Historic Resource Study Civil War Defenses Of Washington_Part I Appendices(508).Pdf

A Historic Resources Study The Civil War Defenses of Washington Part I Appendices A Historic Resources Study The Civil War Defenses of Washington Part I Appendices A Historic Resources Study The Civil[.]

Trang 1

A Historic Resources Study: The Civil War Defenses of Washington

Part I: Appendices

Trang 2

A Historic Resources Study:

The Civil War Defenses of Washington

Part I: Appendices

United States Department of Interior

National Park Service National Capital Region Washington, DC

Contract No 144CX300096053

Modification# 1

Prepared by CEHP, Incorporated Chevy Chase, Maryland

Trang 3

A Historic Resources Study:

The Civil War Def ens es of Washington

Correspondence Concerning Appropriations for the Defenses of Washington

General Reports about the Defenses Supplement to Commission Report Mostly Orders Pertaining to the Defenses of Washington

A Sampling of Correspondence, Reports, Orders, Etc., Relating to the Battle of Fort Stevens

Civil War Defenses of Washington Chronology

Trang 4

Appendix A

Alphabetical Listing of Forts, Batteries, and Blockhouses

Trang 5

Civil War Defenses of Washington Page A-1 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix A

Appendix A: Alphabetical Listing of Forts, Batteries, and Blockhouses

Blockhouse south of Fort Ellsworth

Blockhouse between Fort Ellsworth

& Fort Lyon, also battery

Fort Bunker Hill

Wm B Ross, Attorney John H Bogue, B.B Lloyd Sewall B Corbettt

Elizabeth Studds' heirs, George Studds

Henry Studds Henry Quinn Thomas Jewell J.H Phillips Fenwick Young Mary Randolph Lee, United.States Government Selby B Scaggs

Selby B Scaggs William H Ross Septimus Brown, Samuel Carison (Causen??), _ _ Elliot Major Sayles J Bowen, Daniel F Lee

B.T Swart Michael Caton Henry Rozier Dulany, Rebecca Ann Dulany Stephen & Mrs E.M Meredith

Francis W Rozier & wife, Mrs M.A Hill,, Benedict Edelin William A.T Maddox & Mr Loughborough

Margeret B Dangerfield William Berry, Thomas M Berry, Trustee, John C Mcferron, Lucien and Miss Eliza Berry

Owen & Mary Murray and heirs, Thomas Cozar, Guardian John Veitch

· JohnMagee William A.T Maddox

· John Veitch Thomas Dean family, Samuel Shoe~aker Gilbert Vanderwerken

James Weaver, C & 0 Canal Co

Mrs Stow, Mr Joseph Trimble Ellen J King, John H King John Collins

Giles Dyer, Mrs [James C.] Dyer, Miles Dyer, George W Chase, L.E Chittenden, Edward B.Powell, Mary Walker

Trang 6

John B Kibbey, William Kibbey, Executor, Ann McDaniels L.E Chittenden, Hunter family

John Kennedy S.F & L Burrows, Charles Shoemaker Henry Douglass

John F Callan, L.E Chittenden, Mary Walker B.T Swart

Joseph T Jenkins, Thomas Jenkins, ( Z?)Badcock Williams George Washington Talburtt

Emory Chapel or Emory Methodist Church, Elizabeth Thomas (?) Thomas Dawson, Allen Pearce

Albert Lodge Charles B Calvert, Executor Columbus Alexander George Thomas United States Government Judson Richardson Mary Randolph Lee, United States Government Samuel Cooper, Willam Silvey, George A Smith, John Williams Samuel R Johnson, Josiah Willard

John Lambden William Silvey 1

I Information in this appendix was found in the following sources: Reed Hansen, :'Civil War to Civil Concern: A History of Fort Marcy, Virginia." M.A thesis in History, George Mason University, 1973, 13-14; National Archives and Records Administration, Archives I, Record Group 92, Records of the Office of the Quartermaster General (hereafter referred to as RG92), Special Files, 1794-1926, Entry 225, Consolidated Correspondence File, 1794-1890, "De Russy, Fort (1865-66)," "Defenses of Washington, DC," "Ethan Allen, Fort (VA) (1864),"

"Greble, Fort (MD, 1869)," "Fort Reno, DC, 1863-," "Slocum, Fort - D.C."; National Archives and Records Administration, Archives I, Record Group 77, Records of the Office of the _Chief of Engineers (hereafter referred to as RG77), Records of Detached Engineer Officers, Defenses of Washington, 1861-66, Entry 574, Land Releases, 1865, including "Defenses of Washington, List of transfers of Public property

as compensation for damages and releases by the Claimants," December 16, 1865"; National Archives and Records Administration, Archives

I, Record Group 29, Records of the Bureau of the Census, Microcopy 653, Eighth Census of the United States, 1860 [hereafter referred to as M653], Rolls 102-104; Wynn E Withans, "Preservation Plan for ·Fort C.F Smith," Plan 830 (January 1986) [Found in Fort Ward, Cooling Papers, Research Files, "Mr Lincoln's Forts" Box 2 of 2, folder- marked Fort C.F Smith], 7; Ruth Ward, "Life in Alexandria County During the Civil War," The Arlington Historical Society Journal, VII, (October 1984), 3; Dorthea Abbott, Historian, to Gail Baker, Chairman, HALRB, September 20, 1990, Subject: History of the Hendry property, in Arlington County Central Library, Virginia Room, Vertical File, Civil War Forts-Fort C.F Smith; Fort Myer Post, The History of Fort Myer, Virginia, 100th Anniversary Issue, June 1863, 1-2; A Narrative History of Fon Myer Virginia [1954?] Falls Church, VA: Litho-Print Press, n.d., l; Benjamin Franklin Cooling, III, and Walton H Owen, II

Mr Lincoln's Forts: A Guide to the Civil War Defenses of Washington Shippensburg, PA: White Mane Publishing Company, 1988, 64;

Trang 7

Judith ~eek Helm, Tenleytow11, D C.: Country Village into City Neighborhood (Washington, DC: Tennally Press, 1981), 97, I 13, 119; Fort Ward, Cooling Papers, Research Files, "Mr Lincoln's Forts" Box I of 2, 2nd folder; Washington at Home, 82- 83; RG92, Central Records,• Claims, 1839-1914, Claims Registers and Claims, 1839-1901, Miscellaneous Claims, Entry 843, Claims and Related Papers for Damage to Property by Troops in the Service of the United States, 1861-65, #189; RG92, Claims, 1839-1914,Claims Branch, 1861-1870, Document File, Quartermaster Stores, Rent, Services and Miscellaneous Claims, Entries 797 and 812, Civil War Claims, D-1393, H-3817 and 54-1417; National Archives and Records Administration, Archives I, Record Group 94, Records of the Adjutant General's Office, 1700's to

1917 (hereafter referred to as RG94), Military Reservation Division, Early 1800's-1916, Entry 464, Reservation File, Early 1800's-1916,

"Fort Foote"; RG77, Entry 18, Letters Received, 1826-66, SW4579, L.H.T to B.T Swart;·~G77, entry 171, Land Papers, 1794-1916, District of Columbia; Philip W Ogilvie, "Elizabeth Thomas (1821-1917), multi-page document of events in her life and reproduction of numerous published accounts about her (1998); Benjamin Franklin Cooling, Jubal Early's Raid On Washingto11 1864 (Baltimore, MD: The Nautical and Aviation Publishing Company of America, 1989), 132, 134,; Benjamin Franklin Cooling, Symbol, Sword, and Shield: Defend ing Washington During the Civil War, Second Edition (Shippensburg, PA: White Mane Publishing Company, 1991), 80; Cooling and Walton,

_Mr Lincoln's Forts, 159; Cramer, John Henry Cramer,-Lincoln Under Enemy Fire: The Complete Account of His Experiences During

'

Early's Attack 011 Washi11gto11, (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1948), 24-25; William Van Zandt Cox, The Defenses of Washington-General Early's Advance on the Capital and the Battle of Fort Stevens, July 11 a11d 12, 1864 (Washington, I 907?), 4; Program for the Commorative Ceremony on The One Hundreth Anniversary of the Battle of Fort Stevens at Fort Stevens, Washington, D.C., 2:00 o'clock, July I I, 1964 (1964), "Aunt Betty," 2 pages; U.S., Congress, Senate, Committee on the District of Columbia Park Improvement Papers: A Series of Twe11ty Papers Relati11g to the Improvement of Park System of the District of Columbia, No 4, Fort Stevens, Where Lincoln Was U11der Fire by William V Cox (Washington, D.C.: The Government Printing Office, 1901), 2; #A2298, Major D.C Houston to Brevet Major General Andrew A Humphreys, Chief of Engineers, May 11, 1869; #A3624, William P Craighill to Chief of Engineers, May

13, 1870; and #A3557, Samuel 0 Bogot to Chief of Engineers, April 20, 1870; Entry 36, Letters Received ("A File"), November November 1870, Correspondence Relating To Fortifications, Correspondence of Office Divisions, 1865-70, Records of the Central Office, RG77; Entry 36, Letters Received ("A File"), November 1867-November 1870, Correspondence Relating To Fortifications, Correspondence

1867-·of Office Divisions, 1865-70, Records of the Central Office, RG77; "The Rambler" column, The Sunday Star, May 21, 1916 Part 4, page

7 and June 4, 1916 Part 4, page 6; Alan Virta, Prince George's County: A Pictorial History (Virginia Beach, VA: The Donning Company Publishers, 1984 & 1991), 121, 125; Anne Ciprani Webb, "Fort Strong on Arlington Heights," The Arlington Historical Magazine, 5 (October 1973), 34-39; Roy C J?rewer, "Fort Scott-Past, Present, and Future," The Arlington Historical Magazine, 3 (October 1965), 40-47; Jan Magnusson, "Fort Scott," The Arlington Historical Magazine, 2 (October 1964), 37A7; T Michael Miller, "Jones Point: Haven of History," The Historical Society of Fairfax County, Virginia Yearbook, Volume 21 (1986- 1988), 39-42; T Michael Miller, "The Saga of Shuter's Hill," The Historical Society of Fairfax County, Virginia, Volume 19, (1983), 80-83; "Alexandria Archaeology Investigates Shuter's Hill (1997), publication of Alexandria Archaeology, pages 1-2

Trang 8

AppendixB

Alphabetical Listing of Known Fortification Owners, Their Representatives, and Fortifications

On Their Land

Trang 9

Civil War Defenses of Washington Page B-1 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix B

Appendix 8: Alphabetical Listing of Known Fortification Owners, Their Representatives, and Fortifications on their Land

· Known Landowner or their Representative

Samuel Carison (Causen??)

Charles B Calvert, Executor

Thomas Dean family

John H Bogue, Attorney

Henry Douglass

Henry Rozier Dulany

Rebecca Ann Dulany

Fort Williams Fort Barnard, Fort Berry Fort Hagerty

Battery Garesche & nearby Blockhouse Fort Strong

Fort Mansfield Fort Bennett Fort Slemmer Fort Ellsworth Fort Ellsworth Fort Reno Fort Reno Fort Reno Fort Foote Fort Craig Fort Stevens Fort Foote Fort Scott Fort Snyder Fort Snyder Fort C.F Smith

Trang 10

Civil War Defenses of Washington

Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix B

Capt William A T Maddox

Manassas Gap Railroad

Fort Bennett Fort Gaines Fort Saratoga Fort Greble Fort Kearney Fort Gaines, Battery Kemble Battery Rodgers

Fort Ethan Allen Fort Ethan Allen Fort Hagerty Fort Hagerty Fort Baker

·Fort Baker Fort Strong Battery Cameron Fort Reynolds Fort Bunker Hill Fort Wagner Fort Albany, Fort Runyon Fort Albany, Fort Runyon Fort Bennett, Fort Corcoran Fort Foote

Fort Chaplin, Fort Craven Battery Bailey

Fort Simmons Fort Mansfield Fort Williams, Fort Worth Fort Ricketts

Fort Williams Fort Meigs Blockhouse south of Fort Ellsworth

Page B-2

Trang 11

Civil War Defenses of Washington

Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix B

Fort DeRussy, Battery Smeade Fort Ricketts Fort Stanton Fort Totten

Fort Stevens Fort Meigs Fort Cass, Battery Vermont, Fort Whippl,e Fort Marcy

Battery Jameson, Fort Lincoln Fort Reynolds, Fort Slocum Fort Martin Scott

Fort Willard Fort Snyder Fort Williams Fort Carroll 1

1 Information in this appendix was found in the following sources: Reed Hansen, "Civil War to Civil Concern: A History of Fort Marcy, Virginia." M.A thesis in History, George Mason University, 1973, 13-14; National Archives and Records Administration, Archives I, Record Group 92, Records of the Office of the Quartermaster General (hereafter referred to as RG92), Special Files, 1794-1926, Entry 225, Consolidated Correspondence File, 1794-1890,

"De Russy, Fort (1865-66)," "Defenses of Washington, DC," "Ethan Allen, Fort (VA) (1864)," "Greble, Fort (MD, 1869)," "Fort Reno, DC, 1863-," "Slocum, Fort - D.C."; National Archives and Records Administration, Archives I, Record Group 77, Records of the Office of the Chief of Engineers (hereafter referred to as RG77), Records of Detached Engineer Officers, Defenses of Washington, 1861-66, Entry 574, Land Releases, 1865, including "Defenses of Washington, List of transfers of Public property as compensation for damages and releases by the Claimants," December 16, 1865"; National Archives and Records Administration, Archives I, Record Group 29, Records of the Bureau

of the Census, Microcopy 653, Eighth Census of the United States, 1860 [hereafter referred to as M653], Rolls 104; Wynn E Withans, "Preservation Plan for Fort C.F Smith," Plan 830 (January 1986) [Found in Fort Ward, Cooling Papers, Research Files, "Mr Lincoln's Forts" Box 2 of 2, folder marked Fort C.F Smith], 7; Ruth Ward,

102-"Life in Alexandria County During the Civil War," The Arlington Historical Society Journal, VII, (October 1984), 3;

Dorthea Abbott, Historian, to Gail Baker, Chairman, HALRB, September 20, 1990, Subject: History of the Hendry property, in Arlington County Central Library, Virginia Room, Vertical File, Civil War Forts-: Fort C.F Smith; Fort

Myer Post, The History of Fort Myer, Virginia, 100th Anniversary Issue, June 1863, 1-2; A Narrative History of Fort

Myer Virginia [ 1954 ?] Falls Church, VA: Li tho-Print Press, n.d., 1; Benjamin Franklin Cooling, III, and Walton H

Owen, II Mr Lincoln's Forts: A Guide to the Civil War Defenses of Washington Shippensburg, PA: White Mane Publishing Company, 1988, 64; Judith Beck Helm, Tenleytown, D C.: Country Village into City Neighborhood

(Washington, DC: Tennally Press, 1981), 97, 113, 119; Fort Ward, Cooling Papers, Research Files, "Mr Lincoln's Forts" Box 1 of 2, 2nd folder; Washington at Home, 82- 83; RG92, Central Records, Claims, 1839-1914, Claims

Registers and Claims, 1839-1901, Miscellaneous Claims, Entry 843, Claims and Related Papers for Damage to Property by Troops in the Service of the United States, 1861-65, #189; RG92, Claims, 1839-1914,Claims Branch, 1861-1870, Document File, Quartermaster Stores, Rent, Services and Miscellaneous Claims, Entries 797 and 812,

Trang 12

Civil War Defenses of Washington Page B 4 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix B

Entry 18, Letters Received, 1826-66, SW4579, L.H.T to B.T Swart; RG77, entry 171, Land Papers, 1794-1916, District of Columbia; Philip W Ogilvie, "Elizabeth Thomas (1821-1917), multi-page document of events in her life and reproduction of numerous published accounts about her (1998); Benjamin Franklin Cooling, Jubal Early's Raid

On Washington 1864 (Baltimore, MD: The Nautical and Aviation Publishing Company of America, 1989), 132, 134,

; Benjamin Franklin Cooling, Symbol, Sword, and Shield: Defending Washington During the Civil War, Second

Edition (Shippensburg, PA: White Mane Publishing Company, 1991), 80; Cooling and Walton, Mr Lincoln's Forts,

159; Cramer, John Henry Cramer, Lincoln Under Enemy Fire: The Complete Account of His Experiences During Early's Attack on Washington, (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1948), 24-25; William Van

Zandt Cox, The Defenses of Washington-General Early's Advance on the Capital and the Battle of Fort Stevens, July 11 and 12, 1864 (Washington, 1907?), 4; Program for the Commorative Ceremony on The One Hundreth

Anniversary of the Battle of Fort Stevens at Fort Stevens, Washington, D.C., 2:00 o'clock, July 11, 1964 (1964),

"Aunt Betty," 2 pages; U.S., Congress, Senate, Committee on the District of Columbia Park Improvement Papers:

A Series of Twenty Papers Relating to the Improvement of Park System of the District of Columbia, No 4, Fort Stevens, Where Lincoln Was Under Fire by William V Cox (Washington, D.C.: The Government Printing Office, 1901), 2; #A2298, Major D.C Houston to Brevet Major General Andrew A Humphreys, Chief of Engineers, May

11, 1869; #A3624, William P Craighill to Chief of Engineers, May 13, 1870; and #A3557, Samuel 0 Bogot to Chief

of Engineers, April 20, 1870; Entry 36, Letters Received ("A File"), November 1867-November 1870, Correspondence Relating To Fortifications, Correspondence of Office Divisions, 1865-70, Records of the Central Office, RG77; Entry 36, Letters Received ("A File"), November 1867-November 1870, Correspondence Relating To Fortifications, Correspondence of Office Divisions, 1865-70, Records of the Central Office, RG77; "The Rambler" column, The Sunday Star, May 21, 1916-Part 4, page 7 and June 4, 1916-Part 4, page 6; Alan Virta, Prince George's County:

A Pictorial History (Virginia Beach, VA: The Donning Company Publishers, 1984 & 1991), 121, 125; Anne Ciprani

Webb, "Fort Strong on Arlington Heights," The Arlington Historical Magazine, 5 (October 1973), 34-39; Roy C

Brewer, "Fort Scott-Past, Present, and Future," The Arlington Historical Magazine, 3 (October 1965), 40-47; Jan

Magnusson, "Fort Scott," The Arlington Historical Magazine, 2 (October 1964), 37-47; T Michael Miller, "Jones

Point: Haven of History," The Historical Society ofFairfax County, Virginia Yearbook, Volume 21 (1986- 1988),

39-42; T Michael Miller, "The Saga of Shuter's Hill," The Historical Society of Fairfax County, Virginia, Volume 19,

(1983), 80-83; "Alexandria Archaeology Investigates Shuter's Hill (1997), publication of Alexandria Archaeology, pages 1-2

Trang 13

Appe~dixC ·

Naming of Forts

Trang 14

Civil War Defenses of Washington PageC-1 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix C

Appendix C: Naming the Forts

GENERAL ORDERS, No 18

HDQRS ARMY OF THE POTOMAC,

Washington, September 30, 1861

XI The works in the vicinity of Washington are named as follows:

The work south of Hunting Creek, Fort Lyon

That on Shooter's Hill, Fort Ellsworth

That to the left of the Seminary, Fort Worth

That in front of Blenker's brigade, Fort Blenker

That in front of Lee's house, Fort Ward

That near the mouth of Four Mile Creek, Fort Scott

That on Richardson's Hill, Fort Richardson

That now known as Fort Albany, Fort Albany

That near the end of Long Bridge, Fort Runyon

The work next on the right of Fort Albany, Fort Craig

The next on the right of Fort Craig, Fort Tillinghast

The next on the right of Fort Tillinghast, Fort Ramsay

The work next on the right of Fort Ramsay, Fort Woodbury

That next on the right of Fort Woodbury, Fort De Kalb

The work in rear of Fort Corcoran and near canal, Fort Haggerty

That now known as Fort Corcoran, Fort Corcoran

That to the north of Fort Corcoran, Fort Bennett

That south of Chain Bridge, on height, Fort Ethan Allen

That near the Chain Bridge, on Leesburg road, Fort Marcy

That on the cliff north Of Chain Bridge, Battery Martin Scott

That on height near reservoir, Battery Vermont

That near Georgetown, Battery Cameron

That on the left of Tennallytown, Fort Gaines

That at Tennallytown, Fort Pennsylvania

That at Emory's Chapel, Fort Massachusetts

That near camp of Second Rhode Island Regiment, Fort Slocum

That on Prospect Hill, near Bladensburg, Fort Lincoln

That next on the left of Fort Lincoln, Fort Saratoga

That next on the left of Fort Saratoga, Fort Bunker Hill

That on the right of General Sickles' camp, Fort Stanton

That on the right of Fort Stanton, Fort Carroll

That on the left towards Bladensburg, Fort Greble

By command of Major-General McClellan

S WILLIAMS,

Assistant Adjutant-General

ORA, I, 5 (Serial 5), 611

Trang 15

WASHINGTON, January 7, 1863

Maj Gen S P HEINTZELMAN,

Commanding Defenses of Washington:

GENERAL: I make the following recommendations as to the names of the fortifications around Washington:

That the name of the enlarged work now known as Fort Massachusetts be changed to Fort Stevens <ar31_955> The name of the enlarged work and battery now known as Fort Pennsylvania be changed to Fort Reno

The new fort and battery first on the right of Fort Ripley be called Fort Mansfield

The new fort next on its right, Fort Simmons

The round fort near Great Falls turnpike, Fort Bayard

The new fort between Forts Pennsylvania and De Russy, Fort Kearny

The battery between Ripley and Mansfield, and on the left of Powder Mill Branch, Battery Benson

The battery next on its right, and on the right of Powder Mill Branch, Battery Bailey

The battery between Fort Pennsylvania and Fort Kearny, Battery Rossell

The battery on the left of Fort De Russy, Battery Smead

The battery on the right of Fort De Russy, Battery Kingsbury

The battery on extreme right of Fort Lincoln, and near Eastern Branch, Battery Maine

The 100-pounder gun battery on Maddox Place, Battery Kemble

The 100-pounder gun battery between Kemble and Cameron, Battery Parrott

The battery in advance of Fort Blenker, Battery Garesche

Should these names meet your approval, an order is requested confirming them

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

Brig Gen I I Stevens, U.S Volunteers, was killed at the battle of Chantilly, Va., September I, 1862

Maj Gen Jesse L Reno, U.S Volunteers, captain of ordnance, died of wounds received at the battle of South Mountain, Md., September 14,1862

Brig Gen Joseph K F Mansfield, U.S Army, died of wounds received at the battle of Antietam, Md., September 18 [17], 1862 <ar40_141>

Maj Seneca 0 Simmons, Fourth Infantry (colonel U.S Volunteers), killed June 30, 1862, at the battle of White Oak Swamp, Va

Brig Gen George D Bayard, U.S Volunteers (captain Fourth Cavalry), died of wounds received at the battle of Fredericksburg, Va., December 14, 1862

Maj Gen Philip Kearny, U.S Volunteers, killed at the battle of Chantilly, Va., September 1, 1862

Capt Henry Benson, Second Artillery, died of wounds received at the battle of Malvern Hill, Va., August 11, 1862

Trang 16

Civil W~r Defenses of Washington PageC-3 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix C

Capt John R Smead, Fifth Artillery, killed at the battle of Bull Run, Va., August 30, 1862

First Lieut Henry W Kingsbury, Fifth Artillery (colonel of volunteers), died of wounds received at the battle of Antietam, Md., September 18, 1862

Lieut Col Julius P Garesche, assistant adjutant-general, killed at the battle of Murfreesborough, Tenn., December 31,

Distinguished himself individually at the battle of Williamsburg, being at the front rendering aid to

General Kearny, though his brigade was not engaged, * * * and he particularly distinguished himself at the battle of Fair Oaks, where his horse was shot under him in battle, receiving three balls He died [November

6, 1862] of typhoid fever (at Old Town, Me.), brought on, no doubt, by exposure and the excitement of the battles alluded to.-Extract from a letter from General Heintzelman

I am, your obedient servant,

J G BARNARD,

Brigadier-General

ORA, I, 25, Part 2 (serial 40), 140-41

GENERAL ORDERS, No 83

WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJT GEN 'S OFFICE,

Washington, April 1, 1863

The new or modified forts and batteries around Washington will hereafter be known by the following names: The name of the enlarged work now known as Fort Massachusetts to be changed to Fort Stevens, after Brig Gen I I Stevens, U.S Volunteers, of Massachusetts, who was killed September 1, 1862, at the battle of Chantilly,

Va

Trang 17

The name of the enlarged work now known as Fort Pennsylvania to be changed to Fort Reno, after Maj Gen Jesse L Reno, U.S Volunteers (captain of ordnance), of Pennsylvania, who was mortally wounded, September 14,

1862, at the battle of South Mountain, Md ·

The fort next and east of Fort Ripley to be called Fort Mansfield, after Brig Gen Joseph K F Mansfield, U.S Army, who was mortally wounded, September 17, 1862, at the battle of Antietam, Md

The new fort next and east of Fort Mansfield to be called Fort Simmons, <ar40_187> after Col Seneca G Simmons, Pennsylvania Volunteers (major Fourth U.S Infantry), who was killed, June 30, 1862, at the battle of White Oak Swamp, Va

The round fort near Great Falls turnpike to be called Fort Bayard, after Brig Gen George D Bayard, U.S Volunteers (captain Fourth U.S Cavalry), who was mortally wounded, December 13, 1862, at the battle of

The battery east of Battery Benson and Powder Mill Branch to be called Battery Bailey, after Capt Guilford D Bailey, commissary of subsistence, U.S Army (first lieutenant Second U.S Artillery), who was killed, May 31,

1862, at the battle of Fair Oaks, Va

The battery between Forts Reno and Kearny to be called Battery Rossell, after Maj Nathan B Rossell, Third U.S Infantry, who was killed, June 27, 1862, at the battle of Gaines' Mill, Va

The battery west of Fort De Russy to be called Battery Smead, after Capt John R Smead, Fifth U.S Artillery, who was killed, August 30, 1862, at the battle near Centreville, Va

The battery on the right of Fort De Russy to be called Battery Kingsbury, after Col Henry W Kingsbury,

Connecticut Volunteers (first lieutenant Fifth U.S Artillery), who was mortally wounded, September 17, 1862, at the battle of Antietam, Md

The battery on the right bank of the Eastern Branch of the Potomac to be called Battery Jameson, after Brig Gen Charles D Jameson, U.S Volunteers, who was in the battle of Bull Run, and who distinguished himself at the battles of Williamsburg and Fair Oaks, and died November 6, 1862 at his house in Old Town, Me., of typhoid fever, contracted in the field

The 100-pounder gun battery on Maddox's place to be called Battery Kemble, after the venerable Gouverneur Kemble, of Cold Spring, N Y., formerly president of the West Point Foundry, where most of the Army and Navy heavy guns have been made

The 100-pounder gun battery between Batteries Kemble and Cameron to be called Battery Parrott, after Robert

P Parrott, of Cold Spring, N.Y., formerly a captain of ordnance, U.S Army, and the inventor of the Parrott gun The battery in advance of Fort Blenker, to be called Battery Garesche, after lieut Col Julius P Garesche, assistant adjutant-general, U.S Army, who was killed, December 31, 1862, at the battle of Murfreesborough, Tenn

By order of the Secretary of War:

E D TOWNSEND,

Assistant Adjutant-General

ORA, I, 25, Part 2 (Serial 40), 186

Trang 18

WASHINGTON,

May 30, 1863

Maj Gen S P HEINTZELMAN,

Commanding Department of Washington:

GENERAL: I make the following recommendations as to names of fortifications around Washington:

That the name of the enlarged work on the eastern bank of the Potomac, above the Chain Bridge, consisting of the three forts now known as Forts Alexander, Franklin, and Ripley, be called Fort Sumner, after the late Maj Gen E V Sumner, who died at Syracuse, N Y., March 21, 1863

The three forts above named and incorporated into Fort Sumner to be hereafter styled Redoubt Alexander, Redoubt Franklin, Redoubt Ripley

That the new fort immediately north of Fort De Kalb, and near the Potomac, be called Fort C F Smith, after the late Maj Gen C F Smith, who died at Savannah, Tenn., of disease contracted in the service, and who greatly distinguished himself at the battle of Fort Donelson

That the new fort in progress behind Fort Cass be called Fort Whipple, after the late Major-General Whipple, who died at Washington, D.C., May 7, 1865, of wounds received at the battle of Chancellorsville, Va <ar40_569> That the new fort in progress at Corbett's house, between Forts Richardson and Barnard, be called Fort Berry, after the late Maj Gen H G Berry, who was killed at the battle of Chancellorsville, Va., May 2, 1863

That the new fort in progress on Traitor's Hill, near Fort Worth, be called Fort Williams, after the late Brig Gen T Williams, who was killed at the battle of Baton Rouge, La., August 5, 1862

That the battery for field guns near Rock Creek (east side) be called Battery Sill, after the late Brig Gen J W Sill, who was killed at the battle of Murfreesborough, Tenn., December 31, 1862

That the battery for field guns contiguous to and in advance of Fort Kearny be called Battery Terrill, after the late Brig Gen W.R Terrill, who was killed at the battle of Perryville, Ky., October 8 1862

Should these names meet your approval, an order from the proper authority is requested confirming them

I am, very respectfully, your most obedient,

J G BARNARD,

Brigadier-General, Chief Engineer of Defenses

ORA, I, 25, Part 2 (serial 40), 568-569

HEADQUARTERS CHIEF ENGINEER OF DEFENSES,

Washington, September 4, 1863

Col J C KELTON,

Assistant Adjutant-General.'

SIR: I respectfully recommend that the following works and forts, forming part of the Defenses of Washington,

may be called after the officers whose names are set opposite, and who have died or been killed in the service of the United States:

Fort at Rozier's Bluff, on east side of the Potomac River, 2 miles below Alexandria, to be called Fort Foote, after Rear-Admiral A.H Foote, U.S Navy, who died of disease June 26, 1863, and whose distinguished services in command of the United States naval forces upon the Western rivers are well known

Water battery at Alexandria to be called Battery Rodgers, after Fleet Capt G W Rodgers, U.S Navy, killed August 1?, 1863, in a naval attack upon Fort Wagner, Charleston Harbor, S.C

Fort Blenker, south side of Potomac, to be called Fort Reynolds, after Maj Gen J F Reynolds, killed July 1,

1863, at Gettysburg, Pa

Trang 19

Redoubt A, near Fort Lyon, to be called Fort Weed, after Stephen H Weed, captain Fifth Artillery, brigadiergeneral of volunteers, killed July 2, 1863, at Gettysburg, Pa

Redoubt B, near Fort Lyon, to be called Fort Farnsworth, after Brig Gen Elon J Farnsworth, killed July 3,

1863, at Gettysburg, Pa

Redoubt C, near Fort Lyon, to be called Fort O'Rorke, after Patrick H O'Rorke, first lieutenant of Engineers, U.S Army (colonel of volunteers), killed July 2, 1863, at Gettysburg, Pa

Redoubt D, near Fort Lyon, to be called Fort Willard, after George L Willard, major Nineteenth Infantry

(colonel of volunteers), killed July 2, 1863, at Gettysburg, Pa

J G BARNARD,

Brig Gen., Chief Engineer Defenses of Washington

ORA, I, 29, Part 2 (serial 49), 154

1862 COMMISSION TO STUDY THE DEFENSES REPORT

WASHINGTON, December 30, 1862

Hon E M STANTON, Secretary of War:

SIR: I herewith present you the report of the Commission ordered by you to examine the Defenses of

Washington, and report to you as to their efficiency, &c

It will be seen that the Commission approve generally of the lines established and of the works, and that they attach very great importance to them; that they recommend some additions to or modifications of the existing works; some new works (five or six) to strengthen certain parts of the line, and that they purpose to add a new feature to the defensive system by the construction of works to defend the river from maritime attack Their reasons are given in full, and it is not necessary for me to dwell upon them in this place

The amount expended upon the system up to the time when I relinquished the charge last spring to take the field with the Army of the Potomac was about $550,000 This applied to the construction of upward of fifty forts and a number of batteries Some of these works were of large dimensions, and many had, besides the usual

magazine, extensive bomb-proofs, for the protection of the garrisons

Notwithstanding the number of works built, the defensive system was in some parts still very weak, and

everywhere there was need (as I stated in a report to the Chief Engineer U.S Army a year ago) of auxiliary works, more efficient armament, &c.; and I also stated that there were important gaps in the line which should be filled When the Army of the Potomac retired from the James River, I was ordered to assume the command of the works and troops of Washington, and there was apprehension felt (as the result proved, rightly) for the safety of Washington

Of course, it was my duty, both as engineer and commanding officer, to use the time and means disposable to increase the strength of the defenses The northern side of the city, between the Potomac and Eastern Branch, which had been little exposed to attack the summer before, was, in August and September of this year, the most likely to be assailed, and from the Potomac to the Seventh street road it was exceedingly weak <ar31_903> When, for want of rank, I was superseded in the command, I continued to discharge the duties of engineer, under the full conviction that in that crisis (September 1) I could render no more valuable service to my country than to perfect the defenses of Washington

I commenced on my first arrival to strengthen this part of the line I directed the enlargement of Fort

Massachusetts, and laid out forts and batteries to make a complete connection between the first-named work and Fort Alexander on the Potomac; at the same time I felled the timber to a distance of a mile in front, thus exposing the ground and making it impracticable to the enemy's movements

Trang 20

Ci vii War Defenses of Washington PageC-7 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix C

On the south of the Potomac, rifle-pits were thrown up between the works, new gun-platforms laid, and the

armament improved; obstructions made across the valleys of Four-Mile Run and Hunting Creek; Fort Lyon

strengthened by advanced works, and batteries for field guns prepared On the most prominent or commanding points 100-pounder rifled guns, on center-pivot carriages, were introduced, to bring under fire the whole external area an enemy must occupy in approaching our lines These, and similar works, are fully described in the report of the Commission

With no other assistance from engineer officers than that of a single officer (valuable, indeed-that of Lieut Col B S Alexander), it has been necessary to employ a large number of civil assistants, superintendents, and overseers, to supervise the works and troops and laborers employed This, together with the hire of laborers, the purchase of lumber and other materials, has required a large cash expenditure You authorized (in August, I think) the application of $50,000 from the appropriation for the contingencies of fortifications, field works, &c.; to the Defenses of Washington, $50,000 more This last sum will have been nearly exhausted at the end of this month

It is exceedingly difficult to estimate for this kind of expenditure, and as the exigencies of the service have, since my return here, made it impossible to furnish the number of troops required for the labor, I am obliged to suppose that much of the additional work proposed by the Commission will be done by hired labor, and, making reference to past results, to estimate that an additional sum of $200,000 will be needed; for which I ask that an appropriation of Congress be requested I also request that, until such an appropriation be made, I may be

authorized to apply an additional $50,000 from the existing appropriation for contingencies of fortifications There has been but one other system of field works that I know of that is analogous to this in extent and

character-the famous lines of Torres Vedras These frustrated the design of Napoleon of driving the English from the Peninsula They consisted of a greater number of works, but the works were smaller, and much less expensive

in workmanship; yet on these lines, in a country where labor commanded but one tenth of what is paid in this country, $1,000,000 was expended from first to last

J G BARNARD,

Brig Gen., and Chief Engineer Defenses of Washington

[lnclosure.]

WASHINGTON, December 24, 1862

Hon E M STANTON, Secretary of War:

SIR: The Commission appointed by Special Orders of the War Department, No 312, dated Washington, October

25, 1862, "to examine <ar31_904> and report upon the plan of the present forts, and sufficiency of the present system of defenses for the city," report as follows:

The system of works constituting what are called the Defenses of Washington may be divided into four groups: First, those south of the Potomac, commencing with Fort Lyon, below Alexandria, and terminating with Fort De Kalb, opposite Georgetown; second, those of the Chain Bridge; third, those north of the Potomac, between the Potomac and the Eastern Branch, commencing with Fort Alexander and terminating with Fort Lincoln; fourth, those south of Eastern Branch, commenting with Fort Mahan and terminating with Fort Greble, nearly opposite Alexandria

The perimeter thus occupied, not counting the interval from Fort Greble to Fort Lyon, is about 33 miles, or, including that, 37 miles

In the first group are twenty-three field forts (including the small redoubts, Forts Bennett and Haggerty, and the external works of Forts Lyon and Blenker) In the second group are two forts (Ethan Allen and Marcy) and three batteries for field guns In the third are eighteen forts, four batteries, permanently armed with heavy guns, besides about fourteen batteries for field guns, some of which are of heavy profile, with stockaded gorges, magazines, &c

r - In the fourth group are eleven forts (not including the outworks in progress of Fort Meigs), besides the armed battery connected with Fort Carroll There are, therefore, in the whole system, as it now exists, fifty-three forts and twenty-two batteries

Trang 21

In addition to these, is the small group consisting of Forts Ramsay and Buffalo and intrenchments on Munson's and Perkins' Hills, which do not properly belong to the fortificatioris of Washington

The total armament in the different works, at the date of this report, is six hundred and forty-three guns and seventy-five mortars The total infantry garrisons required for their defense, computed at 2 men per yard of front perimeter, and 1 man per yard of rear perimeter of works, is about 25,000 The total number of artillerymen (to furnish three reliefs for each gun) required is about 9,000 Aggregate, 34,000

It is seldom necessary to keep these infantry supports attached to the works

The 25,000 infantry should be encamped in such positions as may be most convenient to enable them, in case of alarm, to garrison the several works, and a force of 3,000 cavalry should be available for outpost duty, to give notice of the approach of any enemy

The artillerymen, whose training requires much time, having learned the disposition of the armament and computed the distances of the ground over which attacks may be looked for, and the ranges and service of their guns, should not be changed They should remain permanently in the forts Whenever any enemy is within striking distance of the capital-able by a rapid march to attempt a coup de main, which might result in the

temporary occupation of the city, the dispersion of the Government, and the destruction of the archives, all of which could be accomplished by a single day's possession-a covering army of not less than 25,000 men should

be held in position to march to meet the attacking column Against more serious attacks from the main body of the enemy, the capital must depend upon the concentration of its entire armies in Virginia or Maryland They should precede or follow any movement of the enemy seriously threatening the capital

The Commission do not deem it necessary to enter into a history of the construction of these works, though, fully to appreciate their merits or demerits, that history should be known (as it is presumed to be by <ar31_905> those immediately interested), and it is fully given in the engineer's report to the Chief Engineer U.S Army, dated December 10, 1861

The Commission deem it only necessary to remark that, in general, the lines and locations of works are well chosen; that where the works are not altogether adequate for their positions, or the lines fail to occupy the best ground, the causes are to be found in the exigencies under which the ground was selected and the works built They find that the defects in the system, arising from these causes, were clearly understood by the engineer, and that on his reassuming charge, in August last, prompt and vigorous measures were taken to remedy them, and that

at the date of the examination by the Commission some of fine most serious deficiencies in the line had been remedied; that other works had been laid out or proposed which would judiciously strengthen weak portions of the line, and they learn, from his own statements, that only the impossibility of getting adequate working parties from the troops, and the want of means for hiring the large bodies of laborers which would have been necessary, have prevented the execution during the past season of all the works so proposed Though from such causes much remains to be done, the Commission find the line throughout its whole extent respectably strong, the works in good condition generally, garrisoned with artillerymen, and the armament in good order, and well supplied with ammunition, and well served

· With these preliminary remarks, the Commission will proceed to mention the individual works, with such recommendations as they deem necessary

Fort Lyon.-This work forms the extreme.left of our line south of the Potomac, and its function is a most

important one-that of holding the heights south of Hunting Creek, from which Alexandria could be shelled and our left flank exposed The work is the largest of all, excepting Fort Runyon If it had been placed on the higher ground in front of its present position, it would have better fulfilled its object The engineer is now constructing three advanced works, two on this higher ground and one to command the extensive ravine on the southeast The Commission further recommend the construction of an interior reduit, by which the main work will be made more secure against assaults; the construction of traverses, particularly on the southern front, and of additional gun platforms, in order, if required, to bring more fire to bear on the heights to the westward On examining the ground between the Mount Vernon and Accotink roads, the Commission recommend a small work on the spur, with an advanced battery or batteries to sweep the river fiats, the Mount Vernon road, and the ravine before mentioned This work will better cover the Alexandria Bridge, and give great additional strength to Fort Lyon and

to this left flank of our lines

Trang 22

Fort E;llsworth.-This work is well situated, covering immediately Alexandria and the railroad depot Though a work in second line, it fulfills an important purpose in closing the gap between Forts Lyon and Worth, and

sweeping by its fire of rifled guns the approaches to those works, and, uniting its fire with theirs, preventing the establishment of batteries on the heights south of Hunting Creek The work is amply provided with bomb-proofs and magazines The Commission recommend platforms and embrasures for field guns on the flanks

Traitors' Hill.-This is a very excellent position, forming a point d'ap-pui of the line of obstructions across the valley of Hunting Creek, and commanding the deep ravine which envelopes the rear of Fort Worth It is important

to hold it, and it is valuable as a position for artillery to fire upon the opposite heights; and the Commission recommend that a <ar31_906> work be constructed to admit of siege guns, in conformity to a plan presented by the engineer

Fort Worth occupies a very commanding position A larger work would have been desirable, but the site would not have permitted it, even if the exigencies of the times in which it was built had not limited the size to a

minimum The work is deficient in fire (and from its figure cannot bring a sufficient fire) upon the heights

directly opposite, south of Hunting Creek Such additional_ guns as its form permits, to bear in this direction, should be introduced The work has sufficient bomb-proof and magazines A 100-pounder is being mounted to sweep the sector from Fort Lyon around to Fort Ward The works previously enumerated, with a chain of

obstructions across the valley from Fort Lyon to Cooper's Hill, will secure Alexandria and the left flank of our general defensive line, and, by their powerful artillery, prevent the establishment of field batteries on the heights south of Hunting Creek, and make even the establishment of siege batteries a work of great difficulty and danger The Commission recommend the introduction of another 100.pounder into this work, to be placed in the salient of the south bastion

Fort Ward occupies a very commanding and important position, defending the Leesburg and Alexandria

turnpike and lateral roads, and overlooking the country northwardly and westwardly toward Fort De Kalb and Bailey's and Ball's cross-roads It contains a sufficient armament and ample bomb-proofs and magazines It was built in great haste, and with too thin parapets on the exposed fronts The Commission recommend the thickening

of the front parapets to 14 feet, and the construction of counterscarp casemates, for reversed fires, at the northwest and southwest angles A 100-pounder is being placed in this work, which will sweep a large extent of country in front of our lines, and, in conjunction with those of Fort Richardson and the batteries north of the Potomac, will furnish a flank fire upon every part of the line hence to Fort De Kalb

Fort Blenker.-The site was selected for its command of the valley of Four-Mile Run It is defective in trace and

in having no view of the approaches from the west, the ground rising in that direction The latter defect is being remedied by the construction of a seven-gun battery, with stockaded gorge, about 200 yards to the westward The work being in a re-entrant, and its approaches under powerful fire from Forts Ward and Barnard, it is believed to answer sufficiently well its purpose The ravine in rear affords much protection to the garrison against shelling, and it is not proposed to construct bomb-proofs The magazines are adequate The valley of Four-Mile Run is obstructed by abatis, the rifle-pits only occupying a part of the interval near Fort Blenker It is recommended to continue the rifle-pits across the valley, and to construct a battery for field guns on the spur east of the fort, by which an important enfilading fire up the valley will be obtained

Fort Barnard occupies a commanding position, and one naturally very strong It covers the head of ravines, in which large bodies of troops can be collected and concealed in a favorable position for making flank attacks upon

an enemy's columns assaulting our line between it and Fort Craig, or attempting to penetrate the valley of FourMile Run Taken in connection with its outworks and rifle-pits, the ground may be considered well occupied, though the work itself is rather small Its magazines are adequate, and, considering the protection given to troops

by ravines in its rear, it is not considered necessary to build more bomb-proof accommodation The Commission recommend that <ar31_907> casemates, for reversed flank defense, be prepared in the northwestern angle, and that the exterior covert-way be prepared with platforms and embrasures for a battery of field artillery

The works thus far mentioned form a group by themselves, and can scarcely be called "Defenses of Washington," though doubtless having an important bearing on its defense To defend Washington, strictly speaking, requires simply that the enemy shall be kept off from the banks of the Potomac to such a distance that he cannot shell the city, and this object is accomplished by the chain of works from Fort Scott to Fort De Kalb, resting its left on Four-

Trang 23

Mile Run and its right on the Potomac The works in question are, strictly speaking, for the defense of Alexandria and the railroad terminus It is unnecessary to expatiate on the importance of holding these points; and these

remarks are made to show that the hues of works necessarily embrace something more in their objects than the mere defense of Washington

Fort Scott forms the left interior line covering Washington That is, in connection with Fort Richardson, it

continues the line to the Potomac, thus forming a complete defensive system independent of the works previously mentioned, which cover Alexandria Its position is important and commanding, and the work is well constructed and provided with ample bomb-proofs and magazines Under existing circumstances, the Commission do not find cause to recommend any modifications They would recommend, however, the eventual filling up of the gap

between this work and Fort Richardson, by a small work on the elbow of the ridge, and such other additional arrangements as may be necessary to make this interior line complete

Fort Richardson occupies a very commanding position It is small, but well built, well armed, and amply

provided with bomb-proofs and magazines The ravines in front will be seen by the rifle-pits in construction A 100-pounder is being placed in this work, which will sweep a sector from Fort Ellsworth to Fort De Kalb

Considering its position (in a re-entrant) and difficulty of access, the Commission do not judge it necessary to

recommend the construction of reversed flank defenses

Fort Albany is a work partly bastioned, well built, and in admirable condition, the parapets being turfed and

scarps revered with boards It is well defiladed, and in a very advantageous position to cover the Long Bridge, and look into the gorges of Forts Richardson and Craig It sees the high ground in front of Fort Tillinghast, and

commands the valley between Forts Richardson and Scott It is well provided with magazines, embrasures, and bomb-proofs Some heavy rifled pieces are wanted

Fort Runyon.-Though this work has not the importance it first had, it should not have been permitted to fall to

decay, nor to be disarmed, as has very improperly been done As a tete-de-pont, it should be re-armed, and kept in

perfect condition in every respect

The five works, Forts Craig, Tillinghast, Cuss, Woodbury, and De Kalb, extend the line from Forts Richardson and Albany to the Potomac, opposite Georgetown, covering what are usually called the Heights of Arlington, heights from which the enemy would have within long range of rifled guns the most important public buildings of the city The line would have been better had it been thrown half a mile farther forward; but its location where it

is, on ground by no means unfavorable, was not an error of judgment, but a necessity of the circumstances under which it was built In reference to this part of the line, the following general remarks are made: The line south of Fort Richardson, <ar31_908> either by magnitude or commanding positions of works, or both, has great strength;

if broken, the enemy has yet another line to carry before he can reach the bridges or the heights opposite

Washington If he attempts the left flank of the Arlington lines, by the Columbia turnpike, he takes a line of attack through comparatively low ground, swept to a greater.or less degree by cross-fires or front-fires from Forts Ward, Blenker, Barnard, Richardson, Craig, Tillinghast, and Albany The route from Ball's ·cross-Roads, approaching the center and right flank of the Arlington lines, is, from the configuration of the ground, not thus closely swept and commanded It forms the most practicable approach; it leads most directly to the point to be gained All the ground 1n front, to the distance of a mile, is, however, in fact, swept in flank by the 100-pounders and other rifled guns of Fort Richardson, and of Batteries Cameron and Parrott, at an extreme range of 2 miles, and from the 100-pounder of Fort Ward and the two 100-pounders of Battery Kemble at an extreme range of 3_ miles, while it is under the direct fire, to a distance of at least 1,000 yards of the works (closely contiguous to each other), of the line

The Commission are of opinion that this part of the line needs further strengthening, and recommend the

following:

1st A work at the red house, which shall strengthen the extreme flank of the line on the Potomac, and enfilade the long and deep ravine on the right and front of Fort De Kalb ·

2d A work on the spur behind Forts Cass and Tillinghast, which shall see into the gorges of these works, give

an important fire upon the high ground in front of the line, and flank that line from Fort Woodbury to Fort De Kalb This work will give great additional strength to Fort Corcoran, enabling it to be held, even should the two

Trang 24

Civil War Defenses of Washington Page C-11 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix C

works in its front fall, and thus will enable us to maintain a tete-de-pont at the aqueduct, which cannot be held after

Fort Corcoran falls

3d The construction of batteries for field guns along the intervals of the works, or in the lines of rifle-pits,

wherever favorable locations offer themselves

4th The construction of sufficient bomb-proofs, to shelter the garrisons of the works named, Fort Corcoran included

5th The strengthening of the tete-de-pont at the aqueduct

The Commission also recommend the construction of two works in advance of the line, at points which have been examined and indicated-one opposite the interval between Forts Craig and Tillinghast, the other opposite the interval between Forts Woodbury and Cass, and 700 or 800 yards in front, these works to have stockaded gorges

Fort Ethan Allen.-This is a large work, bastioned on its exposed fronts, and pretty well adapted to its

important position The Commission recommend that a retrenchment be made to cross the gorge of the west bastion; that the fire on this capital be increased by placing 20-pounder rifled guns in the adjacent flanks, and two

of the same class of guns on the pan-coupe of the salient; that additional bomb-proofs be built, so as to furnish

sleeping accommodations for one-half the garrison; that the parapets of the northwest front be thickened to 14 feet; that additional platforms be provided for field guns, and that traverses be constructed on the northwest and south fronts

Fort Marey.-Bomb-proofs are in course of construction, as well as additional platforms for guns The

Commission make no further recommendations

The two works just named form no part of the Defenses of Washing ton, strictly speaking, but are of the utmost importance as a tete-de-pont <ar31_909> to the Chain Bridge, over which it is indispensable to secure a debouch

The position is strong and well occupied The lines of rifle-pits which connect the works with each other, and with the banks of the river, afford, with the auxiliary batteries, full view and defense of the numerous ravines, and give all the artificial strength which the position needs The heights from which the works can be commanded, and the approaches to them, are under the fire of the heavy guns (the 100-pounder Parrott, and rifled 42-pounders and 30-pounder Parrotts, and 32-pounder sea-coast guns) of Batteries Cameron, Parrott, Kemble, Vermont, and of Forts Alexander and Franklin

The Commission suggest that some defensive arrangements are necessary immediately about the head of the bridge; probably two or three small works, or, perhaps, block-houses would suffice

Forts on Upton's, Taylor's, and Munson's Hills.-An army falling back on Washington after defeat, or on

account of inferiority of numbers, might find it advantageous or desirable on many accounts to occupy temporarily

or permanently this advanced position; its left resting on these naturally strong points, its right on the works at Chain Bridge On the other hand, should Washington be threatened while held merely by a garrison, these works are too far advanced to be held We recommend that the existing works be preserved from dilapidation, and

consider nothing more necessary

Forts Alexander, Franklin, an·d Ripley.-This group of small works occupies a commanding, but advanced,

position The occupation is in dispensable to the security of the Chain Bridge, and protection of the receiving reservoir The fires from these works add, at the same time, greatly to the strength of the works and position in advance of the Chain Bridge The salient position of these works throws them, in great degree, upon their own unaided strength, while there are heights to the northward dangerously near, affording convenient emplacements for the enemy's artillery The fire from the 100-pounder at Fort Pennsylvania reaches the heights in question; so, too, to a certain degree, that of the rifled guns of Fort Mansfield and adjacent batteries The fire from the works themselves upon these heights is quite inadequate; the guns (32-pounders) crowded and wholly exposed The Commission recommend, first, the union of the three works into (essentially) one, by connecting parapets; second, the removal of three 24-pounders now useless, from Fort Ripley, and placing them in battery behind the

connecting exterior parapets; third, the building of merlons, to protect all the barbette guns bearing toward the heights mentioned; fourth, the construction of traverses on the southwest faces of Fort Alexander; fifth, the

providing of platforms behind the external parapets for at least a dozen field guns to bear upon the heights; sixth, the introduction of another 100-pounder into Fort Alexander or Fort Franklin (Part of the matters here

Trang 25

recommended are in course of execution.) Between these works just named and Fort Mansfield are two well

constructed and well-located batteries for field guns, for sweeping the ravine in front of Fort Mansfield

Fort Mansfield.-The name is applied to two considerable redoubts and an exterior battery, connected by a

substantial rifle-pit The works are well located, as connecting links between Forts Ripley and Pennsylvania; are well built, and deemed adequate for their purpose Still another redoubt (not named) is in construction on this line, near the Great Falls turnpike

Fort Pennsylvania. This work occupies a commanding position, at a point where the dividing ridge between

· the Potomac and Rock Creek <ar31_910> narrows so as to expose the slopes in both directions It commands the three avenues to Washington which unite at Tennallytown The work, as originally built, was deficient in size; its exposed parapets too thin, and it had not a good view of_the approaches from the northward A battery for eight guns has been constructed on an advanced point of the ridge (say 300 yards northward), with magazine and

inclosed gorge This is connected with the work by a double line of rifle-pits, with a flanking battery, making of the ensemble a very strong position The armament of the fort has been increased, and its disposition improved; platforms constructed for additional field guns, and a 100-pounder rifled gun mounted to sweep the sector from Fort Marcy to Fort Massachusetts The Commission recommend an increased thickness for the parapets of

exposed fronts, and the construction of a bomb-proof for garrison

Between Forts Pennsylvania and Kearny is a battery for eight field guns, very substantially constructed, with magazine, but with open gorge It has good views of the cross valley running from near Fort Pennsylvania to Broad Branch (of Rock Creek), and sees well the ridge of high ground in front of Forts Pennsylvania, Kearny, and

De Russy The Commission recommend that its gorge be closed by a stockade, and extend this recommendation to the different batteries of similar construction between Forts Ripley and Massachusetts

Fort Kearny (recently built), occupying an excellent position, is a necessary connecting link between Forts

Pennsylvania and' De Russy It sees well the upper valley of Broad Branch, and crosses its fires with those of Forts Pennsylvania and De Russy and intermediate batteries upon the dangerous heights in front It has a powerful armament, and is provided with ample magazines and bomb-proofs, and is well adapted to its location A field battery, just across Broad Branch, has been built to sweep part of the ravine immediately in front of Fort Kearny; otherwise unseen

Fort De Russy occupies a very commanding point, overlooking the deep valley of Rock Creek, and throwing a

cross-fire upon the approaches to Fort Massachusetts, and (together with Fort Kearny)controlling the country roads between the Rockville turnpike and Rock Creek It is too small, and its fire was inadequate to its position The site does not admit of an easy extension This defect is partially remedied by the construction of batteries on either flank, and a few hundred yards to the left, having a better view of the Milk-House Ford road and ravines toward Broad Branch; the other, on the right, sees the slopes toward Rock Creek The Commission recommend the introduction of a 100-pounder, on center pintle carriage, in place of one of the 32-pounders, to sweep the sector from Fort Pennsylvania to Fort Massachusetts; the fire of which will be particularly important upon the approaches to Fort Massachusetts also; the construction of casemates for reverse fires in the east and west angle of the counterscarp

Fort Gaines is a work in second line Should the enemy succeed in forcing the interval between Forts Ripley

and Pennsylvania, he could not establish himself on the secondary ridge, on which Fort Mansfield is situated, under the fire of this work, by the rifled guns of which the magazines of Fort Mansfield may be exploded The Commission believe nothing further is required at this work

Batteries Cameron, Parrott, and Kemble.-The first, of two rifled James 42s, the other two of one 100-pounder

each, are designed, first, to enfilade the front of the Arlington lines from Fort De Kalb to Tillinghast; second, to operate on the heights between Forts De Kalb and Marcy, <:ar31_911> on which the enemy could plant artillery to bear upon these works, and upon the marginal spurs on which batteries could be established, to bear on the

aqueduct or Chain Bridge Considering how important these functions are, the Commission recommend the

substitution of 100-pounders for the rifled 42s in Battery Cameron, and the addition of another 100-pounder to each of the other batteries

Trang 26

Battery Vermont was constructed before the other shor!! of the Potomac was occupied It has a good view of the

Leesburg turnpike, and the Commission recommend the substitution of rifled guns for the 32-pounders, to bear on that approach

Battery Martin Scott sweeps the Chain Bridge It now contains field 6-pounders Two 8-inch siege howitzers are

recommended

Returning now to the principal line, and proceeding from Fort De Russy eastward, near Rock Creek, on the heights, on the east side, is a battery for field guns, on the line of rifle-pits, intended to command the broad ravine which crosses the interval between Rock Creek and Fort Massachusetts

Fort Massachusetts, in conjunction with Fort Slocum, commands one of the principal avenues of approach to

Washington The original work was entirely inadequate to its important purpose It has recently been judiciously enlarged, and, with the addition, is a powerful and satisfactory work The Commission recommend that merlons

be raised on the exposed front of the old work, which will, at the same time, defilade the rear and lateral faces; that the parapet of the exposed front be thickened; that bomb-proofs for garrison and casemates for reverse fire at the southeast angle of the old work and at the north angle of new work be constructed

Fort Slocum.-From two-thirds of a mile to 1 mile in advance of Forts Massachusetts and Slocum the country

rises to heights say 20 to 30 feet higher than the crests to those works, furnishing to an enemy most advantageous emplacements for artillery Along the dividing ridge of this high ground, between Rock Creek and the Eastern Branch, leads the Seventh street turnpike road These two works are, therefore, exposed to the most powerful efforts of the enemy Fort Slocum, though originally of more respectable dimensions than Fort Massachusetts, was, nevertheless, a small work, and quite inadequate in strength, armament, and bomb-proof The work is undergoing

a considerable and judicious enlargement The Commission recommend merlons and traverses on the exposed fronts of the old work, by which the work will be defiladed and the guns better protected The high ground spoken

of in advance of these works will be under the fire of the 100-pounders and other rifled guns of Forts De Russy and Totten, besides that of the powerful batteries of the works themselves

Fort Totten occupies a most commanding and strong position, and exercises a powerful influence upon the

approaches from the northward and those through the valley between it and Fort Lincoln It is well adapted to its position, well built and well armed, and amply provided with magazines and bomb-proofs The 100-pounder here placed will sweep the sector froin Fort De Russy to Fort Lincoln Merlons and traverses are not called for in this work The position is so strong that reverse fires are not considered necessary for the ditches No

recommendations made

Fort Slemmer.-A well-placed battery for three 32-pounder guns No recommendations made

Fort Bunker Hill occupies a very commanding position, but it is deficient in interior space It should contain at

least two rifled guns, and needs additional fire upon its capital An advanced battery for field <ar31_912> guns is designed, with covered approaches or rifle-pits, connecting with the flanks of the work A covered way would have been a valuable addition, and could have been easily made in the first construction The Commission

recommend a platform for the 8-inch howitzer, to be made in the pan-coupe, and a rifled 30-pounder to be placed

on the existing platforms, on each of the two short lateral faces; also a battery for field guns upon the spur to the southward ; also the moving of the two guns on the gorge to more advantageous positions

Forts Saratoga and Thayer are minor works, forming connecting links between Forts Bunker Hill and Lincoln

They are both lunettes, with faces of 100 feet, and stockaded gorges The first furnishes valuable cross-fires upon the approaches to Fort Bunker Hill, and its situation is commanding It is desirable that at least one rifled gun should be in this work, and a platform for such a gun is recommended to be made at the, salient The heavy guns

on the flanks should be moved on to the faces, and field guns placed in embrasures substituted Merlons should be raised on the faces It is amply provided with bomb-proofs

Fort Thayer is located to command a spacious ravine, which otherwise would afford an ample cover and

convenient approach to an enemy The useless gun on the west-shoulder angle should be moved to the east face, to increase the fire upon this ravine A platform for a siege gun should be made on the pan-coupe and platforms for

field guns on the flanks, and merlons raised on faces A ditch should be made along the stockade of the gorge

Trang 27

Fort Lincoln is situated on an eminence, overlooking the extensive valley formed by the Eastern Branch and its

tributaries, and commanding the Baltimore turnpike, the railroad, and several minor roads, which, passing

through or near Bladensburg, lead into Washington At the foot of this eminence was fought the battle of

Bladensburg The narrowness of the summit, on which it is situated, is unfavorable to a good trace The exterior batteries and rifle-pits, however, thoroughly see the ground over which assaulting columns must pass, and the bomb-proofs and magazines, arranged as traverses, protect the long and narrow interior from enfilading fires A 100-pounder is being mounted in the northeast angle, which will sweep the sector from Fort Slocum around to Fort Mahan The Commission recommend reversed casemates in the northeast angle of counterscarp and a few additional platforms for guns on the western long face An additional magazine is in construction From the fort the ridge runs easterly to the Eastern Branch, about three-fourths of a mile distant About midway is a half-sunk battery for field guns, connected with the work by a double caponiere At this point the ridge falls abruptly 40 or

50 feet, and the line is continued by rifle-pits to the extremity, where a powerful battery has just been built,

terminating this part of our line A deep, and for three fourths its length impenetrable, ravine takes its origin near the fort, and runs behind and parallel to this ridge On the spurs immediately south are two half-sunk batteries for field guns, bearing upon the margins of the Eastern Branch

Fort Mahan may be considered an advanced tete-de-pont to Benning's Bridge, and commands the valley of the•

Eastern Branch as far as Bladensburg, as well as the immediate approaches to the bridge It is situated upon an isolated hill, the steep slopes of which are unseen from the fort, and are necessarily defended by external rifle-pits

As long as this work is held, an enemy cannot bring artillery to bear upon the bridge, nor move in force along the road which leads from Baldness-burg to the Navy-Yard Bridge Between this road and that leading <ar31_913> along the summit of the highlands southeast of the Eastern Branch the ground is very much cut up by wooded ravines perpendicular to the direction of the roads Hence, this single work exercises a powerful influence in preventing an enemy, coming from the direction of Bladensburg, from reaching the margin of the Eastern Branch opposite Washington It should be capable of holding out for a few days without external aid The work is well built and sufficiently large The Commission recommend the construction of bomb-proofs for the garrison, and to contain, besides five days' provisions, reversed casemates at three of the angles of counterscarp and a few more platforms for field guns on east and west faces; also a stockaded redan, to cover the entrance and flank the gorge

It should be remarked that Benning's Bridge itself is guarded by a tete-de-pont for infantry

The chain of works (ten in all) from Fort Meigs to Fort Greble occupies the summit of the ridge between the Eastern Branch and Oxen Creek from almost all points at which, in this distance of 6 miles, an enemy can bring batteries to bear upon the navy-yard or arsenal

Fort Meigs occupies a key-point to the ridge It is the extreme point in this direction from which the arsenal and

the navy-yard can be seen and reached by an enemy's batteries To reach this point from Bladens-burg, an enemy must take the Eastern Branch and Benning's Bridge roads, or, by a considerable detour, strike the Marlborough road to the eastward Obstructed at Fort Meigs, if he would reach the ridge at a lower point, he must make a more extensive detour, cross the valley of Oxen Creek above Fort Meigs, and recross it again; the only public road available being the one ascending the ridge at Fort Wagner and leading to the Navy-Yard Bridge Fort Meigs should be a work capable of resisting a vigorous assault It is not so (no isolated small field-work can be so), and

no single large work on this difficult ground, even if the topography permitted, can be made so without numerous outworks The object can only be attained by a congeries of works, which shall sustain and flank each other, and, from numerous points of vie~ see and guard all the ravines and otherwise hidden surfaces To accomplish this

to a great degree, at least-several auxiliary works are necessary-say, a work some 300 yards distant, on the Marlborough road (under construction); a battery in connection therewith, near the road, to command a ravine of gentle slopes which extends from near Fort Meigs southward to Oxen Creek; a small work (under construction)

on a knob a few hundred yards north of Fort Meigs (of much lower elevation), to see, in reverse, the steep slopes and ravines which approach the fort from the northward These works, with Fort Du Pont, will form a congeries, which may be considered a single fortification or fortified camp, in which the garrison must sustain itself for a few days The various ravines and inequalities of the ground furnish ample protection against direct or covered fires, and, as vertical fires are not to be apprehended, bomb-proofs are unnecessary., except for the ground of the forts themselves and for storage of provisions The guns of Fort Meigs are all sea-coast 32s, and in barbette As

Trang 28

these guns will be useful for their distant fire, the light guns of surrounding works being depended on for flanking purposes, it may be well to let them remain as they are

-Fort Du Pont, after what has been said, requires no especial remark A deep ravine to the westward may,

perhaps, be best defended by a block-house, which can be pretty well screened from an enemy's artillery The system we have just spoken of may require two or three of these structures

Fort Davis requires no especial remark It may be regarded as an «58 RR-VOL XXI» <ar31_914> outwork to

Fort ·Baker, having a pretty good view of approaches on either side of the ridge, not seen from Fort Baker

Fort Baker was designed on correct principles as a strong point on the ridge Its site is the only one between

Forts Meigs and Stanton admitting considerable dimensions It is a strong and well-armed fort A ravine near and parallel to its front requires a battery or block-house to guard it The steep slopes behind it may be well defended

by rifle-pits Additional bomb-proofs are necessary for the garrison The magazine entrances at this and several other works of this group should be screened by traverses

Fort Wagner is a battery intended to sweep the valley through which the road leads up the heights

Fort Ricketts is a battery intended to see the ravine in front of Fort Stanton, which it does but imperfectly

Fort Stanton occupies the nearest point of the ridge to· the arsenal and navy-yard, and overlooks Washington, the Potomac, and Eastern Branch It is a work of considerable dimensions, well built, and tolerably well armed

Casemates for reversed fires are recommended in northwest and southwest counterscarp angles, and platforms for two or three rifled guns on the east front The deep ravine which flanks this work on two sides requires some additional precaution, and further study of it is recommended

Fort Snyder may be regarded as an outwork to Fort Stanton, guarding the head of one branch of the ravine just

mentioned Except additional platforms for field guns, and a ditch in front of the gorge stockade, and block

houses, nothing further seems necessary

Fort Carroll South of the ravine already spoken of, the character of the ridge between Oxen Creek and the

Eastern Branch changes Instead of a narrow ridge, it expands, at a level 60 or 70 feet lower, into a plateau of considerable width At Fort Carroll this plateau narrows so as to afford a view of both slopes A spur toward Oxen Creek gives a fine view of its valley opposite Fort Snyder to opposite Fort Greble This point is occupied by a battery, inclosed at gorge by a stockade The fort itself is large and well built The Commission recommend bombproofs for garrisons and provisions, and additional platforms for field guns, and counterscarp casemates for

flanking the ditches

Fort Greble occupies the extremity of the plateau It is a large and powerful work, well provided with magazines and bomb-proofs The Commission recommend the construction of flanking casemates in counterscarp and

additional platforms for field guns

In relation to this group of works, the Commission express the opinion that an enemy wiB not attempt to enter Washington from this direction, and that we cannot (as a general rule) expect to be able to meet him with a line of troops What is to be prevented is the seizure of these heights for the purpose of establishing batteries to destroy the navy-yard and arsenal For this purpose the works should be self-sustaining, or relying only upon such aid as a small movable body of troops can furnish, and upon succor, which may be thrown over the Branch after an attack

is developed It is under this view that the considerable increase of strength to Fort Meigs is deemed necessary, and other recommendations are made

Rifle-pits.-A line of rifle-pits commences at Fort Lyon and is continued to the Potomac near Fort De Kalb,

interrupted only in the bottoms of Hunting Creek and Four-Mile Run (where obstructions replace it), or

occasionally by ground so broken that continuity is not necessary In this line are frequent emplacements for field guns, openings for <ar31_915> sorties, &c It is not entirely completed At the Chain Bridge the position is

enveloped by a well-arranged system of rifle-pits The line commences again at Fort Alexander, and continues to the Eastern Branch; from the first-named point to Fort Massachusetts being of dimensions enough to cover

entirely a man standing in the trench, and to contain two ranks From Fort Massachusetts to the Eastern Branch the pits are intended only for one rank The Commission recommend that the dimensions be increased to admit two ranks Fort Mahan is surrounded by rifle-pits, and some have been constructed in connection with other works over the Eastern Branch The Commission recommend the construction of rifle-pits in connection with each work, or system of works, of this group, so as to view and defend its own approaches, a continuous line not being necessary

Trang 29

Wells.-Generally the works are (in some cases at great expense of labor) provided with copious wells There are yet some, however, where they are wanted, and where they should be provided

Roads.-On the south side of the Potomac there are roads enough, or nearly so; but they require much work,

such as widening, raising, constructing of culverts, &c., to make them practicable for winter A new military road has been constructed from Fort Alexander to Fort Massachusetts, having branches connecting with the different works The roads along the line thence to Fort Lincoln (partly made by the engineers) make the chain complete Much work, however, is required on the main stems leading from the city, to make them practicable in the winter A military road has been made to Fort Stanton; another is in construction behind the ridge from Fort Baker to Fort Meigs, to enable succor to be given promptly to the works The communications with Forts Carroll and Greble are probably sufficient

It has been estimated that the work on roads about Washington requires ten regiments for twenty days, and efforts have been made to obtain this or an equivalent of labor in some other shape The Commission further state their opinion that the Defenses of Washington cannot be considered complete without the defense of the river against an enemy's armed vessels Foreign intervention would bring against us maritime forces, and we could not depend upon being always in superior naval force on the Potomac, and we are, even now, threatened with Confederate iron-clads fitted out in English ports Fort Washington is too distant for defense of the river under existing circumstances, for the superiority of the enemy in the field, which would drive us behind the Washington lines, would prevent our supporting that work if attacked by land The Commission believe that a satisfactory defense may be afforded by placing on Jones' Point, near Alexandria, a battery of six guns of the heaviest caliber, say, four 200-pounders and two 15.inch guns in caserriates, and by constructing a battery of ten guns and a covering work on the opposite shore of the Potomac, at or near Rozier's Bluff An examination has been made, revealing a most favorable and

strong position on that side, easily communicated with by water Surveys are in progress The occupation of a point

on the other shore in this vicinity will likewise protect Alexandria from cannonade, to which it would be exposed if left open to the enemy The Commission recommend, as an additional security to Washington, the establishment of two heavy guns on Giesborough Point

The Commission conclude their report by expressing their convictions of the great importance of this system of defenses to Washington, and by urging upon the War Department and Congress to take steps and provide means for a full and early completion of the work <ar31_916>

The great authority of Napoleon is on record upon the necessity of fortifying national capitals He gives his opinion that 50,000 men, national guards or volunteers from the citizens, and 3,000 artillerymen will defend a capital against an army of 300,000, and that had Vienna, Berlin, and Madrid been fortified and defended, the countries of which they are the capitals would have been preserved from the fatal results of his campaigns of

1805, 1806, and 1808 against them, and that, had Paris been fortified in 1814, his own Empire would have been saved from overthrow

The position of Washington, on the very borders of the insurgent territory, exposes it to great danger in cases of serious reverse to our arms in Virginia, and twice already have its defensive works been the means of saving the capital and enabling us to reorganize our defeated armies

Trang 30

AppendixD

Correspondence Concerning

Appropriations for the Defense of Washington

Trang 31

Civil War Defenses of Washington PageD-1 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix D

Appendix D: Correspondence Concerning Appropriations for the Defenses of Washington

WASHINGTON, December 6, 1861

Maj Gen GEORGE B MCCLELLAN,

Commanding Army of the Potomac, &c.:

GENERAL: It appears probable that our available appropriations will not suffice to complete entirely the defensive works about Washington Forty-eight different works, some of which, like Forts Ethan Allen,

Runyon, and Lyon, are of very large size, extensive abatis, &c., have been constructed, and many of them, besides the usual magazines, are provided with extensive bomb-proofs for quarters For these constructions the sum of $344,053.46 has been available It is probable that this sum will not entirely suffice, and that it will be more than exhausted by the close of the present month I therefore request that an application be made

to Congress for the immediate appropriation of the sum of $150,000 for completing the defenses of

Washington

You are aware that while hired labor has been extensively employed south of the Potomac, the works north

of the river have been almost exclusively constructed by it

J G BARNARD,

Brigadier-General and Chief Engineer,

Army of Potomac

ORA, I, 5 (serial 5), 676

WAR DEPARTMENT, December 11, 1861

Hon SPEAKER, OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith a copy of a letter of Brig Gen J G Barnard, chief engineer of

the Army of the Potomac, setting forth the necessity for an early appropriation of $150,000 for completing the defenses of Washington

In view of the urgency of the case, as expressed by the commanding general of the Army in his indorsement submitting the letter to this Department, I commend it to the early and favorable action of Congress

Very respectfully,

SIMON CAMERON,

Secretary of War

[lnclosure.]

Maj Gen GEORGE B McCLELLAN,

Commander-in Chief Commanding Army of the Potomac:

GENERAL: By letter of the 6th I requested that an immediate appropriation of $150,000 be asked for "completing the defenses of Washington." I mentioned in that letter that our defensive system thus far consisted of about fortyeight works, mounting over 300 guns, some of which are of very large size; and I may add that the actual defensive

Trang 32

perimeter occupied is about thirty-five miles, exceeding the length of the famous (and hitherto the most extensive fortified by extemporized field-works) lines of Torres Vedras by several miles The amount which has been expended will not, therefore, considering the pressure under which the works have been built, appear extravagantly large

I now remark that in asking for the sum of $150,000 for "completing the defenses of Washington" I have in my mind the fact that many of the works have been thrown up in the very face of the enemy, and are <arl07 _511> deficient in profile; and in many other respects the system requires auxiliary works to complete it, which it will probably be deemed advisable to undertake early in the spring

For this reason I have asked the sum of $150,000, but it is not likely that the works now in hand, and for which payments must be made this month, will require more than the balance remaining available Hence the necessity

ORA, I, 51, Part 1 (serial 107), 510-11

GENERAL ORDERS No.15

2 AN ACT making an appropriation for completing the defenses of Washington, and for other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the sum of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars be, and the same is hereby, appropriated, out

of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for completing the defenses of Washington: Provided,

That all arrearages of debts already incurred for the objects of this act shall be first paid out of this sum: And provided further, That no part of the sum hereby appropriated shall be expended in any work hereafter to be

Trang 33

WASHINGTON, October21, 1862

Hon E M STANTON, Secretary of War:

SIR: In applying for authority (as I did about the 1st of September) to expend $50,000 upon the fortifications around Washington, I had not had time to make a thorough study of the matter, and asked this suin to meet the most obvious demand for additional works An attentive examination of the whole line shows me that much modification and much auxiliary work is necessary in all the works heretofore built The inclosed extract(*) from a letter from Colonel Kelton, assistant adju-tant-general, will explain this

No work is so indefinite as an extensive system of field defenses like this There is scarcely a·ny limit to the amount of work which may be bestowed <ar28_ 462> on it, and the practical limit will depend on varying circuinstances and individual judgment The importance of such a system of defenses for Washington has been so fully demonstrated by events that there need be no argument on this score, and it is quite as clear that if defenses are necessary they must be so adequate, so complete, that in the hour of need they shall be fully equal to what is expected of them Although they proved the means of saving Washington, they had not been made entirely so up

to the time when Washington w,as recently threatened I now desire, and am expected, to make them so For this purpose I desire authority to expend to the amount of $100,000 more (should so much prove necessary) from the current appropriation for contingencies of fortifications and field works I would make a suggestion in connection with this subject Every one in authority is too busy to give any attention to this matter, and the consequence is that I am the sole judge, all questions therewith being referred to me

A work involving so great an expenditure, and which is so important to the national safety, should have other authority than the opinion of a single individual, who may be influenced by personal motives I would, therefore, suggest that a commission of three or four officers, of high rank, be directed to examine into and report upon the subject

I commenced this work as chief engineer of the Anny of the Potomac When I was again (unsolicited by myself) put in charge of the defenses of Washington, it was at a moment of danger, and I felt the immense importance of bringing these works to the proper condition of efficiency From previous familiarity, I was probably better qualified than any other to carry on the work Under this impression, I accepted the task, and have no desire to remain connected with it a day after my services become more valuable elsewhere than here, a matter which it belongs to others to decide Should the idea of a commission to examine and report upon the defenses of

Washington be approved, I would suggest the names of Maj Gen N P Banks, commanding Defenses of

Washington, &c.; Bvt Brig Gen J G Totten, chief engineer, U.S Anny; Brig Gen M C Meigs,

Quartermaster General, and Brig Gens G W Cullum and W F Barry

Such a commission would be the more proper that Congress, at the last session, in making a special

appropriation for fortifications of Washington, prohibited that appropriation from being applied to the

commencement of any new works

Trang 34

WASHlNGTON,December30, 1862

Hon E M STANTON, Secretary of War:

SIR: I herewith present you the report of the Commission ordered by you to examine the Defenses of

Washington, and report to you as to their efficiency, &c

It will be seen that the Commission approve generally of the lines established and of the works, and that they attach very great importance to them; that they recommend some additions to or modifications of the existing works; some new works (five or six) to strengthen certain parts of the line, and that they purpose to add a new feature to the defensive system by the construction of works to defend the river from maritime attack Their reasons are given in full, and it is not necessary for me to dwell upon them in this place

The amount expended upon the system up to the time when I relinquished the charge last spring to take the field with the Army of the Potomac was about $550,000 This applied to the construction of upward of fifty forts and a number of batteries Some of these works were of large dimensions, and many had, besides the usual magazine, extensive bomb-proofs, for the protection of the garrisons

Notwithstanding the number of works built, the defensive system was in some parts still very weak, and everywhere there was need (as I stated in a report to the Chief Engineer U.S Army a year ago) of auxiliary works, more efficient armament, &c.; and I also stated that there were important gaps in the line which should be filled

When the Army of the Potomac retired from the James River, I was ordered to assume the command of the works and troops of Washington, and there was apprehension felt (as the result proved, rightly) for the safety of Washington

Of course, it was my duty, both as engineer and commanding officer, to use the time and means disposable to increase the strength of the defenses The northern side of the city, between the Potomac and Eastern Branch, which had been little exposed to attack the summer before, was, in August and September of this year, the most likely to be assailed, and from the Potomac to the Seventh street road it was exceedingly weak <ar31_903> When, for want of rank, I was superseded in the command, I continued to discharge the duties of engineer, under the full conviction that in that crisis (September 1) I could render no more valuable service to my country than to perfect the defenses of Washington

I commenced on my first arrival to strengthen this part of the line I directed the enlargement of Fort

Massachusetts, and laid out forts and batteries to make a complete connection between the first-named work and Fort Alexander on the Potomac; at the same time I felled the timber to a distance of a mile in front, thus exposing the ground and making it impracticable to the enemy's movements

On the south of the Potomac, rifle-pits were thrown up between the works, new gun-platforms laid, and the armament improved; obstructions made across the valleys of Four-Mile Run and Hunting Creek; Fort Lyon strengthened by advanced works, and batteries for field guns prepared On the most prominent or commanding points 100-pounder rifled guns, on center-pivot carriages, were introduced, to bring under fire the whole external area an enemy must occupy in approaching our lines These, and similar works, are fully described in the report

of the Commission

With no other assistance from engineer officers than that of a single officer (valuable, indeed-that of Lieut Col B S Alexander), it has been necessary to employ a large number of civil assistants, superintendents, and overseers, to supervise the works and troops and laborers employed This, together with the hire of laborers, the purchase of lumber and other materials, has required a large cash expenditure You authorized (in August, I think) the application of$50,000 from the appropriation for the contingencies of fortifications, field works, &c.; to the Defenses of Washington, $50,000 more This last sum will have been nearly exhausted at the end of this month

It is exceedingly difficult to estimate for this kind of expenditure, and as the exigencies of the service have, since

my return here, made it impossible to furnish the number of troops required for the labor, I am obliged to suppose that much of the additional work proposed by the Commission will be done by hired labor, and, making reference to past results, to estimate that an additional sum of $200,000 will be needed; for which I ask that an appropriation of Congress be requested I also request that, until such an appropriation be made, I may be authorized to apply an additional $50,000 from the existing appropriation for contingencies of fortifications

Trang 35

There has been but one other system of field works that I know of that is analogous to this in extent and

character-the famous lines of Torres Vedras These frustrated the design of Napoleon of driving the English from the Peninsula They consisted of a greater number of works, but the works were smaller, and much less expensive in workmanship; yet on these lines, in a country where labor commanded but one tenth of.what is paid

in this country, $1,000,000 was expended from first to last

J G BARNARD,

Brig Gen., and Chief Engineer Defenses of Washington

ORA, I, 21 (serial 31), 902-03

WASHINGTON, February 2, 1863

Hon E M STANTON, Secretary of War;

SIR: On the 30th of December, 1862, I addressed you a letter(*) to accompany the report of the commission

ordered by yourself "to examine and report upon the plan of the present forts, and sufficiency of the present system of defenses for the city."

I would add that in asking for all appropriation of $200,000, far the largest part of this sum is required to carry out the recommendations of the Commission, to connect with the system of defenses already established forts and batteries for the defenses of the Potomac

Such works, though of earth and timber, must necessarily be expensive; and, indeed, they should be so carefully planned that hereafter they may be converted into permanent works, if desirable

J G BARNARD,

Brig Gen., Chief Engineer Defenses of Washington

ORA, I, 25, Part 2 (serial 40), 41-42

HEADQUARTERS CHIEF ENGINEER OF DEFENSES,

At the Chain Bridge there remains much to be done, and I will continue a force of mechanics, with some laborers, provided I can have the assistance of the troops

Fort McDowell (or fort at the red house) is defensible, and can receive its armament I shall be obliged probably

to defer the construction of bomb-proofs So at De Kalb, Woodberry, Cass, Tillinghast, a)ld Craig, the thing to be done is the bomb-proofs, and I can do little on these except through the aid of the garrisons

Trang 36

The fort behind Cass requires the labor of 500 men All I can do is to keep a small force of laborers at work on it The lines of rifle-pits and batteries are essentially complete

There is some interior work on the different forts from Craig to Mott, but I can do no better than to furnish instructions, supervision, and some assistance to the garrisons

The new works on the river, and those recommended on Traitor's Hill and at Corbett's house I had expected to

do with hired labor, and it is that I may be able to do them that I am forced to withdraw hired labor in great degree from finished works No one is more tired of this work than I am The probable allegation that it is endless may be frankly admitted

The works, in the hasty construction and imperfect development given them two summers ago, were certainly

a vast addition to the defensibility of Washington, but to make this line, 35 miles Jong, really a strong line, such

as we need about Washington, the works of 1861 were but the beginning

The artillery (the best we could get) was improper and not adapted to the purpose or the age The garrisons need (if a protracted resistance is expected) to be sheltered by a certain amount of bomb-proof; and that these works should be, as intended, the points d'appui for movable troops, it was important that these last should have

the protection of rifle-pits and properly located batteries for field guns Your own observation must have shown you that in the last eight months vast amount of important work has been done, and that there is no comparison between the defensibility of Washington as it was eight months ago and as it is now

It is extremely difficult to keep up a large force of hired laborers, and as to contrabands, of which there are multitudes somewhere, cultivating Arlington or employed by the quartermaster, I have never been able to get any number

J G BARNARD,

Brigadier-General

ORA, I, 25, Part 2 (serial 40), 513-514

HEADQUA.ITTERS CHIEF ENGINEER OF DEFENSES,

To carry out these suggestions (approved by the War Department), I asked for and obtained an appropriation of

F Smith, on the Arlington lines; the additional works at the Chain Bridge; the union of Forts Alexander, Franklin, and Ripley into one (Fort Sumner); the completion and construction of Forts Mansfield, Simmons, and Bayard; the

· modifications of Forts Reno, De Russy, and Stevens; the extension of Fort Slocum, &c., and the connecting system

of rifle-pits and batteries for field guns, were all pressed forward, so as to be in a condition, if not complete, at least

of efficiency, for their uses, with the return of the season, when active field operations might throw Washington upon its defenses

Trang 37

The two water batteries were commenced in May, one of them, being out of the line, requiring a very expensive work to render it self-sustaining My estimates, however (so far as I could estimate at all), were founded upon my previous experience, in which I had been aided freely by troops, and I counted on their aid in doing most of the earthwork and rifle-pits

Instead of this, however, as soon as the season favorable for work actually set in, almost every detail of troops was withdrawn The extensive system of rifle-pits, incomplete and demanding thousands of men, was left for me

to complete unaided.<ar45_597>

While I was conscious that the appropriation would not by any means suffice to do, thus unaided, all I had expected and was expected to do, I could not blink the necessity of applying it unsparingly to those matters most urgent I employed 1,000 hired men

When everything depended upon the results of the campaign in Maryland, and an unfavorable result would have brought the rebels upon us in a week, I took off all the force from Rosier's and put it upon rifle-pits and batteries between Rock Creek and Fort Lincoln

About $50,000 of the appropriation now remains I cannot with this finish what I have in hand

Under the circumstances I have been obliged to expend this money, I think it proper to ask that $100,000 from the appropriation for "field works" may be made available for the Defenses of Washington This appropriation is under control of the Engineer Department, but as the chief engineer has no control of field operations, and is not the judge of the necessity of field works of the campaign, I presume the General-in-Chief or the Secretary of War

Details will be given, if required, as to the importance of continuation Among other things is the important and expensive work of Rosier's-so important in case of a European difficulty

I am, respectfully, &c.,

J G BARNARD,

Brigadier-General

ORA, I, 27, Part 3 (serial 45), 596-97

GENERAL ORDERS No 231

WARDEPT.,ADJT GENERAL'S OFFICE,

Trang 38

AppendixE

General Reports About the Defenses

Trang 39

Civil War Defenses of Washington PageE-1 Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix E

Appendix E: General Reports about the Defenses

OFFICE CHIEF ENGINEER ARMY OF POTOMAC,

Washington, D.C., December.IO, 1861

General J G TOTTEN, Chief of Engineers, &c.:

SIR: The resolution of the House of Representatives of July 8, of which the following is the tenor

Resolved, That the Secretary of War be requested to furnish this House, as soon as practicable, plans and estimates, to be prepared by the Engineer Department, for completing the defensive works on the south side of the Potomac, near this city; and also to report upon the expediency of constructing similar Works of defense on the northern _side of this city, with estimates for the same, so as to reduce to a minimum the number of troops required for the protection and defense of the- capital-

having been submitted to me in July last, I now make the following statement:

At the time when the resolution was referred to me I was attached to the headquarters of Brigadier-General McDowell as chief engineer, and a few days thereafter I was in the field engaged in the campaign of Bull Run Previous to this movement the army of Washington, yet weak in numbers and imperfectly organized under General Mansfield, had crossed the Potomac and occupied the south bank from opposite Georgetown to

Alexandria

The first operations of field engineering were, necessarily, the securing of our debouches to the other shore and establishing of a strong point to strengthen our hold of Alexandria The works required for these limited objects (though being really little towards constructing <ar5_679>a defensive line) were nevertheless, considering the small number of troops available, arduous undertakings Fort Corcoran, with its auxiliary works, Forts · Bennett and Haggerty, and the block-houses and infantry_ parapets around the head of the Aqueduct, Forts Runyon, Jackson, and Albany (covering our debouches from the Long Bridge), and Fort Ellsworth, on Shooter's Hill, Alexandria, were mostly works of large dimensions During the seven weeks which elapsed between the crossing of the Potomac and the advance of General McDowell's army the engineer officers under my command were so exclusively occupied with these works (all of which were nearly completed at the latter date), to make impracticable the more general reconnaissances and studies necessary for locating a line of defensive works around the city and preparing plans and estimates of the same

The works just mentioned on the south of the Potomac, necessary for the operations of an army on that shore, were far from constituting a defensive system which would enable an inferior force to hold the long line from Alexandria to Georgetown or even to secure the heights of Arlington

On the retreat of our army such was our situation Upon an inferior and demoralized force, in presence of a victorious and superior enemy, was imposed the duty_ of holding this line and defending the city of Washington against attacks from columns of the enemy who might cross the Potomac (as was then deemed probable) above or below

Undecided before as to the necessity, or at least the policy, of surrounding Washington by a chain of fortifications, the situation left no longer room to doubt With our army too demoralized and too weak in

numbers to act effectually in the open field against the invading enemy, nothing but the protection of defensive works could give any degree of security Indeed, it is probable that we owe our exemption from the real disaster which might have flowed from the defeat of Bull Run-the loss to the enemy of the real fruits of his victory-to the works previously built (already mentioned), and an exaggerated idea on his part of their efficiency as a defensive line

The situation was such as to admit of no elaborate plans nor previously-prepared estimates Defensive arrangements were improvised and works commenced as speedily as possible where most needed A belt of woods

Trang 40

Civil War Defenses of Washington PageE-2 · Historic Resources Study Part I-Appendix E

was felled through the forest in front of Arlington and half sunk batteries prepared along the ridge in front of Fort Corcoran and at suitable points near Fort Albany, and a battery of two rifled 42-pounders (Battery Cameron)was established on the heights near the distributing reservoir above Georgetown to sweep the approaches to Fort Corcoran

Simultaneously a chain of Iunettes (Forts De Kalb, Woodbury, Cass, Tillinghast, and Craig) was commenced, connecting Fort Corcoran and the Potomac on the right with Fort Albany on the left, and forming a continuous defensive line in ·advance of the heights of Arlington The wooded ridge, which lies north of and parallel to the lower course of Four Mile Run offered a position from which the city, the Long Bridge, and the plateau in advance of it could be overlooked and cannonaded While our external line was so incomplete, it was important

to exclude the enemy from its possession Access to it was made difficult by felling the forest, which covered it (about 200 acres), and the large Junette (Fort Scott) was commenced as soon as the site could be fixed (about the middle of August) The subsequent establishment of our defensive line in advance throws this work into the same category with Forts Corcoran, Albany, Runyon, &c., as an interior work, or second line, but it <ar5_680>is nevertheless an important work, as, taken in connection with Forts Richardson, Craig, &c., it completes a defensive line for Washington independent of the extension to Alexandria

The defense of Alexandria and its connection with that of Washington was a subject of anxious study The exigency demanding immediate measures, the first idea was naturally to make use of Fort Ellsworth as one point

of our line, and to connect it with Fort Scott by an intermediate work on Mount Ida An extended study of the topography for several miles in advance showed that such a line would be almost indefensible Not only would the works themselves be commanded by surrounding heights, but the troops which should support them would be restricted to a narrow space, in which they would be overlooked and harassed by the enemy's distant fire The · occupation of the heights a mile in advance of Fort Ellsworth, upon which the Episcopal Seminary is situated, seemed absolutely necessary The topography proved admirably adapted to the formation of such a line, and Forts Worth and Ward were commenced about the 1st of September, and the line continued simultaneously by Forts Blenker and Richardson to connect with Forts Albany and Craig Somewhat later the work intermediate between Blenker and Richardson-filling up the gap and having an important bearing upon the approaches to Forts Ward and Blenker and the valley of Four Mile Run-was commenced

The heights south of Hunting Creek, overlooking Alexandria and commanding Fort Ellsworth, had been always a subject of anxiety The securing to our own possession the Seminary Heights, which commanded them, diminished materially the danger As soon, however, as a sufficient force could be detached to occupy those heights and protect the construction of the work it was undertaken, and the large work (Fort Lyon) laid out and commenced about the middle of September

Previous to the movement of the army defensive measures had been taken at the Chain Bridge, consisting of

a barricade (bullet proof, and so arranged as to be thrown down at will) across the bridge, immediately over the first pier from the Virginia side, with a movable staircase to the flats below, by which the defenders could retreat, leaving the bridge open to the fire of a battery of two field guns immediately at its Maryland end, and a battery

on the bluff above (Battery Martin Scott) of one 8-inc.h sea-coast howitzer and two 32-pounders As even this last battery was commanded by heights on the Virginia side, it was deemed proper, after the return of the army, to erect ·another battery (Battery Vermont) at a higher point, which should command the Virginia Heights and at the same time sweep the approaches of the enemy along the Maryland shore of the Potomac

During the months of May and June the country between the Potomac and the Anacostia had been examined mainly with the view of obtaining knowledge of the roads and.defensive character of the ground, not in reference

to locating field defenses At the period now in question there was apprehension that the enemy might cross the Potomac and attack on this side Of course what could be done to meet the emergency could only be done without that deliberate study by which a complete defensive line would best be established The first directions given to our labors were to secure the roads, not merely as the beaten highways of travel from the country to the city, but also as in general occupying the best ground for an enemy's approach

Thus the sites of Forts Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Slocum, Totten, Bunker Hill, Saratoga, and Lincoln were rapidly chosen, and works commenced simultaneously at the first, second, third, and sixth of these <ar5_681>points

Tiêu đề	The Civil War Defenses of Washington Part I: Appendices
Trường học	United States Department of Interior National Park Service National Capital Region
Chuyên ngành	Historic Resources Study, Civil War Defenses of Washington
Thể loại	Historic Resources Study
Năm xuất bản	2023
Thành phố	Washington, DC

Định dạng
Số trang	207
Dung lượng	9,92 MB