uss frolick

Reminds me of the Missus. She too is a little dingy.

Thanks! What makes this model important, is that while the British took the lines off of the Chesapeake, they didn't bother to record the inboard profile or deck details. (Although there is a deck framing plan in the Fox Papers at the Peabody Museum in Salem.) How did they get that huge model home undamaged from England, back to America, then how did it end up in Hamburg, Germany?

I saw that cage too many years ago. I think it was on a plate in the Jean Boudriot Press reprint of the (French industrial spy) Blase Oliver book, circa 1737.

One rare exception: The Sloop USS Hornet, 1807-1829, had two figureheads. A gilded eagle clutched a starred-and-striped shield in her talons when the Hornet was in port, but when at sea, it was replaced with a simple billethead. This must have been a difficult task, at best, that the crew did not look forward to.

Thanks 74 Boni !!!!! I'm buying it now.

Is that blood on the jig? If so, please slow down mate! Use the old MS solid hull kit Stevens plans for the rigging.

The Cumberland photograph is labeled as the Cumberland at the dock. Hauntingly beautiful. Cumberland and Savannah both had 15 aside when first launched, but Cumberland had her ports reduced to 13 (depending on what you call a 'broadside port'). The National Archives sail plan, lines plan, inboard profile and gun deck plan all agree with Chapelle's plan. Chapelle says she mounted 26 32-pounders on the gun deck when relaunched in 1856. She then somehow ended up mounting 22 9-inch Dahlgrens in 1862, during the 'The-War-Of-Yankee-Agression' as they say in Charleston, when she fought CSS Virginia. When she swapped her batteries out I don't know. In Jan '61, the Savannah had a mixture of long 32's and 8-inch shell guns on her main deck, 22 total. As far as I know, there are no plans of the Savannah as altered, so I can't be sure if she was similarly altered with respect to the gunport placement. Chapelle doesn't even mention the conversion of the Savannah.

Thanks Jerry! Awesome pictures! If you magnify the famous Portsmouth Navy Yard 1860 Cumberland photograph, you will see that she had what looks like four large bollards across her stern at the level of the cap rail. These pieces, whatever they were, must certainly have prevented the placement of a wide port directly across her stern for the after 10" pivot gun, she having only ports for it on her quarters and broadside. The photo also shows that the Cumberland had quarter galleries too, although they are hard to see, but the one small remaining window in her starboard gallery gives it away. The Cumberland's gun-deck plan also shows the presence of galleries, although Chapelle omits them.

Jerry, can you give any more information on that Savannah model? What was her scale and where is she displayed? Do you have any more pictures? The Frigate Savannah was altered identically as the much more famous Frigate Cumberland was, hence my interest in her. Interesting USS Savannah trivia: After she was altered in about 1855, the Savannah's old purser reported back aboard, only to be told that because his old frigate was now a sloop of war, his pay would be less, since he technically was no longer a frigate's purser. He sued in federal court, claiming that the ship was essentially the same vessel which, had not lost a deck, nor a level of cannon, and even though she carried fewer guns, they were heavier and made the ship more powerful. He won, and the navy had to refer to her as a frigate once again.

These books are not easy reads. O'Brian likes to toss out French and Latin phrases, and make the reader look them up. But he is a concise writer, and he packs a lot into a minimum of words. He repeats nothing, so if you miss the significance of an event, however minor, early on, then you might be confused later. He has a different style of writing too, with phrases that just seem to flow. You have to hear the late Patrick Tull's book narrations (Recorded Books, inc.) to truly feel it. O'Brian has often been called "The Jane Austin for guys". His Napoleonic Period histories, his nautical descriptions, his naval intelligence methodologies, and his medical and "natural philosopher" descriptions are spot on. His characters are the best of any other seafaring genre. The Hornblower sailors just seems wooden compared to them. Not an easy read, the Aubrey-Maturin Series, but well worth the time.

If anyone gets it, please let us know if that huge and well-done POW bone model of the US Frigate Chesapeake that is in the Hamburg Maritime Museum is featured prominently. I'm hoping that since the book is published in Hamburg, it may well be. A careful study of her deck details would be of great value to us 1812-ers.

JAXBOAT, USNI Press published a rather comprehensive book about that cruise a few years back called "Blakeley and the Wasp", I think, although I forget who wrote it.

Let's see what old Billy-Jim has to say about this fight. From William James's "The Naval History of Great Britain: Volume VI", page 237-8: " ... On the 9th of October [1814], when off the shoals of Nantucket, she [the Frigate Endymion] fell in with the American Privateer Brig Prince de Neufchatel, of 18 guns and 120 or 130 men. It being calm, Captain [Henry] Hope detached his boats, under the orders of Lieutenant Abel Hawkins, first of the Endymion, to capture the privateer. The boats were repulsed, after sustaining the loss of Lieutenant Hawkins, one midshipman and 26 seamen and marines killed, the second lieutenant, one master's mate, and 35 seamen and marines wounded. Besides which the launch was captured, and the crew made prisoners. So determined and effective a resistance did great credit to the American captain and his crew. On the 31st, the Endymion fell in with the 56-gun ship Saturn, Captain James Nash, bound to Halifax; and sending on board [i.e. the Saturn], with her surgeon and his servant, 28 wounded officers and men, [and he] received from the Saturn, to replace the severe loss he had sustained, one lieutenant, four midshipmen, and 33 seamen and marines." Notes: "Abel Hawkins" is one heck of a name for a frigate officer! The heavy Frigate Saturn was a razeed 74 that had been cut down to fight the American 44's, but she retained her main deck 32-pounders. The Endymion's log book says that the yawl was lost, not the launch. The Saturn's 38 replacements still would have left Captain Hope shorthanded when he fought the USF President. The Prince de Neufchatel's captain was French during this cruise, not American.

Wow, Chapman! There must be something much more to this interesting topic of 'privateer marines' if an entire book has been written of the subject. If you buy it, please write a review.

In the research for my Wasp book, I found that even in 1813-14, there were insufficient numbers of real US Marines available for the Wasp in Boston, Newburyport and Portsmouth, so Captain Blakeley had to make due with just five, plus an additional thirteen sailors who were assigned to perform the role as marines. In Newburyport, one of the real Marines got drunk, deserted, stole a horse, but was recaptured. Two of the sailor marines got into a knife fight in France and one had to be punished with the lash. But they still managed to stop the Reindeer's boarders and marines ...

As for the marines, Jerome R. Garitee, in his "The Republic's Private Navy: The American Privateering Business as Practiced in Baltimore During the War of 1812" says that they were just landsmen acting as marines. Specifically on page 310, he notes: "Most of the variations in [privateer] crew stations involved petty officers and the number of first class and ordinary seamen as well as marines or landsmen. Ten or fifteen marines were the rule."

Since this thread had attracted so much interest, I thought I'd include the first part of the Newburyport Herald article: "Cruise of the Prince of Neufchatel Arrived here on Saturday last Privateer brig Prince-of-Neufchatel, Ordannaux, of New York (of 315 tons 14 guns) from a cruise. Sailed from Cherbourg, 4th July. On 9th, captured Sloop Jane, Bowen, from St Jean de Luz, for Falmouth- cargo lumber, burnt her. - 22nd captured brig Triton, Blanche, from Cadiz to London cargo coffee and wine, scuttled her after taking out some of the coffee - 24th captured Brig Aaron (a transport), Prindall, from Gibraltar to Lisbon, in Ballast, scuttled her, - 27th , captured brig Apollo, Hardy, from St. Ubes for Riga, cargo Salt, burnt her, - August 8th captured the Cutter Gen. Doyle, Simpson, from Leghorn to Lisbon, cargo oil, took out most of her cargo and burnt her - 14th captured Brig Barewich Packet, Crosby, from Cork for Bristol in Ballast and 50 passengers, put on board all the prisoners and gave her up. Same day captured sloop George, Barber, from Milford Haven for Portsmouth, cargo coals scuttled her 16th captured brig Gibson, Clark, from Grenock for Cork in Ballast, scuttled her - 18th captured Brig Nymph, Hutchinson, from St. Jean de Luz for Cork, cargo dry goods and provisions took out all the former articles and threw overboard the latter, put on board all the prisoners and gave her up. Same day captured Brig Albion, Faragher, from Greenock for Cork, cargo, wine, gin, brandy and dry goods, took out the latter article and some of the former, then burnt her, 20th captured Ship Harmony, Wilson, from Grenock for Cork, cargo dry goods and an assortment of other articles, took a part of the cargo, and manned her and kept her in company two or three days, and saw her taken by a sloop of war - 30th lat 45 30 long 29, captured brig Charlotte, Edwards, from Rio Janeirro, [sic] cargo hides and Brazil wood, burnt her. Same day boarded Russian Ship Austrian, from Havannah to Bordeaux, had been plundered the day before by a Guernsey letter of marque brig of 14 guns (which the captain saw in the Havannah) under American colours. Put onboard by the captains consent, a number of prisoners and supplied them with provisions. Sept. 2nd, Lat 44 Long 35 , spoke and boarded brig William, prize to the York Privateer, supplied her with bread. September 6th, captured ship Douglass, of and for Liverpool, from Demerara, full cargo of Rum, cotton and coffee, 420 tons, lat 41 30 long 45, 30th lat 38 30 long 61 30 captured brig Mary Ann , McLeod, from St. Johns for Barbados, cargo lumber, burnt her. Total prizes fifteen." Note that only two of the prizes were manned, the rest burnt or sent off, so maybe the Prince had a larger proportion of her crew on board during the battle than I had previously supposed ... Note also: "14 guns" !!! :lol

Tim, I just saw your Prince de Neufchatel build log: Very nice!

Carronades cast with standard trunnions, instead of with the bottom loop, did exist in that period, but they were rare, and only in the smaller cailbers. They were almost always referred to as "gunades" or "gunnades".

Chapman, another great find! Keep them coming guys ... Did Model Shipways discontinue their Prince de Neufchatel kit? Tim, I like your thoughts on her armament ... "long nines" .... "and twelves" ... ?

Tim, what a great find! Perhaps the Prince de Neufchatel's new captain swapped most of her long guns out for carronades in Boston between the time Hope wrote his report, and the time Sir George Collier wrote his? It might have been done to save weight, perhaps?

I agree in general, Tar, with the great professionalism of the Royal Navy of the period. The British have no greater fan than I! But in this particular case, I look at the draughts of the schooner in question and the height of her sides don't seem unusually great for a brig, and her force doesn't seem to be "very superior" for a privateer, even if she were fully manned, which she was not. One need only look through the pages of James Naval History to see unbelievable boarding actions won by Her Majesty. I sailed those same waters as a kid, and even I known what happens in Nantucket Sound when the tide changes, let alone inshore amongst the shallow shoals. Captain Hope ought to have known the characteristics of the waters he was assigned to blockade. Certainly he knew when the tide was due to change. And surely all the signal shenanigans didn't help with the surprise aspect. But he sent off between a quarter and a third of his crew - not an inferior force by any means - in five boats armed with carronades and swivels, yet he suffered nearly as many casualties at the hands of this gaggle of multinational merchant sailors as did Captain Dacres of the Guerriere at the hands of the Constitution.

No exact disposition of the P de N's guns are known to me other than the above report. The all carronade armament would have been used had the brig been taken into the RN service, but since her frame was built so lightly that her back broke in the British dry-dock whilst taking her lines off, this was not done. So Tim, your disposition of sixteen and two nines and twelves respectively, is probably correct. I can't see her carrying more than two heavy long twelves, especially considering how light her frame would prove to be. The P de N was built in New York by the firm of Adam and Noah Brown. Another of the firm's brig/schooners was the famous Privateer General Armstrong. During her first commission, the General carried 18 long nine pounders and one long 12-pounder. It is not known whether the long twelve was on a pivot or used as a shifting 'long tom'. During her second cruise the General carried six long nines and one massive French 36-pounder on a pivot. See Tucker, Spencer, "Arming the Fleet: US Navy Ordinance in the Muzzle Loading Era", Naval Institute Press, p.136. Note also that the report implies that she had no "channel plates" and so that her chain plates were perhaps flush with the sides so that the British couldn't use them to gain access to the deck.

I can understand the differences between the two reports as being essentially honest. If the official letter had been written before the return of the paroled prisoners, then Captain Hope would have only the reports of those men who failed to gain the enemy's deck to go on. The that privateer was undermanned rings true, as she had already sent in many captured prizes, including manning the nearby Douglass prior to the battle. The description of the British prisoners being kept in their own yawl to prevent an uprising tends to support this. Those men in the boats that got back to the Endymion would not have had a clear estimate of how many men the enemy consisted of, as it was night-time, and they were badly battered by the cannon prior to reaching the brig's side. All they saw was a high brig's side with its boarding nettings and the flash of cannon and small arms. The American claims of multiple drifting boats with no one left alive in them, could be explained. If your oars are shot away, your officers are taken out and the current if pulling you away, your first instinct would be to duck, since you cannot renew the attack, and you lie as low in the gunwales as you possibly can until you are out of range. It would appear to the Americans that everyone was dead in them. The statement that the Endymion's 105 man boarding party was out-numbered by a superior force of 140 multinational privateersmen is a touchy statement that few navy men would dare to make. I think overconfidence and cockiness on the British part, the total lack of surprise, combined with an unfamiliarity of the sudden and vicious currents off Nantucket, doomed the mission. The Privateersmen, whatever their true number also displayed excellent gunnery and small arms skills.

I truncated the American newspaper account, omitting the earlier parts of her cruise and her numerous captures. It seems to be copied from the brig's log book. But it is still a contemporary account. But notice the details they agree upon, 104 vs. 105 British sailors made the attack, and both agreed the contest lasted 20 minutes. Poor James was either in New York or Boston at the outbreak of the war, and being a lawyer, he couldn't help but shoot off his mouth. This quickly landed him in prison, from which he escaped somehow, and hoofed it north to Canada, where he befriended many British Naval officers, chief among them Phillip Brook of the Shannon. He definitely had an axe to grind, and perhaps he was justified, but you can feel this in his writings, particularly in "Naval Occurrences". He is spot on, however, with his material and technical data, and for this reason, his work is the definitive work for the period.