1. Introduction: The Laird Rams and the evolution of the ironclad warship, p. 7 2. Chapter One: Industry and Innovation: Building the Laird Rams 1862-1863, p. 30 3. Chapter Two: Reluctant Actions: Seizure and Acquisition of the Laird Ironclads 1863-1864, p. 104 4. Chapter Three: Technological Advances and Failings: The Laird Rams in Service 1865-1880, p. 194 Illustrations, p. 281 5. Chapter Four: Naval Weapons and Power Projection: The Laird Rams on Foreign Station 1874-1883, p. 292 6. Chapter Five: Imperial Competition and Strategic Change: The Laird Rams 1883-1885, p. 363 7. Conclusion, p. 410 8. Glossary of terms, p. 416 9. Bibliography, p. 418 5 Illustrations 1. Birkenhead Iron Works (1857) 2. Dry Dock No. 4, Cammell Laird, 2015 3. Armour Plate Rolling Mill, Mersey Ironworks, Liverpool 1863 4. Marine Trunk Steam Engine likely at Lairds (circa 1865) 5. John Laird, 1861 6. The ‗294 and ‗295‘ in the Mersey, 1863 7. H.M.S. SCORPION at Sea, 1869 8. H.M.S. WIVERN at Plymouth, 1865, NH# 52526 (Public Domain) 9. H.M.S. WIVERN off Plymouth, 1865, NH# 71211 (Public Domain) 10. H.M.S. WIVERN in the Channel, 1866 11. Coles Turret with RML 12. H.M.S. ROYAL SOVEREIGN and H.M.S. SCORPION off Dover 1869 13. Nordenfelt gun, circa 1880 14. A refitted H.M.S. WIVERN at Portsmouth, 1880, NH# 65901 (Public Domain) 15. ‗Fresh Paint‘, 1885 16. A refitted H.M.S. SCORPION at Bermuda, circa 1900 17. The hulk of the WIVERN departs Hong Kong for the breakers, 13 March 1923 6 INTRODUCTION The Laird Rams and the evolution of the ironclad warship The two ironclad sister ships built by Lairds shipbuilders of Birkenhead during the American Civil War, have been largely overshadowed by another ship built by Lairds, the famous raider C.S.S. Alabama. Constructed after the equally famous H.M.S. Warrior and predating the ill-fated H.M.S. Captain (also a Lairds ship), the Confederate-intended Birkenhead ironclads were built in response to the combat proven monitors of the Union fleet, yet were more capable of an ocean going role (at least for coastal warfare) than the low-hulled Union turret warships. As they were nearing completion, the rams became the focus of intelligence gathering and diplomatic manoeuvre which ended when the two Birkenhead-built turret ships were acquired by a reluctant government in Whitehall. The move proved fortunate. They were built in time to provide Britain with an extra edge against potential rivals as larger British broadside ironclads were nearing completion. Yet, advances in naval gun manufacture led one observer to note: ‗The ship may be cased with armor [sic] which today is shot-proof; but tomorrow it may be pierced with ease by shot or shell thrown by some new iron monster‘.1 More than just the new guns, the British press warned that a new projectile would make ironclads like the celebrated Warrior and her sister the Black Prince obsolete ‗and then our ironsides will take their place with Brown Bess among a class of antiquities which will be pronounced rusty‘.2 With proper forging techniques, bigger guns could be crafted in the iron makers‘ workshops (both smoothbore and rifle) capable of firing a larger powder charge which could propel a larger projectile at increased 1 James Phinney Baxter III, The Introduction of the Ironclad Warship. (Originally published Cambridge, MA, 1933, Annapolis, 2001), 204. 7 velocity and range.3 Jules Verne would write (in 1863) of the ‗absurd duel between armour and cannonballs, as to which would resist and which would penetrate‘. Verne predicted that the cannonballs (and shells) would triumph in this contest he called ‗a noble rivalry‘.4 Displayed at Woolwich Arsenal is an armoured target from that era before steel, when iron was supreme. Here was a testament to the transition from the primacy of iron plates to the heavy gun as the ultimate factor in naval warfare. The shield was some 12 inches thick, originally cast in two separate plates, and fitted one below and one above to create a single gunport at the centre. The gunport was the obvious aim point for a range test circa 1868. The thick armour was not penetrated, but it was noticeably cracked and scalloped in appearance. The impact from shells and balls distorted the shield, giving the target an appearance more granular, not unlike wet clay. The armour was not dented much, but in some places it looked as though it had been scooped out, as if by hand. The iron was able to keep the shells out…but, barely. This target, in a way, represents the dilemma faced by naval architects and navies of that era. The experts did not know when the continuous experimentation and exasperating drive to outdo the latest advance in armoured construction and competing gunnery progress would end.