Skip to main content

Full text of "Monitor Builders: A Historical Study of the Principal Firms and Individuals Involved in the Construction of the USS Monitor"

See other formats


r  2?.^--m  7i 


Monitor  Builders:  A  Historical  Study  of  the  Principal 

Firms  and  Individuals  Involved 

in  the  Construction  of 


USS  Monitor 


sa&'sp 


APR   4 


1989 


CL£MSON 
LIBRARY 


Cover  illustration:  Delamater  Ironworks,  one  of  a  handful  of  New  York  firms  that  built  Monitor,  was  active  in  'ronclad 
construction  throughout  the  Civil  War  years.  The  monitor  Dictator  slides  down  the  ways  from  a  covered  shipyard  shed  on 
December  27,  1863.  (Harper's  Weekly) 


Monitor  Builders:  A  Historical  Study  of  the  Principal 

Firms  and  Individuals  Involved 

in  the  Construction  of 

USS  Monitor 


By 

WILLIAM  N.  STILL,  JR.  Ph.D. 

Professor  of  History 

East  Carolina  University 


Prepared  for 

United  States  Department  of  Commerce 

National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 

Marine  and  Estuarine  Management  Division 

Washington,  D.C. 


Published  by 

National  Maritime  Initiative 

Division  of  History 

National  Park  Service 

Department  of  the  Interior 

Washington,  D.C. 
1988 


Acknowledgements 

I  would  like  to  express  my  appreciation  to  the  following  individuals  and  institutions  for  their  help: 
K.  Jack  Bauer,  Rensselaer  Polytechnic  Institute;  James  P.  Delgado  and  Kevin  J.  Foster,  National  Park 
Service;  Pat  Guyette,  Joyner  Library,  East  Carolina  University;  Harold  Langley,  Armed  Forces 
History  Division,  The  National  Museum  of  American  History;  John  D.  Milligan,  State  University  of 
New  York  at  Buffalo;  Stuart  Morgan,  Peabody  Museum;  Captain  Ernest  Peterkin,  USNR  (Ret.); 
Virginia  Wood;  and  the  staff  of  the  Eleutherian  Mills-Hagley  Foundation  Library,  Wilmington, 
Delaware. 


Table  of  Contents 

Acknowledgements 2 

Foreword    5 

I.  Iron  Manufacturers 7 

A.  Early  Development 7 

B.  Holdane  &  Company 8 

C.  The  Albany  Ironworks 

D.  The  Rensselaer  Ironworks 9 

E.  Niagara  Steam  Forge 19 

F.  H.  Abbott  &  Sons 11 

II.  Machinery  Manufacturers  12 

A.  Early  Development 12 

B.  Novelty  Ironworks 14 

C.  Delamater  Ironworks 18 

D.  Clute  Brothers  Foundry 22 

E.  Continental  Ironworks 22 

III.  Civil  War  Contracts 23 

IV.  Post-War  History 31 

Notes 36 

Bibliography    


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

LYRASIS  Members  and  Sloan  Foundation 


http://archive.org/details/monitorbuildershOOstil 


Foreword 

This  analysis  of  the  firms  involved  in  casting,  forging,  manufacturing,  and  assembling  John 
Ericsson's  Monitor  is  the  first  such  study  of  this  important  aspect  of  the  oft-researched  ironclad.  Dr. 
Still,  noted  Civil  War  naval  historian  and  author  of  several  works  on  Confederate  ironclads  and 
Monitor,  was  an  ideal  choice  to  research  and  write  Monitor  Builders. 

The  study  was  done  under  contract  with  the  National  Maritime  Initiative  of  the  National  Park 
Service  to  aid  in  the  preparation  of  a  historical  context  study  to  determine  the  various  aspects  of 
Monitor's  significance.  This  work  was  done  under  provision  of  a  cooperative  agreement  with  the 
National  Oceanic  Atmospheric  Administration  (NOAA)  to  provide  technical  support  and  expertise 
to  NOAA's  program  of  research  and  management  of  the  shipwrecked  remains  of  USS  Monitor.  The 
National  Park  Service  contributed  cultural  resource  management  policies,  procedures  for  applying 
for  research  permits,  an  archeological  research  design,  the  before-mentioned  historical  context 
study,  and  prepared  a  successful  nomination  for  Monitor's  designation  as  a  National  Historic 
Landmark. 

The  industrial  history  and  archeology  of  19th  century  America  is  now  the  subject  of  considerable 
interest  and  attention.  Monitor,  significant  to  many  aspects  of  the  history  and  culture  of  the  United 
States,  is  clearly  shown  by  Dr.  Still  to  be  both  a  product  and  a  stimulator  of  the  American 
industrial  revolution. 

James  P.  Delgado 

Maritime  Historian  of  the  National  Park  Service 


Launch  of  Monitor,  September,  1862.  (U.S.  Naval  Historical  Center) 


I.  Iron  Manufacturing 

A.  Early  Development 

USS  Monitor  was  the  product  of  a  number  of  ironworks,  foundries,  and  machinery-manufacturing 
firms.  With  the  exception  of  one  Baltimore  company,  all  firms  were  located  in  New  York  State,  with 
the  majority  in  New  York  City.  Although  a  large  number  were  small  establishments  selected 
because  of  the  necessity  to  complete  the  ship  as  quickly  as  possible,  a  few  were  large,  prosperous, 
and  well-established  companies.  Their  composite  history  illustrates  industrial  growth  of  the  United 
States  during  the  19th  century,  especially  its  initial  development.  Monitor's  "builders"  were 
mechanics,  inventors,  engineers,  and  businessmen.  Although  they  were  intimately  associated  with 
technological  change,  they  were  generally  self-taught,  working  largely  without  the  benefit  of 
theoretical  background. 

The  physical  environment  of  the  United  States  provided  both  the  incentive  and  the  means  to 
develop  new  industry,  transportation  facilities,  and  the  accompanying  technology.  The  United 
States  achieved  extraordinary  expansion  during  the  first  half  of  the  19th  century— nearly  1.8  million 
square  miles— yet  its  population  remained  small  and  scattered.  Transportation  facilities  to  link  up 
the  far-flung  territory  were  essential,  and  this  need  provided  opportunities  for  inventiveness  and 
exploitation.  The  transportation  revolution  cheapened  and  facilitiated  the  movement  of  goods  and 
provided  an  impetus  for  industrial  growth.  The  country's  natural  resources,  virtually  untapped  at 
the  century's  beginning,  were  discovered  and  developed,  particularly  coal  and  iron. 

The  19th  century  is  sometimes  described  as  the  age  of  coal,  iron,  and  steel,  with  the  United  States 
emerging  as  a  leading  nation  in  that  epochal  age.1  At  the  beginning  of  the  century,  the  great  bulk 
of  manufactured  iron  was  produced  by  smelting  and  refining.2  Small  ironworks,  found  in  every 
state,  were  based  upon  ore  from  a  nearby  mine  or  bog  and  relied  on  charcoal  for  fuel.  In  the  1820s, 
with  the  emergence  of  small  factories,  specialization  appeared  in  the  manufacture  of  iron  products. 
The  manufacture  of  farm  machinery  and  implements,  followed  by  household  products,  provided  the 
major  market  for  the  iron  industry.3 

The  development  of  rolling  mills  was  a  major  factor  in  the  iron  industry's  expansion.  The  first  angle 
iron,  and  probably  the  first  regular  bars,  were  rolled  in  the  United  States  in  1817.4  By  1830  the 
manufacture  of  rolled  and  hammered  iron  products  amounted  to  113,000  tons.  During  the  following 
two  decades,  the  production  of  rolled  iron  would  expand  rapidly,  totalling  more  than  500,000  tons 
by  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War.5  In  1860  almost  one  million  tons  of  iron  ore  were  produced.  In 
that  year  there  were  256  ironworks  in  20  states  producing  bars,  sheet,  and  railroad  iron.6 

Almost  60  percent  of  the  country's  iron  ore  in  1860  came  from  Pennsylvania,  followed  by  Ohio  and 
New  York.  The  Empire  State's  output  totalled  74,645  net  tons  from  15  furnaces.  Most  of  the  ore 
was  found  in  two  localities,  the  southern  highlands  and  the  area  around  Lake  Champlain.  New 
York's  rise  to  distinction  in  iron  manufacturing  dates  from  the  1830s.  By  1840  New  York  emerged  as 
the  leading  producer  in  bar,  sheet,  and  railroad  iron,  with  195  establishments  turning  out  more 
than  four  million  dollars'  worth.7  Among  these  were  several  ironworks  later  involved  in  building 
Monitor.  Two  cities,  New  York  and  Troy,  became  leaders  in  the  fabrication  of  iron  and  steel 
products. 


B.  Holdane  &  Company 

In  New  York  City,  Holdane  &  Company,  a  small  establishment  that  specialized  in  "Boiler  and 
Sheet  Iron,  Rivets,  Welded  Tubes,  Etc."  subcontracted  to  provide  125  tons  of  armor  plate,  as  well 
as  bar  and  angle  iron  for  Monitor.8  Little  has  been  learned  about  its  prewar  business  activities,  and 
in  fact,  Trow's  New  York  City  Directory  for  the  year  ending  May  1,  1863,  does  not  list  Holdane  & 
Company.  Nevertheless,  the  business  continued  to  exist  and  prospered  during  the  war  and  after. 

In  1854  Robert  G.  Dun  joined  the  Mercantile  Agency,  a  firm  that  specialized  in  gathering 
information  on  merchants  and  businesses  throughout  the  country.  Mercantile 's  information  was 
frequently  used  in  business  transactions  involving  credit.  Rating  credit  became  standard  practice  and 
was  one  criterion  used  to  determine  the  economic  soundness  of  a  merchant  or  business  firm.  Dun 
provided  reports  on  a  number  of  the  Monitor  companies,  including  Holdane;  the  earliest  such 
report,  dated  1860,  states  that  the  company  had  trouble  during  the  panic  of  1857.  In  January  1860, 
Dun  mentioned  that  Holdane  was  "still  considerably  impaired  . . .  and  the  indications  generally  are 
that  they  will  not  soon  recover  their  former  good  business  and  position."  However,  the  report  also 
stressed  that  "they  have  the  reputation  of  being  sharp  and  shrewd  financiers."9  Apparently  part  of 
their  decline  in  business  was  the  result  of  H.  Abbott  &  Sons  removing  its  account  from  Holdane. 
The  New  York  Ironworks  had  been  the  exclusive  agent  for  Abbott's  Baltimore  rolling  mill  until 
Abbott  decided  to  establish  its  own  business  office  in  New  York  City.10  The  secession  crisis 
improved  the  firm's  financial  situation.  Dun  reported  on  April  11,  1861,  one  day  before  Fort  Sumter 
was  fired  on,  that  "their  business  has  been  lately  improved  although  not  as  strong  as  they  were 
[previously]."11 

C.  The  Albany  Ironworks 

Holdane  was  representative  of  a  number  of  small  establishments  scattered  throughout  New  York 
City.  The  port  had  more  ironworks  than  any  other  locality  in  the  state,  but  the  two  largest  were  at 
Troy,  a  small  city  150  miles  up  the  Hudson  River.  Strategically  located  near  large  deposits  of  iron 
ore,  Troy  was  also  a  transportation  center  with  water  and  rail  links  to  New  York  City. 

At  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War,  eight  blast  furnaces,  20  forges,  three  rolling  mills,  and  two 
foundries  were  located  in  Troy.12  Two  establishments,  the  Albany  Ironworks  and  the  Rensselaer 
Ironworks,  produced  iron  for  Monitor.  Three  of  the  city's  leading  businessmen,  Erastus  Corning, 
John  Flack  Winslow,  and  John  Griswold,  all  associated  with  the  two  ironworks,  were  involved  in 
building  Monitor. 

John  Winslow  and  John  Griswold's  involvement  with  Monitor  is  well  known,  but  that  of  Erastus 
Corning  is  not.  According  to  Coming's  biographer,  he  was  probably  a  silent  partner;  in  1861  he 
was  a  member  of  Congress  and  thus  could  not  be  a  contractor  with  the  Federal  government.13 
Corning  was  a  native  New  Englander  who  served  as  an  apprentice  in  a  Troy  hardware  store.  He 
began  his  career  as  an  iron  manufacturer  in  1826,  when  he  purchased  a  small  foundry  and  rolling 


^m 


John  Winslow,  managing  partner  of  the  Albany  Ironworks,  was  called  an  iron- 
working  "genius."  His  talents  were  put  to  good  use  in  the  difficult  task  of 
casting  the  parts  needed  to  assemble  the  prefabricated  Monitor  in  a  few  months' 
time.  (Dictionary  of  American  Biography) 


mill  that  specialized  in  producing  nails  from  imported  bar  iron.  The  Albany  Nail  Factory  initially 
employed  34  workers.14  Corning  personally  devoted  little  time  to  the  factory.  Later,  shortly  after 
purchasing  the  Troy  establishment,  he  moved  to  Albany  and  became  involved  in  banking,  local 
politics,  and  railroad  promotion.  During  the  first  10  years  the  nail  factory  was  not  a  financial 
success.  In  1837  Corning  hired  John  Winslow  as  manager,  who  not  only  ran  the  company,  but 
eventually  became  a  partner  in  it.  The  firm  changed  its  name  to  Corning,  Horner  &  Winslow,  and 
the  factory  was  renamed  the  Albany  Ironworks.15 

John  Winslow,  a  New  Englander  from  Vermont,  was  the  son  of  an  ironmaster.  After  briefly  serving 
as  a  clerk  in  a  mercantile  house,  he  entered  the  iron  business,  working  for  two  years  with  an 
ironworks  in  New  Jersey  before  purchasing  a  small  iron  foundry  in  that  state.  He  had  six  years  of 
experience  in  iron  manufacturing  when  he  agreed  to  become  manager  and  a  partner  of  the  Albany 
Ironworks.16  Although  partners  in  the  Albany  Ironworks  changed,  both  Corning  and  Winslow 
remained  associated  with  it  until  they  retired  from  professional  life.  Corning  left  the  actual  running 
of  the  factory  to  Winslow,  but  all  major  decisions  were  made  with  his  concurrence.17 

Yet  it  was  Winslow  who  developed  the  ironworks  into  one  of  the  largest  in  New  York.  According 
to  J.  Leander  Bishop,  Winslow  was  a  "genius"  in  the  iron  business.  He  had,  according  to  another 
authority,  an  "uncanny  sense"  of  what  would  prove  successful  in  the  manufacture  of  iron.18  A  year 
after  he  took  over,  the  ironworks  began  puddling,  or  converting,  pig  iron  into  wrought  iron.  The 
coming  of  the  railroad  offered  another  opportunity,  and  by  the  1830s,  a  factory  had  been  added  for 
making  boiler  rivets  and  spikes  for  railroads  and  vessels.  Apparently  the  Albany  Ironworks 
provided  spikes  for  most  of  the  railroads  in  New  York  State  and  as  far  west  as  Cleveland,  Ohio.19 
Winslow  also  redesigned  and  enlarged  the  rolling  mill  at  Albany  Ironworks.  The  modified  facility 
included  18  puddling  and  heating  furnaces,  four  complete  trains  of  rollers,  Winslow' s  patented 
rotary  squeezer,  shears,  roller  lathes,  wrought  railroad-chair  machinery,  hammers,  and  five  steam 
engines  to  run  the  different  machines.20  In  the  1850s,  two  additional  rolling  mills  were  added,  one 
run  by  water  power  and  the  other  by  steam,  and  an  axle  plant.  By  the  Civil  War,  the  establishment 
covered  some  40  or  50  acres  of  land  with  "numerous  buildings,  constituting  a  small  village  in 
itself."21  By  that  date  more  than  750  men  were  employed. 

Corning  and  Winslow,  as  typical  enterpreneurs,  were  involved  in  a  variety  of  business  enterprises. 
Corning  was  prominent  in  railroad  development,  particularly  on  the  lines  that  ultimately  became 
the  New  York  Central  system.  Following  New  York  Central's  consolidation,  Corning  was  elected  its 
first  president.  Winslow  was  also  involved  in  railroad  and  banking  enterprises  and  in  later  years 
was  president  of  Rensselaer  Polytechnic  Institute  from  1865  to  1868. 

D.  The  Rensselaer  Ironworks 

Both  Winslow  and  Corning  were  investors  in  a  second  ironworks  located  in  Troy,  which  also 
became  involved  in  building  Monitor.  In  1846  the  Troy  Vulcan  Company  erected  a  rolling  mill.  In 
1853  it  was  converted  to  a  rail  mill  and  became  known  as  the  "Rensselaer  Iron  Company"  and  the 


John  Griswold,  proprietor  of  Troy,  New  York's  Rensselaer  Ironworks,  successfully 


«0     y  '  combined  business  and  politics  in  his  career.  Griswold  found  business  and  politics 


profitably  intertwined  in  the  construction  of  John  Ericsson's  Monitor.  (Dictionary 
of  American  Biography) 


following  year  was  renamed  the  "Rensselaer  Ironworks."  By  1856,  its  18  furnaces  and  four 
steam-driven  roll  trains  produced  12,650  tons  of  rail  and  862  tons  of  bar  iron.22  The  Rensselaer 
Ironworks  was  owned  by  John  A.  Griswold,  who  sold  a  half  interest  in  the  establishment  to 
Corning  and  Winslow  in  1855. 23  By  1860  Rensselaer  Ironworks  employed  350  men  in  the 
manufacture  of  railroad  rails,  bar  and  sheet  iron.24 

Like  Corning,  John  Griswold  had  begun  his  career  as  a  clerk  in  a  Troy  hardware  store.  He  then 
worked  for  a  number  of  firms  before  entering  the  iron  business.  Winslow  apparently  managed  the 
Rensselaer  works  as  well  as  the  larger  Albany  Ironworks.  Griswold  had  no  experience  in  iron 
manufacturing,  and  in  fact,  apparently  was  more  interested  in  politics.  He  would  be  elected  mayor 
of  Troy  in  1855,  the  year  that  he  sold  partnerships  in  the  works  to  Corning  and  Winslow.  Although 
he  was  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  Congress  in  1860,  he  was  elected  in  1862.  One  writer 
mentioned  that  "it  was  undoubtedly  this  combination  of  business  and  politics  that  gave  special  and 
distinctive  importance  to  his  career."25  As  with  the  other  iron  manufacturers,  Griswold  invested  in 
other  businesses,  including  banks,  railroads,  and  ironworks. 

When  the  Civil  War  broke  out,  Troy  was  recognized  as  an  iron  manufacturing  center.  The  Albany 
and  Rensselaer  Ironworks  together  employed  more  than  a  thousand  men,  and  were  considered  the 
largest  producers  of  railroad  and  other  iron  in  the  United  States.26  Considering  their  size  and 
prominence,  their  involvement  in  government  contract  work,  including  the  fabrication  of  iron  for 
warships,  was  not  surprising. 

E.  Niagara  Steam  Forge 

Government  work  was  less  straightforward  for  a  smaller  company  located  in  Buffalo,  300  miles  west 
of  Troy  on  Lake  Erie.  The  Niagara  Steam  Forge  would  manufacture  the  massive  "port  stoppers"  for 
Monitor's  turret. 

In  1851  Charles  D.  Delaney  started  a  small  firm  that  he  named  the  Delaney  Forge  and  Iron 
Company.28  In  that  year  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  &  Western  Railroad  was  completed,  linking  the 
coal  fields  in  northwestern  Pennsylvania  and  southern  New  York  with  Buffalo.  It  was  no 
coincidence  that  Delaney's  company  started  that  year.  To  be  smelted,  iron  required  coal.  The 
completion  of  the  railroad  led  to  Buffalo's  becoming  an  important  iron  manufacturing  center  in  the 
1850s.  Delaney  is  credited  with  starting  the  iron  industry  in  Buffalo.29 

Delaney,  a  native  of  Pennsylvania,  entered  the  iron  manufacturing  business  as  an  apprentice.  In 
1831  he  moved  to  Buffalo  where  he  became  superintendent  of  construction  of  engines  for  a  number 
of  Great  Lakes  steamers,  including  the  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  General  Porter.30  He  then  went  to 
work  at  the  Novelty  Ironworks.  In  1841  he  built  the  first  locomotive  in  Buffalo  and  later  the  first 
railroad  cars.  Delaney  started  his  own  ironworks  in  1851,  which  he  named  the  Delaney  Forge  and 
Iron  Company.  In  1853  it  became  the  Niagara  Steam  Forge  and  would  be  known  by  that  name  for 
more  than  three  decades.  Because  of  ill  health,  Delaney  sold  out  in  1856,  but  with  the  financial  help 
of  a  local  banker,  T.  P.  Patchin,  who  became  a  partner,  he  acquired  ownership  again  four  years 
later.31  By  1861,  Delaney  was  advertising  as  a  manufacturer  of  railroad  car  axles,  crank  axles,  track 
and  driving  axles,  wrought-iron  driving  wheels,  locomotive  frames,  steamboat  propeller  shafts  and 
cranks,  connecting  rods,  piston  rods,  crank  pins,  mill  shafts,  anchors,  hammered  bar  iron  and 
shafting  of  any  length  and  size,  and  blacksmithing.32  The  Niagara  Steam  Forge  was  apparently  well 
equipped  to  manufacture  "port  stoppers"  and  other  parts  for  Monitor. 

F.  H.  Abbott  &  Sons 

Only  one  non-New  York  establishment  was  substantially  involved  in  producing  ironwork  for 
Monitor.  H.  Abbott  &  Sons  of  Baltimore,  Maryland,  provided  armor  plate  for  the  turret.  As  with  the 
Niagara  Steam  Forge,  the  Baltimore  firm's  beginning  was  related  to  railroad  development. 
Construction  of  one  of  the  first  railroads  in  the  United  States,  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio,  began  in  1828, 
and  by  the  early  1830s  the  railroad  had  proved  an  economic  success  for  the  investors  and  the  city  of 
Baltimore.  Business  leaders  projected  the  city's  future,  not  only  as  a  port,  but  as  a  rail  center. 
Baltimore's  potential  as  a  transportation  hub  persuaded  a  small  group  of  investors  to  develop  an 
industrial  park  near  the  railroad,  on  the  waterfront.  They  named  the  park  "Canton."33 


10 


Horace  Abbott's  ironworks  in  Baltimore  were  one  of  only  two  large  mills  whose  machinery  could  roll  the  thick  iron  plates 
needed  to  build  Monitor.  (The  Peale  Museum,  Baltimore) 


Peter  Cooper  was  one  of  those  investors.  Cooper  had  designed  "Tom  Thumb,"  the  first  American- 
built  locomotive  for  the  Baltimore  &c  Ohio  Railroad.34  He  bought  out  the  other  "Canton"  speculators 
and  began  to  develop  the  property.  He  started  an  ironworks,  the  Canton  Ironworks,  to  repair  and 
construct  railroad  equipment.  In  1836  the  works  were  leased  to  Horace  Abbott.35 

Abbott,  a  native  of  Massachusetts,  had  been  apprenticed  to  a  blacksmith  as  a  young  boy.  After 
serving  his  term  of  apprenticeship  and  a  brief  period  as  an  employee,  he  established  his  own 
blacksmith  shop.  In  1836  he  and  his  brother  moved  to  Baltimore  and  rented  the  Canton  Ironworks. 
He  was  successful  in  shifting  from  manufacturing  horsehoes,  tools,  and  small  farm  implements  to 
producing  large  wrought-iron  shafts,  cranks,  axles,  and  other  railroad  and  ship  parts.  The 
ironworks  received  public  attention  in  the  1840s  by  forging  the  first  large  steamship  shaft  made  in 
this  country,  a  shaft  designed  for  the  Russian  frigate  Kamtschatka,  built  in  New  York  for  Czar 
Nicholas  I.  The  six  and  one-half  ton  shaft  and  connecting  rods  weighing  about  two-thirds  that 
amount  were  exhibited  at  the  New  York  Exchange  as  the  first  heavy  engine  forgings  made  in  the 
United  States.36  By  1850  Abbott  had  gained  a  national  reputation  as  an  ironmaster. 

In  1850  he  added  a  rolling  mill  capable  of  turning  out  the  largest  rolled  plate  in  the  country  at  that 
time.  The  mill  was  enlarged  in  1854  and  two  years  later  produced  2,000  tons  of  plate.37  Abbott 
continued  expanding,  adding  in  1857  a  second  rolling  trull  of  the  same  size  and  capacity  as  the  first, 


11 


a  third  in  1859  and  a  fourth  in  1861.  Mill  Number  Two  contained  three  heating  and  two  puddling 
furnaces,  a  Nasmyth  steam  hammer,  and  one  pair  of  10-foot  rolls,  the  largest  in  the  country.  More 
than  likely  these  were  the  rolls  used  to  make  the  plates  for  Monitor  and  other  armored  vessels 
during  the  Civil  War.  Mill  Number  Three  was  designed  to  manufacture  thin  plates  for  gas  pipes, 
boiler  tubes,  etc.38  When  the  Civil  War  broke  out,  Abbott's  establishment  and  the  Tredegar 
Ironworks  in  Richmond,  Virginia,  were  the  two  largest  in  the  South.  Tredegar  would  roll  Virginia's 
plate  and  Abbott,  Monitor's. 

II.  Machinery  Manufacturers 

A.  Early  Development 

The  mechanization  of  industry  was  an  integral  part  of  the  economic  revolution  in  the  United  States 
in  the  nineteenth  century.  Alongside  blast  furnaces  and  rolling  mills  developed  works  for  the 
production  of  heavy  machinery.  Blowing  engines  for  blast  furnaces,  machinery  for  rolling  mills, 
sawmills,  sugar  mills,  and  other  industries  were  developed.  The  most  important  products,  however, 
were  stationary  steam  engines,  and  engines  for  locomotives,  steamships,  and  steamboats. 

The  mechanization  of  the  United  States,  particularly  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
did  not  involve  a  massive  shift  to  new  power  sources.  American  industries  relied  upon  water  as  the 
main  source  of  power  until  well  into  the  second  half  of  the  century.  A  Congressional  report  in  1838 
estimated  there  were  some  250  steam-engine  builders,  mostly  small  and  scattered.  They  had 
produced  3,000  steam  engines  of  which  1,860  were  stationary  engines  used  primarily  in  industrial 
establishments,  350  locomotive  engines,  and  800  engines  for  steam  vessels.39 

Although  stationary  steam  engines  replaced  water-powered  machinery  very  slowly  in  the  United 
States,  the  growth  of  the  application  of  steam  power  to  transportation  was  phenomenal.  Its  effect 
was  most  important  to  the  country's  development.  Rosenberg  wrote,  "It  is  perhaps  not  too  much 
to  say  that  the  major  economic  consequence  of  the  acquisition  of  the  steam  engine  in  the  New 
World  before  the  Civil  War  lay  in  its  application  to  new  forms  of  transport— the  steamboat  and  later 
the  railroad."40  This  was  perhaps  an  inevitable  result  of  the  nation's  continental  expanse,  vast 
inland  distances,  and  need  for  suitable  transport.  The  steam  engine,  first  in  boats  and  later 
locomotives,  provided  the  means  for  fulfilling  this  need.  From  1830  to  1850  steamboats  dominated 
internal  transportation  in  the  United  States  on  the  Western  rivers  and  began  to  move  outward  to 
the  coast.41 

Ocean  transportation,  however,  progressed  less  rapidly,  not  establishing  steamship  service  on  the 
Atlantic  until  1838—25  years  after  steamboats  were  successfully  introduced.  Technological  and 
economic  factors  handicapped  the  growth  of  oceanic  steam  transportation.  Substantial  growth 
would  come  in  the  1850s.  According  to  Cedric  Ridgely-Nevitt  in  American  Steamships  on  the  Atlantic, 
two  events  resulted  in  the  rapid  development  of  steamships  and  led  to  their  construction  in  great 
numbers.  In  the  late  1840s  Congress  authorized  subsidized  mail  contracts  from  New  York  to  various 
ports  in  the  United  States  and  abroad.  The  discovery  of  gold  in  California  also  contributed  to  a 
shipbuilding  boom.42 

Between  1820  and  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War,  New  York  City  was  the  center  of  the  steam-engine 
industry,  particularly  power  plants  for  river  and  ocean  vessels.  According  to  Robert  Albion,  "No 
other  American  port  could  rival  the  assemblage  of  talent  concentrated  in  its  'iron  works.'  Nowhere 
else  in  the  world,  in  fact,  was  there  such  a  group  except  on  the  banks  of  the  Clyde  around 
Glasgow."43  Bishop  admiringly  wrote: 

It  has  been  truly  remarked  that,  as  the  city  of  New  York  is  sustained  almost  entirely  by  its 
commerce,  and  as  this  commerce  is  becoming  every  year  more  and  more  dependent  for  its 
prosperity  and  progress  upon  the  power  of  the  enormous  engines  by  which  its  most 
important  functions  are  now  performed,  the  establishments  where  these  engines  are 
invented,  made  and  fitted  into  ships,  which  they  are  destined  to  propel,  constitute  really 
the  heart  of  the  metropolis;  that  the  splendor  and  fashion  of  Fifth  Avenue,  and  of  Union 
Square,  and  the  brilliancy  and  ceaseless  movement  of  Broadway,  are  mere  incidents  and 
ornaments  of  the  structure;  while  these  establishments,  and  those  of  kindred  character  and 
functions,  form  the  foundation  on  which  the  whole  of  the  vast  edifice  reposes.44 


12 


One  of  John  Ericsson's  biographers,  William  C.  Church,  quotes  a  letter  to  a  newspaper  that  said  in 
1840  there  was  no  establishment 'in  New  York  that  could  "forge  an  ordinary  steam  engine  shaft." 
This  assertion  may  explain  why  Abbott  &  Sons  in  Baltimore  were  contracted  to  forge  the  iron  shaft 
for  the  Russian  frigate  built  in  New  York  City.  Yet  by  1853,  the  three  largest  establishments  in  New 
York  City  specializing  in  steam  engine  work  employed  more  than  2,100  men.  Four  years  later,  3,130 
men  were  employed  in  17  engine-building  companies.45 

In  1857  a  financial  panic  created  a  brief  but  rather  severe  economic  recession  in  the  country. 
Hundreds  of  establishments  failed  or  were  badly  hurt.  Recovery  was  slow,  particularly  in  the 
shipping  and  shipbuilding  industries.  Nevertheless,  The  Scientific  American  reported  in  1861  that  the 
New  York  City  steam-engine  manufacturing  firms  were  busy:  "at  the  same  time  last  year  there  was 
not  so  much  business  going  forward  as  there  is  at  the  present  moment."46  Among  the  engine 
manufacturing  establishments  in  New  York  City  at  that  time  several  worked  on  Monitor,  including 
two  well-known  companies,  Novelty  Ironworks,  and  Delamater  Ironworks. 


General  view  of  the  Novelty  Ironworks,  New  York.  (Hater's  New  Monthly  Magazine,  Vol.  II,  No.  XII,  May  1851) 


13 


B.  Novelty  Ironworks 

Novelty  Ironworks,  which  built  Monitor's  turret,  was  the  largest  engine-building  firm  in  the  city 
during  the  1850s.  There  is  some  disagreement  about  the  date  that  the  works  was  founded,  but  it 
apparently  occurred  in  the  late  1820s  or  early  1830s.47  The  establishment  was  started  by  Dr. 
Eliphalet  Nott,  the  president  of  Union  College  at  Schenectady,  an  "indefatigable  inventor."48  The 
occasion  was  the  construction  of  a  steamboat— which  he  named  Novelty.  Nott  chose  the  name 
because  the  vessel  would  be  the  first  to  use  a  new  fuel— anthracite  coal— as  well  as  a  new  type  of 
boiler  and  engine.49  To  fabricate  some  of  the  machinery,  including  one  engine,  Nott  purchased 
Burnt  Hill  Point  at  the  foot  of  14th  Street  on  the  East  River.  He  converted  a  number  of  farm 
buildings  at  the  Point  into  shops.  He  not  only  used  the  shops  to  work  on  Novelty,  but  other 
ironwork  as  well;  for  example,  he  began  to  build  home  heating  stoves  known  as  "Nott  Stoves," 
which  he  patented.50 

Hezekian  Bliss,  a  friend  of  Robert  Fulton  and  a  steamboat  builder,  was  hired  as  superintendent. 
Under  his  direction,  the  ironworks,  which  gradually  became  known  in  the  neighborhood  as  "the 
Novelty  Works,"  began  to  take  in  more  marine  work.  The  Novelty  Works  continued  to  be  the  name 
of  a  location  until  1855  when  an  incorporated  company  with  the  title  of  "Novelty  Iron  Works"  was 
established.51  In  1835  a  visitor  to  the  "Novelty  Works"  wrote,  "I  found  an  immense  establishment 
in  which  were  carried  on  all  the  different  branches  and  operations  in  any  way  connected  with 
making  stoves,  steam  engines,  boilers,  and  almost  every  article  of  large  machinery,  and  even 
steamboats."52 

In  1838  Nott  sold  the  ironworks  to  a  partnership,  Ward,  Stillman  &  Company.  Under  the  new 
management  the  works  were  greatly  enlarged  and  began  to  concentrate  more  and  more  on  steam 
engine  construction.  Already  building  a  variety  of  steam  engines,  the  company  was  apparently  one 
of  the  first  establishments  in  the  United  States  to  construct  oscillating  engines  for  use  on 
steamboats.  In  the  late  thirties  the  company  gained  prestige  when  it  built  the  machinery  for  two 
Spanish  steamships,  Lion  and  Eagle. 

In  1842  the  man  who  would  largely  determine  the  company's  direction  for  the  next  quarter  century 
joined  Novelty  Works  as  a  junior  partner.  Horatio  Allen,  one  of  the  better  known  engineers  in  the 
country,  remained  with  Novelty  as  a  partner  until  its  demise  after  the  Civil  War.  The  company  was 
renamed  Stillman,  Allen  &  Company,  and  remained  so  until  1855  when  it  was  incorporated  as 
Novelty  Ironworks  with  Allen  as  president.53 

The  New  York  Daily  Times  reported  on  December  20,  1854,  that  Stillman  &  Allen's  business  had 
declined  significantly  and  that  a  large  number  of  employees  had  been  laid  off.  More  than  likely  this 
was  the  major  reason  in  the  decision  to  incorporate— needed  capital  could  be  attracted  by  selling 
stock.  In  addition  to  Horatio  Allen  as  president,  the  new  officers  included  Edward  Allen,  Horatio's 
brother.  Equally  important,  Edward  was  the  son-in-law  of  James  Brown  of  Brown  Brothers,  one  of 
the  most  powerful  banking  houses  in  New  York  City.  James  Brown  became  one  of  the  largest 
stockholders  in  Novelty  Ironworks.  Several  years  later,  one  of  Brown's  sons  wrote,  "Father  owns 
almost  the  whole  of  the  stock."54  In  later  years  another  of  the  Browns,  Clarence,  also  became 
deeply  involved  with  Novelty.  The  Browns  were  not  the  only  important  stockholders,  however.  In 
1856  R.G.  Dun  &  Company  reported  that  Novelty  Ironworks  stock  was  held  by  "wealthy  men, 
prominent  among  them  James  Brown."55 

Horatio  Allen  was  born  in  Schenectady,  New  York,  in  1802  and  graduated  from  Columbia  College 
in  1823. 56  His  father  was  professor  of  mathematics  and  natural  philosophy  and  later  principal  of  a 
large  preparatory  school  at  Hyde  Park.  Allen  majored  in  mathematics  and  after  briefly  studying  law, 
he  entered  the  engineering  profession,  his  principal  occupation  throughout  his  career. 

Allen's  professional  career  began  during  the  "canal  era."  From  the  construction  of  the  Erie  Canal  in 
the  post-War  of  1812  years  until  railroads  demonstrated  their  superiority,  the  United  States 
witnessed  a  canal  boom,  with  more  than  a  hundred  canals  being  excavated  in  all  parts  of  the 
country.  It  is  not  surprising,  then,  that  Allen  first  worked  for  the  Chesapeake  and  Delaware  Canal 
Company,  then  the  Delaware  and  Hudson  Coal  Company.  The  latter's  efforts  to  reach  the 
Pennsylvania  anthracite  coal  region  resulted  in  Allen's  being  sent  to  England  to  purchase  railroad 
iron  and  locomotives.  He  tested  the  first  locomotive  after  it  was  delivered  to  the  United  States,  and 
in  1829  the  "Stourbridge  Lion"  became  the  first  railroad  engine  to  run  in  this  country.  Although 

14 


the  engine  was  never  economically  a  success,  Allen's  involvement  resulted  in  his  appointment  as 
chief  engineer  of  the  South  Carolina  Railroad  Company  later  that  year.57 

As  chief  engineer,  Allen  surveyed  the  railroad's  proposed  route  from  Charleston  to  the  Savannah 
River.  He  also  developed  plans  for  a  locomotive  that  would  be  built  under  his  supervision  at  the 
West  Point  Foundry  in  New  York.  This  would  be  the  first  railroad  engine  built  in  the  western 
hemisphere.  Because  of  this  and  the  "Stourbridge  Lion,"  Allen  has  been  rightfully  called  the  "true 
father"  of  locomotives  in  the  United  States.58  Allen  remained  with  the  South  Carolina  Railroad  until 
1835  when  he  resigned  and  went  abroad.59  Three  years  later  he  settled  in  New  York  City  where  he 
was  appointed  assistant  engineer  of  the  Croton  aqueduct.  The  chief  engineer  was  John  Jervis,  who 
had  been  both  a  friend  and  colleague  in  earlier  projects.  The  Croton  aqueduct  was  to  provide  water 
for  New  York  City  by  means  of  a  dam  and  aqueduct.  It  took  seven  years  to  complete  the  project, 
with  water  first  being  turned  on  in  1842. 60 

With  the  completion  of  the  aqueduct,  Allen  looked  elsewhere  to  utilize  his  engineering  talents.  In 
1842  he  became  a  partner  in  the  Novelty  Works,  but  apparently  had  little  initial  impact  on  the 
company's  business  activities.  The  following  year  he  returned  to  railroads  when  he  was  appointed 
president  of  the  Erie  Railroad.  His  administration  was  short— less  than  two  years.  He  achieved  some 
success  but  was  unable  to  solve  the  company's  financial  difficulties,  and  in  1845  it  was  sold  under 
foreclosure.61 

Allen  would  become  involved  in  one  more  railroad  venture,  the  Panama  Railroad  Company,  which 
was  incorporated  in  1849. 62  There  is  no  evidence,  however,  that  his  participation  was  more  than 
perfunctory.  By  that  time  he  was  concentrating  his  energies  in  designing  and  improving  marine 
steam  engines  that  were  being  built  by  Novelty.  Allen's  interest  in  marine  engines  coincided  with 
the  accelerated  interest  in  oceanic  steam  transportation.  During  the  1840s  he  took  out  at  least  five 
patents  relating  to  marine  steam  machinery,  including  a  cutoff  valve  mechanism  that  would  be  used 
on  most  of  the  engines  that  Novelty  built.63  According  to  one  engineer,  Allen  was  critical  of  the 
cutoff  valve  invented  by  John  Sickel  and  used  on  the  majority  of  steam  engines.  "Horatio  Allen  . . . 
fought  Mr.  Sickel  during  his  whole  business  life  and  would  never  allow  a  Sickel  cutoff  to  be 
applied  in  the  Novelty  Ironworks,"  wrote  Charles  Porter.64  A  number  of  well-known  vessels, 
including  Adriatic  and  the  Collins  steamships  Artie  and  Atlantic,  had  engines  that  included  steam 
and  exhaust  valves  designed  by  Allen.65 

Allen  was,  as  one  writer  said,  "a  prolific  inventor."  Between  1841  and  1879,  he  took  out  at  least  17 
patents,  the  majority  related  to  steam  engines.66  He  spent  considerable  time  trying  to  improve 
oscillating  cylinder  engines,  which  he  recommended  over  side-lever  engines  for  side-wheel 
steamers.  Most  of  the  engines  for  paddlewheel  vessels  built  by  Novelty  and  the  other  steam- 
machinery  builders  were  the  side-lever  type.  A  number  of  the  Novelty -built  steamers,  including 
Adriatic  and  Golden  Gate,  however,  carried  oscillating  engines.67 

The  Novelty  Works  during  these  years  became  one  of  the  largest  establishments  in  the  country  for 
building  marine  engines.  The  firm's  rise  to  prominence  in  steam-machinery  construction 
corresponded  with  the  developing  oceanic  steamship  business.  The  steam  "packet"  service  in  1855 
employed  56  ships,  most  of  them  new  and  at  least  half  built  in  New  York  City.  The  total  steamship 
registered  tonnage  in  the  United  States  jumped  from  5,631  tons  in  1847  to  nearly  a  hundred 
thousand  in  I860.68  New  York  City  was  the  most  important  shipbuilding  center  in  the  country,  and 
Novelty  provided  the  power  plants  for  more  steamers  than  any  other  establishment. 

The  names  of  the  vessels  in  the  two  decades  prior  to  the  Civil  War  with  Novelty-built  engines  reads 
like  a  Who's  Who  of  American  vessels  for  the  period.  Southerner,  launched  in  1846,  was  the  second 
actual  oceangoing  steamship  built  in  the  United  States.  William  H.  Brown  of  New  York  was  the 
shipbuilder  and  Novelty  provided  her  machinery.69  In  March  1845,  Congress  passed  a  law  calling 
for  the  contracting  of  the  mails  to  foreign  countries,  which  resulted  in  the  organization  of  new 
steamship  lines  and  the  construction  of  new  steamers.  The  Ocean  Navigation  Company  built  two 
new  vessels,  Washington  and  Hermann,  with  side-lever  engines  constructed  by  Novelty.70  These  ships 
were  followed  in  1849-50  by  four  steamers  constructed  for  the  Collins  Line,  which  was  established 
by  American  entrepreneur  Edward  Knight  Collins,  to  compete  with  the  British  Cunard  Line.  Two  of 
the  four  Collins  steamers,  Atlantic  and  Arctic,  received  their  machinery  from  the  Novelty  Works.71 
The  loss  of  Arctic  in  1854  was  a  major  early  American  marine  disaster.  Among  the  passengers  who 
lost  their  lives  was  the  family  of  Edward  Allen,  a  Nove'ty  official  and  Horatio  Allen's  brother.72 

15 


Another  fleet  of  steam  packets  was  built  in  the  late  1840s  to  run  to  and  from  Le  Havre,  France, 
including  the  Arago,  Franklin,  and  Humbolt,  all  with  Novelty-built  engines.73 

In  1847  Congress  initiated  another  mail  subsidy,  which  resulted  in  two  steamship  lines  being 
organized  for  the  Panama  route.  The  mail,  passengers,  and  a  limited  amount  of  light  freight  was 
carried  by  steamer  from  eastern  U.S.  ports  to  Panama.  Passengers  and  cargo  crossed  the  isthmus  by 
rail  and  then  by  steamer  to  San  Francisco.  The  government  also  subsidized  the  Pacific  steamship 
lines.  A  group  headed  by  William  H.  Aspinwall  of  New  York  organized  the  Pacific  Mail  Steamship 
Company  to  receive  the  mail  contract  for  the  Panama  route,  which  soon  grew  in  importance 
because  of  the  discovery  of  gold  in  California.  New  York  shipbuilders  produced  most  of  the  liners 
for  this  route,  and  22  out  of  64  engines  built  there  came  from  Novelty.74 

Stillman,  Allen  &  Company  also  provided  machinery  for  Adriatic  (350  ft.  long,  50  ft.  wide,  and  5,000 
tons  displacement),  when  completed,  the  largest  side-wheel  steamer  in  the  world  except  for 
Britain's  Great  Eastern.  Adriatic  was  also  considered  the  fastest  steamship  afloat  for  several  years, 
once  steaming  15  knots  in  smooth  water.  Her  two  oscillating  engines  had  cylinders  101  inches  in 
diameter  with  12-foot  strokes.  The  paddle-wheels  were  40  feet  in  diameter  and  their  hubs  were 
probably  the  largest  castings  for  steamships  made  in  the  United  States  before  I860.75 

Unfortunately,  Adriatic's  machinery  had  major  defects,  primarily  in  the  valves  and  valve-operating 
gear  designed  by  Horatio  Allen.  Because  of  these  deficiencies,  the  ship's  maiden  voyage  was 
delayed  more  than  a  year,  an  expensive  delay  that  was  a  factor  in  the  failure  of  the  Collins  Line 
and  would  also  seriously  affect  the  prosperity  of  the  Novelty  Ironworks.76 

Novelty  provided  the  machinery  for  a  number  of  other  pre-Civil  War  ships.  Nashville,  launched  in 
1853,  had  side-level  engines.  This  vessel  became  a  Confederate  raider  during  the  war  and  was 
destroyed  in  1863. 77  In  1854  the  Samuel  S.  Sneeden  shipyard  constructed  the  paddle  wheeler 
Metropolis  at  Greenpoint,  Long  Island.  Built  for  the  Fall  River  Line,  she  was  considered  "the  largest 
steamboat  in  the  world."78  In  1850  Novelty  built  the  machinery  for  the  Pacific  Mail  steamer,  Golden 
Gate,  and  according  to  The  Scientific  American  the  wrought-iron  center  shaft  and  four  cranks  for  this 
vessel  were  the  "largest  and  heaviest  pieces  of  wrought-iron  mechanism  ever  made  in  this  city, 
and,  if  we  are  not  greatly  in  error,  in  this  country."79  Golden  Gate  was  one  of  Pacific  Mail's  best 
steamers.  The  company  also  provided  the  machinery  for  a  number  of  vessels  built  for  other 
countries,  including  at  least  two  for  Russia  and  one  each  for  Turkey  and  Brazil.80 

Novelty's  lead  in  building  the  machinery  for  steamers  was  not  the  result  of  a  clear  superiority  over 
the  other  constructors,  nor  cheaper  prices,  but  rather  the  effect  of  Horatio  Allen's  personal  and 
business  ties  with  key  individuals  associated  with  various  financial  and  shipping  interests.  For 
example,  he  was  associated  with  William  Henry  Aspinwall  in  the  Panama  Railroad  Company; 
Aspinwall  was  instrumental  in  developing  the  Pacific  Mail  Steamship  Company.  The  Brown 
brothers'  banking  firm  provided  much  of  the  financial  backing  for  Pacific  Mail,  and  Allen  and  the 
Novelty  Works  had  a  close  relationship  with  Brown  Brothers.  In  a  suit  adjudicated  in  1856  involving 
Allen  and  the  Novelty  Ironworks,  a  lawyer  stated  that  Edward  Collins  of  the  Collins  Line  was 
forced  to  use  Novelty-built  machinery  in  his  vessels.  "He  was  tied  hand  and  foot  by  Brown 
Brothers  &  Company  at  the  feet  of  Horatio  Allen."81 

Although  Novelty's  reputation  rested  to  a  great  extent  on  the  construction  of  marine  machinery,  the 
ironworks  manufactured  a  variety  of  products  ranging  from  sugar- mill  machinery  to  fire  engines. 
According  to  one  account  more  than  75  steam  fire  engines  designed  by  Lee  &  Larned  were  built  by 
Novelty.  "The  fire  Department  of  [New  York  City]. .  .was  completely  equipped  with  them," 
Thomas  Porter  wrote.82  In  1844  Novelty  built  two  iron  vessels  for  the  government,  one  a  surveying 
steamer,  and  the  other  a  cutter  for  the  Revenue  Cutter  Service.83  Occasionally,  the  ironworks  acted 
as  the  agent  for  products,  including  machinery,  manufactured  by  other  estalishments.84 

Novelty's  business  fluctuated  in  the  decade  preceding  the  Civil  War.  The  company  expanded  and 
prospered  early  in  the  decade  because  of  the  city's  thriving  shipbuilding  industry.  One  authority 
estimated  that  Novelty's  business  in  one  year  was  worth  more  than  1.5  million  dollars.85  In  1850  the 
works  stretched  for  nearly  a  thousand  yards  along  the  East  River  from  12th  to  14th  Street,  and 
included  an  iron  foundry  with  four  furnaces,  smith's  shop,  various  buildings,  and  two  slips  capable 
of  holding  eight  or  10  large  vessels  at  one  time.  That  year,  1,170  people  were  employed  in  the 
ironworks,  but  the  steam  power  plant,  the  boiler  factory,  explosions  from  gasses  in  the  molds 

16 


Workers  at  the  Novelty  Works  mold  and  forge  iron.  (Harper's  New  Monthly  Magazine,  Vol.  II,  No.  XII,  May  1851) 


17 


combined  with  the  billowing  smoke  from  more  than  30  forges  in  the  blacksmith  shop,  created, 
according  to  one  observer,  an  extremely  noisy  and  smoky  area.86 

The  city's  shipbuilding  business  began  declining  in  the  mid-1850s.  The  high  cost  of  construction, 
along  with  the  failure  of  some  of  the  large  lines,  particularly  the  Collins  line,  contributed  to  the 
decline.  Whereas  37  steamers  were  launched  in  1853  and  47  in  1854,  only  13  were  completed  in 
1855. 87  Novelty's  business  was  hurt,  not  only  because  of  the  drop  in  shipbuilding  activities  but  also 
because  of  the  firm's  well-publicized  problems  with  the  Collins  liner  Adriatic.  The  company's 
financial  difficulties  led  to  its  reorganization  in  1855.  The  new  capital  brought  in  by  this 
reorganization  stabilized  the  company's  financial  situation  and  more  than  likely  saved  it  from 
collapsing  during  the  country's  economic  crisis  of  the  late  1850s. 

Novelty,  like  so  many  industrial  firms  in  the  United  States,  was  affected  by  the  1857  financial  panic. 
A  statement  in  an  R.  G.  Dun  report  for  September  1857  said,  "Novelty  works  failed  on  Saturday;" 
but  another  report  in  October  commented  that  "the  Company  will  continue  reliable. .  .so  long  as 
they  receive  the  support  of  Brown  Brothers  &  Company  under  whose  supervision  the  Company  is 
conducted."  An  1859  report  stated  that  the  "Company  since  its  reorganization  has  had  to  contend 
[with] . . .  strong  opposition  and  a  depressed  condition  of  commerce  and  has  consequently  been 
obliged  to  take  work  at  very  low  rates.  It  is  supposed  to  have  held  its  own."  In  1860  R.  G.  Dun 
mentioned  that  the  Company  had  had  moderate  business  building  fire  engines  and  "work  for  the 
Russian  Government."  The  report  added  that  the  firm  had  "made  no  money  for  some  time,"  and 
"paid  no  dividends."88  The  Scientific  American  in  its  December  1860  issue  agreed  with  Dun:  "The 
Novelty  Ironworks  and  the  Morgan  Ironworks  are  both  working  at  present  on  short  time,  viz.  nine 
hours,  by  reason  of  the  financial  embarrassment  now  obtaining  in  commercial  circles  and  not  from 
any  lack  of  work."89 

Less  than  three  weeks  before  Fort  Sumter  was  fired  upon  and  President  Abraham  Lincoln's  call  for 
troops,  Novelty  was  still  not  working  to  capacity.  According  to  The  Scientific  American, 

At  present  they  employ  600  men . . .  there  are  now  going  forward  two  beam  engines ...  for 
the  Norwich  and  Stonington  route;  one  marine  beam  engine ...  for  the  Pacific  Mail 
Steamship  Company;  some  quartz  rock-crushing  machinery  for  South  America;  an  iron 
stern-wheel  boat,  fitted  with  two  horizontal  high-pressure  engines  and  boilers;  and 
hydraulic  pumps  and  presses  for  a  fish  oil  factory ....  Working  time  at  present,  nine  hours 
per  day.90 

The  war  would  change  Novelty's  condition,  as  it  would  other  business  firms  throughout  the 
country. 

C.  Delamater  Ironworks 

No  New  York  City  establishment  profited  more  than  the  Delamater  Ironworks,  which  built  much  of 
the  Monitor's  machinery.  Delamater,  originally  known  as  the  Phoenix  Foundry  was  established  in 
1835  by  James  Cunningham.91  From  the  beginning,  the  company  specialized  in  fabricating  marine 
machinery,  achieving  some  prominence  because  of  a  unique  valve  system  that  Cunningham 
developed.  Cornelius  Delamater  joined  the  company  at  age  16  as  a  clerk.  In  1842  the  Phoenix  works 
was  purchased  by  Delamater  and  Peter  Hogg,  one  of  the  foundry's  draftsmen  and  engineers,92  and 
the  company's  name  was  changed  to  Hogg  &  Delamater. 

Three  years  before  Delamater  and  Hogg  assumed  control  of  the  ironworks,  John  Ericsson,  a  young 
Swedish  inventor,  contracted  with  Cunningham  to  do  some  work  for  him.  Ericsson  met  Cornelius 
Delamater  at  the  foundry,  and  a  friendship  and  business  relationship  developed  which  would  last 
throughout  their  lives.  Delamater  became  Ericsson's  closest  friend.  Ericsson  constantly  wrote  to 
Cornelius  ,  whom  he  called  "Harry."  "A  happy  new  year  to  you  my  old  and  true  friend,"  Ericsson 
wrote  to  "Harry"  Delamater  on  January  2,  1868. 93 

Their  business  association  was  just  as  close.  As  one  writer  has  pointed  out,  "rarely. .  .did  either  of 
them  enter  upon  a  business  venture  without  consulting  the  other."94  After  Delamater  became  sole 
owner  of  the  foundry,  Ericsson  was  never  charged  for  using  its  facilities,  tools,  or  materials.  In 
return,  Delamater  was  compensated  when  the  Swede's  inventions  were  successful.  Ericsson 
preferred  doing  business  through  Delamater  and  permitted  him  to  sell  an  unlimited  number  of  his 
inventions.  Cornelius  Delamater  "did  more  work  for  Captain  Ericsson  than  any  one  else  engaged  in 

18 


Cornelius  Delamater's  association  with  John  Ericsson  lasted  through  much  of  his  career.  Delamater's  ironworks  profited 
from  this  association  when  it  won  the  contract  to  construct  Monitor's  machinery.  (Division  of  Mechanical  and  Civil 
Engineering,  National  Museum  of  American  History,  Washington,  B.C.) 


the  line  of  engineering,"  said  The  Scientific  American  in  Delamater's  obituary.  "It  would  have  been 
unusual,  almost  unthinkable,  for  the  Swedish-American  engineer  to  have  taken  the  [Monitor]  work 
anywhere  else.  He  had  relied  on  Delamater  almost  exclusively  since  the  firm  agreed  to  handle  the 
construction  of  two  iron  canal  boats  that  were  commissioned  by  Lieutenant  Robert  F.  Stockton  in 
1839.  "95 

Hogg  &  Delamater  expanded  substantially  in  the  1840s.  Because  of  limited  space  at  its  original 
location,  the  company  was  moved  to  a  new  site  in  1849,  and  the  name  changed  to  Hogg  & 
Delamater  Ironworks.  A  final  name  change  occurred  in  1858  when  Hogg  sold  out  to  Delamater.  The 
establishment  until  its  demise  would  be  known  as  the  Cornelius  H.  Delamater  Ironworks.96  At  the 
time  the  Civil  War  broke  out,  Delamater  was  reputed  to  be  the  largest  marine  steam-engine 
manufacturing  establishment  in  the  country.97  It  occupied  "two  hundred  feet  fronting  the  North 
River,  with  a  front  of  six  hundred  feet  on  Thirteenth  Street,  and  an  equal  space  on  Fourteenth 
Street  as  well  as  additional  grounds  on  the  south  side  of  Thirteenth  Street ....  The  establishment  is 
furnished  with  every  requisite  for  building  all  kinds  and  varieties  of  machinery. .  .  .There  have  at 
times  been  from  one  thousand  to  twelve  hundred  workmen  employed  here."98 

J.  Leander  Bishop  in  his  history  of  manufacturing  wrote,  "When  the  whole  expense  of  conducting 
such  Works  is  taken  into  account,  it  seems  wonderful  that  such  extensive  operations  should  have 
been  so  successfully  conducted  under  the  proprietorship  of  a  single  individual."  In  contrast  to  the 
other  large  marine  machinery  works  operated  by  partnerships  or  corporations,  "the  Delamater 
Ironworks  have  achieved  distinguished  triumph  in  engineering  under  the  direction  of  a  single 
proprietor  possessing  a  mind  of  great  executive  and  iinancial  ability."99 


19 


An  R.  G.  Dun  report  stated  in  1854  that  Delamater  had  "been  doing  a  large  business  and  made 
money,  was  considered  rich."  In  1857,  the  year  of  the  financial  panic,  Dun  mentioned  that 
Delamater's  business  was  "good  and  profitable."100  The  company  apparently  was  not  badly  hurt  by 
the  recession  that  hit  the  country  in  the  late  1850s. 

As  contracts  were  obtained,  the  company's  work  expanded  form  marine  machinery  to  cast  pipe  and 
built  machinery  (boilers,  engines,  tanks,  etc.)  for  sugar  refineries  and  waterworks,  fire  engines,  and 
stationary  engines  for  a  variety  of  uses,  from  running  mill  machines  to  fog  horns.  Delamater 
imported  large  tools  from  England  and  manufactured  others.  One  of  the  most  successful  products 
was  fire  engines  or  Ericsson  pumpers.  Ericsson  also  invented  a  hot-air  or  "caloric"  engine  that  was 
manufactured  and  sold  in  large  numbers  by  Delamater.101 

The  company's  reputation  was  built  on  marine  machinery,  particularly  steam  engines  and 
propellers.  Machinery  was  fabricated  for  paddle  wheelers,  but  it  was  in  propeller-driven  craft  that 
the  company  specialized,  undoubtedly  because  of  the  unique  relationship  between  Ericsson  and 
Delamater.  Even  before  Delamater  became  owner,  however,  the  company  was  manufacturing  the 
machinery  for  screw-propelled  vessels.  In  1837  Ericsson  built  a  screw  propelled  steamer  in  England. 
Five  years  later,  after  having  emigrated  to  the  United  States,  he  was  employed  by  the  Navy 
Department  as  superintendent  for  the  construction  of  Princeton,  the  first  screw-propelled  warship. 
Although  the  hull  and  most  of  the  machinery  were  built  at  Philadelphia,  the  Phoenix  Foundry 
fabricated  her  boilers,  propeller,  and  centrifugal  blower.102 

It  is  possible  that  Clarion,  the  first  ocean-going  propeller-driven  craft  in  the  United  States,  received 
her  machinery  from  the  Phoenix  foundry.  Originally  a  sailing  vessel,  she  was  converted  to  twin 
screws  in  1840  by  Ericsson.103  In  1844,  two  steamers  with  screw  propellers  were  launched,  both 
with  Hogg  &  Delamater-built  machinery.  Midas  was  a  twin  screw  vessel  built  for  Robert  B.  Forbes,  a 
well-known  shipmaster,  shipowner,  and  strong  advocate  of  propeller-driven  craft.104  She  was 
followed  by  Marmora,  also  with  Ericsson-designed,  Hogg  &  Delamater-built  machinery.  From  the 
mid-1840s  through  the  Civil  War,  Hogg  &  Delamater  dominated  industry  along  the  Atlantic  coast  in 
the  construction  of  machinery  for  screw-propelled  craft.105 

Delamater  benefitted  from  a  close  association  with  a  yachting  friend,  Charles  Henry  Mallory,  a 
Mystic  shipbuilder  and  ship  owner.  Early  in  1860  Mallory  created  a  shipping  company  to  run  a  line 
of  steamers  between  New  York  and  the  Gulf  ports.  He  built  a  number  of  wooden  steamers  and 
contracted  with  Delamater  to  provide  their  machinery,  beginning  a  business  association  that  would 
last  for  a  number  of  years.  As  Mallory 's  biographer  wrote,  "For  machinery,  the  Mallory  yards 
depended  primarily  on  the  Delamater  Ironworks, . . .  the  Reliance  Machine  Company,  and  the  Mystic 
Ironworks.  Delamater  filled  the  bulk  of  Mallory's  order  for  engines,  boilers,  shafts,  pumps,  and 
windlasses."106 

In  1852  Ericsson  designed  a  ship  named  after  himself  that  was  powered  by  a  caloric  engine, 
considered  revolutionary  by  the  inventor  and  many  of  his  contemporaries.  The  vessel's  machinery, 
which  was  as  usual  built  by  Hogg  &  Delamater,  was  designed  to  test  Ericsson's  idea  of  driving  a 
ship  by  heated  air  instead  of  steam.  Ericsson  and  Delamater  also  backed  the  ship  financially, 
expecting  it  to  be  so  successful  that  ship  owners  worldwide  would  adopt  his  caloric  engine.  In  1854 
a  Dun  statement  noted  that  Hogg  &  Delamater  "have  invested  a  large  amount  of  money  in  the 
'Ericsson  ship  experiment.'  If  it  is  successful  they  will  be  very  rich,  and  if  it  is  not,  they  will  be 
hard  run."107  Ultimately,  the  ship's  engines  were  considered  a  failure,  the  speed  reaching  only  half 
of  what  was  anticipated.  Nevertheless,  the  company  was  not  badly  hurt  financially,  partly  because 
John  B.  Kitching,  a  wealthy  New  Yorker  and  one  of  Ericsson's  backers,  absorbed  much  of  the  loss. 
Perhaps  more  important,  the  caloric  engine  proved  quite  successful  for  pumping  water,  driving 
printing  presses,  and  running  a  variety  of  small  machines,  and  in  later  years,  Delamater  built  many 
such  engines  for  non-marine  use.108 

Delamater  also  became  involved  in  the  constructon  of  iron  vessels.  As  mentioned  earlier  two  iron 
barges  had  been  built  for  the  Delaware  and  Raritan  Canal  Company  in  1840.  The  works  provided 
machinery  for  Iron  Witch,  launched  in  1846,  which  was  a  side- wheeler  built  for  the  Hudson  River 
and  labelled  by  Dayton  "a  freak  of  the  forties."109  Although  Iron  Witch  was  a  failure,  two  iron  screw 
propellers  built  in  1859-60,  Matanzas  and  North  Carolina,  were  successful.  Matanzas  would  be  used  in 
the  West  India  trade  until  destroyed  by  fire  in  1868.  North  Carolina  would  become  a  Confederate 
blockade  runner  during  the  Civil  War.110  Delamater  had  acquired  considerable  experience  in 

20 


A  VERY  PERFECT  VIEW  OF  THE  NEW  CALORIC  SHIP,  ERICSSON. 


The  caloric  ship  Ericsson  was  an  early  collaboration  of  John  Ericsson  and  Cornelius  Delameter.  Delamater  continued  to 
manufacture  caloric  engines  until  well  after  the  Civil  War.  (San  Francisco  Maritime  National  Historic  Park) 


fabricating  machinery  for  iron-hulled  vessels  by  the  time  Monitor  was  contracted  for.  The  Clute 
Brothers  Foundry  had  no  such  preparation. 

D.  Clute  Brothers  Foundry 

In  addition  to  the  New  York  City  firms,  only  one  other  establishment  specializing  in  steam-engine 
construction  was  involved  in  building  Monitor.  In  1835  the  firm  of  Clute  &  Bailey  was  started  in 
Schenectady,  New  York,  by  P.  I.  Clute.  Seven  years  later,  Cadwallader  C.  Clute  bought  out  Bailey 
and  the  firm  became  P.  I.  Clute  and  Sons. 

In  1849  the  elder  Clute  retired  and  Cadwallader  C.  Clute  was  joined  by  a  brother  to  form  Clute 
Brothers.  The  establishment  was  continued  under  that  name  for  more  than  30  years.  The  foundry 
manufactured  tools,  boilers,  steam  and  caloric  engires,  both  stationary  and  marine.111  Machinery 
was  built  for  Erie  Canal  boats.  Little  is  known  about  the  company's  business  activities  until  the 


21 


1850s  when  it  started  building  Ericsson's  caloric  engines,  which  was  probably  why  the 
establishment  was  chosen  as  one  of  the  Monitor  sub-contractors.112 

E.  Continental  Ironworks 

Continental  Ironworks  was  the  most  recently  established  firm  that  contributed  to  the  building  of 
Monitor.  Thomas  Fitch  Rowland  was  the  company's  owner  in  1861.  Rowland  was  born  in  New 
Haven,  Connecticut,  in  1831. 113  At  age  13  he  began  work  in  his  father's  grist  mill,  and  a  few  years 
later  was  employed  in  the  machine  shop  of  the  New  York  and  New  Haven  Railroad.  He  first 
became  involved  in  the  maritime  industries  in  1850,  when  he  was  appointed  an  engineer  on  the 
steamboat  Connecticut.  Two  years  later  he  obtained  a  position  with  the  Allaire  Ironworks,  one  of  the 
largest  builders  of  marine-steam  machinery  in  New  York  City.  Rowland  worked  for  four  years  in 
the  machine  shop  and  drawing  room  and  then  was  appointed  superintendent.  He  supervised  the 
construction  and  installation  of  machinery  for  several  vessels,  including  Harriet  Lane,  before  leaving 
Allaire  to  join  Samuel  Sneeden's  shipyard  as  engineer.  Sneeden's  shipyard,  located  in  Brooklyn, 
specialized  in  the  construction  of  small  wooden  vessels.  In  1859  Sneeden  contracted  to  build  an  iron 
steamer  for  a  New  Orleans  businessman  to  run  on  Lake  Pontchartrain.  He  had  no  experience  in 
iron-ship  construction,  and  hired  Rowland  as  his  engineer  and  superintendent.  Rowland  designed 
the  ship,  including  her  hull,  "constructed  in  the  same  manner,  substantially,  as  a  steam  boiler,  with 
a  single  thickness  of  plates  of  iron  riveted  together  where  they  lap  at  the  edges."114 


Thomas  Fitch  Rowland,  31  years  old  and  "full  of  energy  and  enterprise,"  actively 
campaigned  to  win  government  contracts  for  iron  work  when  the  Civil  War 
began.  Rowland's  efforts  were  rewarded  when  he  was  selected  to  build  Monitor's 
^?v  hull. 


Rowland  and  Sneeden's  subsequent  relationship  is  unclear,  as  is  the  origins  of  the  Continental 
Ironworks.  One  account  says  that  Rowland,  in  association  with  Sneeden,  established  a  business  at 
Greenpoint;  another  states  that  he  took  over  the  Sneeden  shipyard  in  April  1859.  Fred  Irving 
Dayton,  however,  mentions  Sneeden  and  Rowland  as  partners  in  1861.  A  fourth  source  refers  to 
the  two  as  partners  in  the  Continental  Ironworks,  "a  concern  which  did  other  types  of  iron 
construction."115  The  most  logical  explanation  is  that  Sneeden  and  Rowland  became  partners  some 
time  after  Rowland  joined  the  firm  and  continued  the  association  until  1861.  In  1860,  they  created 
the  Continental  Ironworks,  which  absorbed  the  old  shipyard.  Their  first  important  contract,  with 
the  New  York  Water  Board,  was  to  construct  "a  wrought  [iron]  tube  seven  and  a  half  feet  in 
diameter  and  one  and  a  quarter  mile  in  length  to  be  connected  to  a  bridge  over  the  Harlem  river," 
linking  the  Croton  Aqueduct  to  a  reservoir  in  Central  Park.116 

The  partners  received  a  contract  in  1861  to  build  two  steamboats  for  the  Norwich  &  New  York 
Transportation  Company.  The  first  one,  City  of  Boston,  was  launched  in  1861,  and  the  second,  City 
of  New  York,  the  following  year.  They  were  large  vessels,  more  than  300  feet  in  length,  and 
according  to  J.  Scott  Russell,  who  was  a  well-known  English  naval  architect  and  designer  of  Great 
Eastern,  were  "remarkable  specimens  of  American  naval  architecture."117 

22 


III.  Civil  War  Contracts 

By  the  time  City  of  New  York  was  completed,  the  Civil  War  was  in  its  second  year,  and  the 
Continental  Ironworks  and  other  Monitor  companies  were  deeply  involved  in  government  work. 
Novelty  Ironworks  was  the  first  of  these  companies  to  receive  a  contract.  The  Navy's  engineer-in- 
chief,  Benjamin  F.  Isherwood,  had  worked  at  Novelty  early  in  his  career  and  regarded  the  firm 
highly.  Shortly  before  the  Civil  War  Isherwood  designed  the  machinery  for  two  Russian  gunboats 
that  were  constructed  at  Novelty  under  his  direction.118  Shortly  after  the  conflict  began,  the  Navy 
decided  to  build  small  wooden  gunboats  that  could  be  used  for  close  inshore  work  in  the  shallow 
Southern  waters.  Isherwood  recommended  that  the  Russian  gunboat  design  be  adopted,  and  that 
Novelty  be  awarded  a  contract  to  build  them.  The  Navy  agreed,  and  the  New  York  City  firm 
received  a  contract  to  build  the  machinery  for  four  of  the  gunboats.  They  were  completed  in  90 
days,  earning  for  that  class  of  vessels  the  name  "ninety-day  gunboats."119 

Throughout  the  summer  and  early  fall  of  1861,  Novelty  was  occupied  with  the  gunboats  and 
machinery  for  several  steamers,  including  the  Pacific  Mail  steamship  Constitution. 120  Novelty 
company  sought  no  additional  government  work  until  Ericsson  approached  the  company  with  the 
proposition  to  construct  Monitor's  turret.  R.  G.  Dun  reported  in  October  1861,  that  "they  [Novelty] 
have  recently  had  increased  work  and  employed  a  good  many  hands,"121  presumably,  a  result  of 
the  Monitor  work,  which  had  started  that  month. 

Novelty's  neighbor  on  the  East  River,  the  Cornelius  Delamater  Ironworks,  spent  the  early  months 
of  the  war  completing  the  steamships  for  Mallory.  In  July  1861,  Delamater  journeyed  to 
Washington,  D.C.,  where  he  conferred  with  Secretary  of  the  Navy  Gideon  Welles.  Delamater 
informed  Ericsson,  "I  am  treated  well. .  .yet  I  have  no  expectation  of  any  contract  or  immediate 
good  to  result  to  me  or  to  us. .  ."122  According  to  a  history  of  the  company,  Delamater  offered  the 
government  "such  work  as  might  be  needed,  but  nothing  was  forthcoming  until  the  Monitor."123 
Continental  Ironworks  on  Long  Island  and  its  owner,  Thomas  Rowland,  faired  better.  Rowland  (31 
years  old)  was  "full  of  energy  and  enterprise,  anxious  to  identify  himself  with  government  work." 
As  soon  as  the  war  started,  Rowland  endeavored  to  obtain  government  contracts.  He  was  awarded 
one  by  the  Navy  to  build  gun  carriages  and  became  a  sub-contractor  to  manufacture  wrought-iron 
beds  for  13-inch  mortars,  which  were  later  installed  on  schooners  and  used  by  David  Dixon  Porter 
in  an  attack  against  the  forts  guarding  New  Orleans.  The  Navy  also  engaged  the  company  to  fit  out 
merchant  vessels  purchased  for  war  service.124 

In  May  1861,  Rowland  travelled  to  Washington  with  a  model  and  proposal  for  an  ironclad  warship. 
The  proposed  vessel  was  to  be  a  twin-screw  ironclad  of  about  750  tons,  armored  with  three  layers 
of  one-and-a-fourth-inch  iron,  backed  by  iron  bars  laid  parallel  to  each  other.  Two  diamond-shaped 
"gun  houses"  were  initially  planned,  but  in  a  modified  proposal  submitted  later  they  were  replaced 
by  two  revolving  turrets.  A  board  of  naval  officers  considering  various  proposals  rejected 
Rowland's,  saying,  "it  would  not  bear  the  weight  and  provide  stability."125 

The  proposal  had  been  signed  by  Charles  W.  Whitney  and  Rowland.  Whitney  was  the  New  York 
agent  for  H.  Abbott  &  Sons  of  Baltimore,  who  may  well  have  agreed  to  provide  the  iron  plating  for 
the  vessel.  Rowland  withdrew  from  the  project  after  the  board's  rejection,  but  Whitney  later  got  a 
contract  for  constructing  an  armored  vessel  that  was  named  Keokut.  It  has  been  suggested  that  it 
was  after  Rowland's  proposal  was  turned  down  that  he  agreed  to  sub-contract  for  Monitor's  hull.126 

John  F.  Winslow,  representing  the  Albany  and  Rensselaer  Ironworks  of  Troy,  also  hurried  to 
Washington  eager  to  secure  war  contracts.  In  September  1861,  he  wrote,  "we  have. .  .propositions 
before  the  War  and  Navy  Departments,  and  with  attention,  we  shall  secure  a  fair  proportion  of 
what  is  wanted."  Winslow,  as  Ericsson  would  later  recognise,  was  well  connected  in  Washington. 
He  was  a  political  ally  of  Secretary  of  State  William  Henry  Seward  and  New  York  Representative 
Erastus  Corning.  Winslow  contracted  with  the  War  Department  to  furnish  railroad  equipment  and 
even  a  few  cannon.127  Two  experimental  rifled  guns  were  cast  out  of  steel,  or  what  The  Scientific 
American  called  "semi-steel."  Although  the  magazine  claimed  that  the  firing  tests  conducted  at  West 
Point  were  successful,  apparently  no  contracts  for  additional  guns  were  awarded  to  the  Troy 
works.128 

Winslow  and  his  Troy  partner,  John  Griswold,  were  approached  by  Cornelius  Bushnell,  a  New 
Haven,  Connecticut,  businessman,  to  provide  iron  for  an  armored  warship  that  he  was  proposing 

23 


to  build.  Bushnell's  vessel,  named  Galena,  would  receive  her  iron,  including  armor  plate,  from  the 
two  Troy  establishments.  Winslow  devised  a  system  of  plating,  which  he  patented,  that  was 
applied  to  Galena.  In  order  to  eliminate  the  use  of  bolts  to  attach  the  plate  to  the  wood  backing, 
which  he  considered  to  be  a  serious  weakness  of  European  ironclads,  he  developed  a  "tongue  and 
groove"  system,  with  the  plates  being  attached  by  rivets  to  iron  "chairs"  similar  to  inverted 
railroad  T-rails.129  Galena— and  Winslow's  armor  plan— was  a  failure.  The  ironclad  was  badly 
damaged,  with  at  least  18  shots  penetrating  her  armor,  when  she  engaged  Confederate  forts  near 
Richmond  in  May  1862.  As  a  result  of  the  business  relationship  with  Bushnell,  Winslow  and 
Griswold  later  became  involved  in  the  Monitor  project. 

Undoubtedly  other  Monitor  companies  sought  government  contracts.  Certainly  H.  Abbott  &  Sons 
did.  The  firm's  size,  capabilities,  reputation,  and  proximity  to  the  nation's  capital  made  it  a  prime 
industry  to  secure  government  work.  Undoubtedly  Holdane  &  Company  sought  similar  contracts. 
R.  G.  Dunn  reported  in  the  spring  of  1862  that  Holdane  was  "done  good  business  and  made 
money  since  the  Rebellion  broke  out."130  There  is  no  evidence  that  Clute  in  Schenectady,  nor  the 
Niagara  Steam  Forge  Company  in  Buffalo  engaged  in  government  work  before  becoming  Monitor 
subcontractors.  According  to  a  recent  study  of  Buffalo,  "The  Civil  War  [did]. .  .little  to  alter  the 
commercial  orientation  of  Buffalo's  economy. .  .Those  industries  that  did  exist  at  the  end  of  the 
war— iron  foundries,  ship  builders,  clothing  manufacturers— produced  strictly  for  the  local 
market."131 

The  story  of  Monitor's  construction  and  the  contribution  by  the  various  companies  has  frequently 
been  told,  and  need  only  be  briefly  mentioned  here.132  Ericsson,  Bushnell,  Griswold,  and  Winslow 
were  all  instrumental  in  getting  the  proposal  for  "Ericsson's  battery"  accepted  by  the  Navy,  and  a 
contract  was  awarded  to  the  "Battery  Associates"  on  October  4,  1861.  Each  of  the  four  took  a 
fourth  interest  in  the  venture.  Initial  financial  backing  was  obtained  by  Griswold  and  Winslow.133 
Because  of  the  contractural  time  constraint  of  100  days  to  complete  the  ironclad,  the  contractors 
decided  to  subdivide  the  work  among  a  number  of  establishments.  They  also  divided  up  their 
responsibilities.  Griswold  would  handle  finances;  Winslow  would  obtain  the  iron  including  the 
armor  plate;  and  Ericsson  would  see  that  the  machinery  was  built  and  oversee  the  vessel's 
construction.134 

Ericsson  and  the  contractors  for  the  hull  and  turret  provided  Winslow  with  specifications,  drawings 
and  amount  of  iron  needed,  and  he  in  turn  either  produced  it  at  the  Troy  facilities  or  ordered  it 
from  H.  Abbott  &  Sons  or  Holdane  &  Company.  The  Troy  works  manufactured  some  of  the  angle 
and  bar  iron,  spikes,  and  bolts,  but  because  of  other  commitments,  particularly  Galena,  Winslow 
had  to  depend  on  the  other  ironworks  for  much  of  the  iron.  Ericsson  wanted  rolled  plates  of  4-inch 
thickness  for  the  armor,  but  Abbott,  the  only  establishment  in  the  country  capable  of  manufacturing 
them,  said  that  it  would  take  at  least  two  months  to  modify  their  facilities  to  roll  iron  of  that 
thickness.  The  Navy  reluctantly  agreed  to  accept  one-inch  plate  for  laminated  armor.135  Abbott  and 
the  Albany  Ironworks  manufactured  the  armor  plate,  which  was  the  first  rolled  in  the  United 
States.136 

Holdane  &  Company  was  not  a  manufacturer,  but  an  iron  dealer  in  New  York  City.  The  firm 
contracted  to  provide  a  large  quantity  of  angle  iron  for  frames,  bulkheads,  and  more,  along  with 
125  tons  of  armor  plate.  Apparently  Holdane  had  difficulty  in  supplying  it.  On  November  12, 
Ericsson  wrote  to  Griswold  complaining  about  the  non-receipt  of  iron  from  Holdane:  "The  Vi  inch 
engine  bulkhead  iron  Mr.  Holdane  has  been  promising  from  day  to  day— not  a  sheet  had  made  its 
appearance  yesterday."  He  added,  "I  feel  sometimes  a  despair  on  account  of  the  want  of  material." 
In  a  postscript  he  wrote,  "Mr.  H.  has  also  at  last  given  me  the  names  of  the  parties  who 
manufactured  the  iron."  Earlier  he  had  mentioned  that  "strange  to  say  I  am  not  permitted  to  know 
where  the  plate  is  being  rolled."137 

Ericsson  negotiated  for  the  machinery  and  for  the  construction  of  the  turret  and  vessel  itself. 
Delamater,  not  surprisingly,  was  to  manufacture  the  main  engines,  boilers,  propeller,  and  other 
machinery  parts.  He  contacted  Clute  &  Brothers,  a  firm  with  which  he  was  familiar  because  of  their 
success  in  producing  his  caloric  engines.  On  November  6,  he  accepted  an  offer  from  Clute  to  build 
the  turret  engines,  gun  carriages,  anchor  hoister  (windlass),  and  engine  room  grates.138 

Ericsson  selected  the  Novelty  Ironworks  to  construct  the  turret  because  it  was  apparently  the  only 
establishment  in  New  York  City  with  powerful  steam-operated  presses  and  other  facilities  needed  to 
bend  the  iron  plates.  The  Continental  Ironworks  was  chosen  to  actually  build  the  vessel.139  Ericsson 

24 


/oftn  Ericsson  produced  engineering  and  construction  drawings  almost  daily  to  guide  the  casting  and  assembly  of  Monitor. 
The  distinctive  four-fluke  anchor  shown  here  was  one  of  many  new  features  manufactured  to  Ericsson's  specifications.  (Na- 
tional Museum  of  American  History) 


25 


never  said  why  that  company  was  selected.  He  wrote  in  an  account  of  Monitor,  published  after  the 
war,  that  "I  divided  the  work  among  three  leading  mechanical  establishments,"  presumably 
referring  to  Novelty,  Delamater,  and  Continental.140  Geographical  proximity  may  have  been  a  factor 
in  the  choice.  "All  three  were  readily  accessible  for  the  engineer  to  personally  supervise  and  direct 
the  activities  at  each  location.  As  the  three  major  elements  of  the  battery  were  to  be  constructed 
separately,  Ericsson  felt  that  their  successful  assimilation  would  depend  heavily  upon  his  maximum 
supervision  and  coordination."141 

Undoubtedly  their  relative  closeness  was  an  attractive  feature,  but  more  important  were  Rowland's 
experience  in  building  iron  vessels  and  the  facilities  available  at  Continental.  As  one  writer  noted, 
"Rowland's  experience  and  shipbuilding  facilities  were  well  suited  to  Ericsson's  needs."142 
According  to  Church,  Rowland  approached  Ericsson  about  it.  Of  course,  the  shipbuilder  was  well 
known  to  the  inventor,  and  his  yard  was  a  logical  site  to  construct  and  launch  Monitor. 

Monitor  was  completed  early  in  1862,  and  after  sea  trials  in  February  left  under  tow  March  6  to  join 
the  blockading  squadrons.  The  warship  arrived  in  Hampton  Roads  in  time  to  challenge  the 
Confederate  ironclad  Virginia  in  one  of  the  more  dramatic  naval  engagements  in  American  history. 
Monitor's  apparent  success  in  the  battle  produced  such  intense  enthusiasm  in  the  North  that  a 
"Monitor"  craze  swept  the  Union.  Three  weeks  after  the  action,  10  improved  Ericsson  monitors 
were  contracted,  the  Passaic  class,  which  would  see  more  service  than  any  other  class  of  monitor. 
Until  the  end  of  the  war  the  Navy  would  concentrate  on  monitor  construction.  Of  the  40  armored 
vessels  laid  down  by  the  Union  during  the  war,  35  were  of  the  monitor  type. 

Ericsson  profited  from  this  situation  not  only  in  the  acclaim  for  his  design  but  in  the  award  of 
contracts  to  construct  six  of  the  improved  monitors.  He  immediately  subcontracted  with  several  of 
the  same  firms  that  built  Monitor.143  Continental  Ironworks  constructed  the  hulls  and  turrets  for 
three,  Passaic,  Montauk,  and  Catskill.  Delamater  provided  much  of  the  machinery.  As  with  Monitor, 
the  Troy  interests  handled  the  finances.  On  March  14,  1862,  six  days  after  the  Hampton  Roads 
action,  Winslow  wrote  Corning,  "We  have  closed  for  6  Boats  on  the  plan  of  the  Monitor  for 
$400,000  each— they  are  to  be  a  trifle  larger  in  size— this  will  do."144 

The  armor  plate  was  supplied  by  Abbott  &  Sons.  Possibly  other  ironworks,  including  those  in  Troy, 
provided  some  of  it,  although  it  is  more  likely  that  the  New  York  firms  furnished  the  other  iron 
materials.145  Evidently  Clute  was  a  subcontractor  again.  Correspondence  in  the  Ericsson  papers 
located  in  the  New  York  Historical  Society  and  the  American  Swedish  Historical  Foundation 
between  the  inventor  and  the  Schenectady  works  concerns  blowers  and  other  miscellaneous  parts, 
but  specific  vessels  are  not  mentioned.  In  November  1862,  Clute  Brothers  wrote  Captain  Albin  C. 
Stimers,  who  had  been  appointed  "General  Inspector  of  Iron  Clad  Steamers,"  concerning  a  contract 
to  provide  turrets  for  a  later  class  of  monitors.  In  the  letter  the  company  asked  "if  the  drawings  for 
Gun  Carriages  for  11-inch  guns  which  we  examined  at  Capt.  Ericsson's  are  the  ones  to  be  used." 
Clute  Brothers  definitely  received  a  contract  to  build  the  anchor-hoister  machinery  for  the  sea-going 
monitor  Dictator.146 

In  addition  to  Passaic,  Ericsson  received  a  contract  for  two  large  oceangoing  monitors  that  were 
named  Dictator  and  Puritan.  Dictator's  hull  and  machinery  were  subcontracted  to  Delamater.  Dictator 
was  commissioned  in  November  1864,  but  mechanical  difficulties  prevented  her  from  participating 
in  the  final  naval  operations  of  the  war.  Puritan's  hull  was  subcontracted  to  Continental  Ironworks, 
and,  although  launched  in  1864,  was  never  commissioned.147  Secretary  of  the  Navy  Welles  wrote  in 
his  diary  that  "the  contractors  for  the  Puritan  and  the  Dictator  are  in  trouble  and  embarrassed," 
apparently  because  they  were  unable  to  meet  their  schedule  for  completing  the  vessels. 
Nevertheless,  the  Secretary  recommended  that  they  be  fully  paid  to  keep  them  from  being 
ruined.148 

Thomas  Rowland,  the  young  and  energetic  president  of  Continental  Ironworks,  secured  a 
substantial  amount  of  work  for  his  establishment  during  the  war.  Ericsson  was  clearly  pleased  with 
Continental's  work  on  Monitor,  awarding  the  firm  contracts  to  build  not  only  the  hulls  and  turrets 
for  three  "improved  monitors,"  (Passaic,  Montauk,  and  Catskill),  but  the  turrets  of  three  others 
(Sangamon,  Lehigh,  and  Patapsco).  The  company  would  later  receive  a  contract  to  build  the  hull  and 
turrets  for  Onondaiga,  the  first  double-turreted  monitor,  and  finally  an  agreement  to  construct  the 
"light-draft"  monitor  Cohoes.149 


26 


Many  of  the  firms  that  built  Monitor  received  contracts  to  construct  the  next  generation  of  monitors.  Passaic,  shown  here, 
was  first  of  a  type  built  largely  by  both  the  Continental  and  Ddamater  Ironworks.  (Harper's  Weekly,  Vol  VI,  No.  310, 
December  6,  1862) 


27 


Continental's  substantial  turret  contracts  resulted  in  Rowland's  designing  and  building  special 
machinery,  including  a  "double  planer  for  armor  and  turret  plates"  described  in  The  Scientific 
American.  In  another  issue  the  editor  reported  on  another  unique  piece  of  turret  machinery 
developed  by  Rowland:  "the  holes  [on  the  plates]. .  .are. .  .drilled  out  by  means  of  an  ordinary 
drilling  machine,  ingeniously  arranged  upon  a  long  piece  of  timber,  and  operated  by  a  small 
engine.  This  timber  has  a  bearing  in  its  center,  which  works  around  a  central  shaft  in  the  turret, 
and  by  this  arrangement  all  the  holes  are  easily  run  through,  first  with  a  drill,  and  then  finished 
with  a  reamer.  The  use  of  this  machine  despenses  with  the  labor  of  no  less  than  seventy-five  men; 
it  was  not  employed  in  the  construction  of  the  Monitor."  An  article  in  Harper's  New  Monthly 
Magazine  mentioned  that  Continental  was  heating  plates  before  bending  them,  "so  the  powerful 
hydraulic  press  [used  by  Novelty]  is  despensed  with."150 

Rowland  impressed  not  only  Ericsson  but  all  those  who  visited  his  plant.  A  writer  for  Harper's  New 
Monthly  Magazine  admired  his  administrative  skills  and  energy.  The  Scientific  American's  editor  called 
him  "ubiquitous."  "He  is  inquired  for  on  every  side,  overseeing  the  most  minute  details,  he  seems 
to  accomplish  in  his  own  person  the  work  of  two  of  three  men."151  The  Navy,  however,  was  not  as 
complimentary.  On  the  basis  of  a  report  from  Rear  Admiral  Francis  H.  Gregory,  head  of  the 
"Monitor  Bureau,"  Secretary  Welles  wrote  on  September  26,  1862,  "Mr.  Rowland,  the  contractor, 
seems  to  have  great  responsibility  and  he  ought  to  throw  his  whole  energies  into  the  work,  giving 
daily  the  influence  of  his  presence  among  the  workmen,  especially  in  the  case  of  Catskill  so  far 
behind."152 


Continental  Ironworks'  many  monitor  contracts  resulted  in  Thomas  Fitch  Rowland's  design  and  construction  of  this 
"double  planer  for  armor  and  turret  plates, "  one  of  many  inventions  inspired  by  the  need  for  a  new  "ironclad" 
technology.  (Scientific  American,  Vol.  VII,  October  25,  1862) 


28 


By  the  fall  of  1862,  Continental  Ironworks  occupied  seven  to  eight  acres;  according  to  The  Scientific 
American,  it  was  so  crowded  with  buildings,  shops,  stacks  of  lumber,  iron,  etc.,  that  "locomotion 
[by  the  workers]  is  both  difficult  and  dangerous."  The  number  of  workmen  employed  by  Rowland 
varied  from  500  to  more  than  a  thousand  during  the  war.153 

In  September  1862,  The  Scientific  American  boasted  of  the  "immense  ironclad  fleet  in  the  course  of 
construction"  in  New  York  City.  The  city  had  been  a  center  of  shipbuilding  for  many  years,  yet  the 
local  papers  were  aware  that  more  warships,  particularly  the  new  monitor  types,  were  being  built 
in  their  community  than  elsewhere  in  the  country.  The  evidence  was  visible,  including  the 
prosperity  that  it  engendered.  On  March  17,  1863,  the  Brooklyn  Union  reported  on  the  "unabated 
prosperity  of  the  ship  building  interest  in  that  Long  Island  city."  The  value  of  the  number  of 
warships  and  commercial  vessels  under  construction  "was  upward  of  ten  millions  of  dollars,  and 
the  number  of  persons  employed  thereon  is  between  two  and  three  thousand." 

Not  all  were  pleased  with  New  York  City's  good  fortune.  Charles  H.  Cramp,  who  owned  extensive 
shipbuilding  facilities  in  Philadelphia,  wrote  in  his  memoirs  of  a  New  York  "ring"  presumably 
involving  Admiral  Gregory  and  other  naval  officers  responsible  for  warship  construction  in  the 
country,  as  well  as  influential  civilians.  He  accused  the  "ring"  of  preventing  "the  construction  of  a 
type  of  iron  clad  vessel  except  monitors,"  and  of  concentrating  warship  construction,  especially 
armored  vessels,  in  New  York  City.154  Ericsson  did  favor  New  York  and  Boston  contractors,  but  it  is 
equally  true  that  New  York  City  along  with  Philadelphia  were  the  nation's  center  for  iron-ship 
construction  before  the  war.155  The  New  York  interests,  particularly  Ericsson,  also  had  political 
support  in  Washington.  During  the  first  year  of  the  war  Erastus  Corning  had  represented  one  New 
York  district  until  replaced  by  Griswold,  who  was  eventually  appointed  to  the  Naval  Affairs 
Committee.  The  business  relationship  between  Ericsson  and  Griswold,  which  began  with  the 
Monitor  negotiations,  continued  throughout  the  war.  "Griswold  acted  as  Ericsson's  Washington 
agent  and  spent  much  time  in  the  Navy  Department  promoting  the  inventor's  interests  whenever 
possible."156  Nevertheless,  there  is  no  evidence  that  a  New  York  ring  existed.  Of  the  27  monitors 
contracted  before  1863,  20  were  built  outside  New  York  City,  and  naval  officers  in  Washington, 
particularly  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Navy  Captain  Gustavus  Fox,  were  most  responsible  for 
concentrating  on  the  monitor  type. 

The  monitor  companies  understandably  did  not  depend  entirely  on  Ericsson  for  government 
contractual  work.  Continental  Ironworks  built  the  hull  and  machinery  for  the  iron  side-wheeler 
Muscoota;  Delamater  and  Clute  Brothers  provided  miscellaneous  machinery  parts  for  a  number  of 
Union  vessels  other  than  monitors;  and  Abbott  &  Son  rolled  plate  for  the  majority  of  armored 
vessels  built  in  the  Northern  states.157 

Abbott  received  a  contract  from  the  War  Department  shortly  after  completing  Monitor's  plate  to 
fabricate  30  mortar  beds  for  use  on  Western  rivers.  Abbott  also  manufactured  mortar  beds  for  David 
Dixon  Porter's  flotilla  that  bombarded  the  forts  guarding  New  Orleans.  In  1863  Abbott  completed 
another  order  for  250,000  pounds  of  rolled  iron  in  48  hours  and  received  a  letter  of  commendation 
from  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  for  this  achievement.158 

There  is  no  evidence  that  the  Niagara  Steam  Forge  subcontracted  with  Ericsson  or  solicited 
additional  government  work  after  Monitor.  Despite  its  geographical  isolation  from  the  Eastern 
seaboard  and  the  mainstream  of  war-related  activities,  Buffalo's  economy  expanded  during  the 
conflict.  By  1865,  for  example,  the  city  had  20  ironworks  in  operation.  Most  of  this  prosperity, 
however,  was  related  to  the  Great  Lakes.  Shipbuilding  on  the  Lakes  boomed  during  the  war  years, 
and  Buffalo  was  a  center  of  the  industry.  The  first  commercial  iron  ship,  The  Merchant,  was  built  in 
1861  in  Buffalo.  The  Niagara  Steam  Forge  made  the  engine  shafts  and  other  parts  for  many  of  the 
new  vessels,  and  by  1865  employed  120  workers.159 

Novelty  Ironworks,  which  built  Monitor's  turret,  was  the  only  major  subcontractor  to  no  longer 
work  for  Ericsson.  This  was  probably  because  the  company  was  already  working  on  an  armored 
vessel,  Roanoke,  when  the  contracts  for  the  "improved  monitors"  and  the  ocean-going  monitors 
were  let.  Roanoke  had  been  built  before  the  war  as  a  large  screw  frigate,  a  sister  ship  of  the 
Merrimack.  The  Navy  decided  to  convert  her  into  an  ironclad  by  cutting  the  hull  down  to  the  gun 
deck  and  then  plating  her  with  iron  armor.  It  was  proposed  that  she  carry  four  Coles  turrets  on  the 
center  line,  but,  because  of  the  weight,  only  three  were  installed.  According  to  one  account, 
Novelty  was  selected  as  the  builder,  "as  no  Navy  y.  rd  could  produce.  .  .heavy  armor."160  Novelty 


29 


received  a  contract  to  provide  the  iron  plate  and  to  build  the  turrets  probably  in  March  1862,  and 
she  was  completed  and  placed  in  commission  approximately  a  year  later. 

Roanoke's  plate  was  rolled  at  another  New  York  ironworks,  and  transported  to  Novelty  where  it  was 
drilled  and  "curved"  by  using  a  large  hydraulic  press.161  Although  Roanoke  was  theoretically  the 
most  powerful  turreted  vessel  commissioned  during  the  war,  she  was  generally  considered  a  failure. 
The  weight  of  the  three  turrets  caused  her  to  roll  heavily,  even  in  a  slight  seaway;  her  hull  was  too 
weak  to  support  them;  and  her  draft  was  too  great  to  operate  in  the  shallow  Southern  waters.  She 
joined  the  North  Atlantic  Blockading  Squadron  for  several  months,  but  spent  most  of  her  service  as 
a  station  or  guard  ship. 

Roanoke's  completion  did  not  result  in  Novelty's  working  with  Ericsson  again,  possibly  because  of 
other  commitments,  or  because  of  the  use  of  Coles  turrets  on  Roanoke,  or  possibly  because  of 
Horatio  Allen's  strong  ties  with  two  influential  naval  officers,  Alban  C.  Stimers  and  Benjamin  F. 
Isherwood,  both  of  whom  frequently  clashed  with  Ericsson.  Navy  Chief  Engineer  Stimers,  who  was 
Inspector  General  of  Ironclads  with  an  office  in  New  York  City,  even  hired  a  Novelty  engineer, 
Allen's  nephew,  as  his  assistant.162 

Allen's  relationship  with  Isherwood,  who  was  Engineer-in-Chief  of  the  Navy,  was  much  closer. 
Isherwood  had  served  as  an  apprentice  at  Novelty  in  the  1840s  and  had  been  instrumental  in 
obtaining  for  Novelty  the  contracts  to  build  the  ninety-day  gunboats  and  Roanoke.  In  1863 
Isherwood  persuaded  the  Navy  Department  to  sponsor  an  investigation  of  the  "value  of  working 
steam  expansively"  with  an  appropriation  from  Congress.  Chief  Engineer  Stimer  chose  Allen  to 
conduct  the  experiments,  which  were  carried  out  at  Novelty.163 

Finally,  Novelty  built  Isherwood-designed  machinery  for  two  warships,  the  monitor  Miantonomoh, 
and  the  screw  steamer  Wampanoag.  Miantonomoh  was  one  of  four  large,  double  turreted  monitors, 
two  with  Ericsson-designed  machinery  and  two  Isherwood's.  After  the  war  Miantonomoh  would  be 
the  first  monitor  type  to  cross  the  Atlantic  Ocean.  Wampanoag,  called  "Isherwood's  masterpiece" 
was  designed  to  challenge  the  Confederate  cruisers.  Carrying  Isherwood-designed  machinery, 
Novelty-built,  she  was  remarkably  fast,  making  the  record-breaking  speed  of  17.75  knots  on  one 
trial  run.  She  had  been  laid  down  in  1863  but  not  completed  until  four  years  later.164  Allen's 
relationship  with  the  Navy  Department,  especially  Isherwood,  clearly  benefited  Novelty.  In  addition 
to  the  various  vessels  mentioned  above,  the  company  built  machinery  for  seven  additional  warships 
during  the  conflict.165 

Novelty  also  had  the  time  to  build  the  machinery  for  two  large  sea-going  amored  warships 
constructed  in  New  York  City  for  the  Italian  government,  several  commercial  steamers,  and  even  a 
yacht.  Finally,  the  ironworks  continued  to  manufacture  machinery  for  domestic  use,  such  as  paper 
mills.166 

In  June  1862,  R.  G.  Dun  &  Co.  recorded  in  a  ledger  that  Novelty  has  "had  considerable  good 
work. .  .&  have  now  a  contract  for  iron  plating  of  war  steamers."  Ten  months  later  The  Scientific 
American  reported  that  "at  these  works  we  found  a  large  number  of  engines  in  all  stages  of 
construction."  Nine  hundred  workers  were  employed  according  to  the  magazine.  A  year  later  the 
company  was  still  heavily  involved  in  marine  steam-machinery  building.  Four  beam  and  two  single- 
screw  engines  for  Pacific  Mail  steamers  under  construction  in  New  York  City,  engines  and  boilers 
for  two  revenue  cutters,  as  well  as  the  machinery  for  the  naval  vessels,  were  all  in  various  degrees 
of  construction.  Novelty  would  be  busy  throughout  the  war  and,  according  to  R.  G.  Dun  "made 
money  fast."167 

Novelty  was  not  the  only  Monitor  company  during  the  war  to  be  involved  in  both  government  and 
non-government  work.  Delamater  continued  to  build  machinery  for  commercial  vessels  throughout 
the  conflict.  Several  engines  were  constructed  for  Lake  Erie  vessels;  machinery  for  a  number  of 
vessels  engaged  in  New  York  and  New  England  coastal  and  inland  trade,  and  machinery  for  several 
vessels,  "taken  into  government  service,"  was  produced  by  the  firm.  Delamater's  business 
relationship  with  Mallory,  developed  before  the  war,  continued  with  the  New  York  establishment's 
supplying  engine's  and  machinery  for  the  hulls  built  by  the  Mystic  shipbuilding  firm.  By  the  middle 
of  1863  Delamater  was  employing  nearly  a  thousand  men.168  Like  Novelty,  Delamater  made  money 
during  the  war. 


30 


The  Civil  War,  in  fact,  benefited  all  the  Monitor  companies,  as  it  did  other  firms  in  the  country, 
enabling  them  to  recover  from  a  period  of  instability  that  beset  the  nation's  economy  in  the  years 
before  the  war.  The  wartime  reports  of  R.  G.  Dun  &  Co.  clearly  indicate  the  companies'  prosperity. 
However,  the  end  of  the  war  brought  changes.  Demobilization,  an  increasingly  parsimonious 
Congress  and  what  one  authority  has  referred  to  as  "the  naval  establishment's  resistance  to 
technological  change"  resulted  in  a  drastic  decline  in  warship  construction.169 

There  was  an  equal  decline  in  merchant-ship  construction.  This  deterioration  actually  began  before 
the  war  as  American  shipbuilders  were  unable  to  compete  with  the  heavily  subsidized  British 
companies.  The  Civil  War  decimated  the  American  carrying  trade.  Finally,  in  the  post-war  years, 
British  competition  once  more  hurt  the  American  shipbuilding  industry,  particularly  in  the 
construction  of  iron  ships.170  To  make  matters  worse,  the  government  sold  off  hundreds  of  old 
blockaders,  transports,  and  captured  vessels. 

IV.    Post-War  History 

Two  years  after  the  war,  ship  construction  in  New  York  City  was  virtually  at  a  standstill.  Novelty 
was  completing  Wampanoag  and  several  other  vessels,  but  there  was  only  one  merchant  vessel  on 
the  stocks  of  the  13  shipyards  in  New  York  City,  Brooklyn,  and  Jersey  City.  When  that  ship  was 
completed  in  the  summer  of  1868,  it  marked  the  end  of  New  York's  quarter-century  of  leadership  in 
the  building  of  ocean  going  steamships.171  Shipbuilding  in  the  area  would  be  limited  to  river, 
harbor,  and  coastal  vessels.  U.S.  Census  Agent  Henry  Hall  in  his  shipbuilding  industry  report 
published  in  1882  said,  "Since  the  war  it  has  not  been  practicable  to  carry  on  iron-shipbuilding  in 
New  York  City . . .  the  building  of  hulls . . .  has  ceased,  prices,  wages  and  taxes  being  too  high  for 
that  class  of  work."171 

The  Monitor  companies  were  affected  by  the  shipbuilding  industry  collapse.  Novelty  completed 
work  on  the  machinery  for  the  Pacific  Mail  steamers  Arizona  and  Great  Republic  in  1866  and 
Wampanoag  in  1867.  Although  Pacific  Mail  Steamship  Company  made  a  loan  of  $500,000  to  keep  the 
company  operating,  it  closed  down  in  1870.  R.  G.  Dun  mentions,  "the  concern  belonging  to  James 
Brown  of  Brown  Brothers  &  Co.,  who  are  about  closing  it  all  up,  trying  now  to  dispose  of  it.  The 
business  has  not  been  lucrative  for  some  time  past  and  are  under  very  heavy  expenses."173  The 
valuable  property  along  the  waterfront  was  sold  to  a  gas  company. 

Horatio  Allen,  the  company  president  for  so  many  years,  retired  in  1871.  Nevertheless,  he  came  out 
of  retirement  for  one  more  prominent  engineering  project,  the  construction  of  the  Brooklyn  Bridge. 
Although  he  knew  little  about  building  a  suspension  bridge,  he  served  for  three  years  as  senior 
consulting  engineer.  He  apparently  did  very  little;  the  bulk  of  the  work  in  designing  and  building 
fell  to  John  A.  Roebling.  Allen  retired  a  second  time  and  as  a  prominent  New  Yorker  was  involved 
in  civil  activities  for  many  years.171  He  died  in  1889,  at  age  87. 

Cornelius  H.  Delamater  died  that  same  year.  Unlike  Novelty,  Delamater's  ironworks  were  still  in 
existence  at  his  death,  Also,  unlike  Allen,  Delamater  was  able  to  continue  a  profitable  business  in 
the  construction  and  repair  of  machinery  for  many  years  after  the  war,  partly  because  of  the 
unusually  strong  business  relationships  between  Delamater  and  his  associates,  Ericsson  and 
Mallory.  In  1869  the  ironworks  received  a  contract  to  build  and  install  the  machinery  for  30  small 
gunboats  for  the  Spanish  government  to  be  used  in  Cuban  waters.  Half  the  hulls  were  built  by 
Mallory  in  Mystic,  Connecticut,  the  remainder  elsewhere;  those  gunboats  had  been  designed  by 
Ericsson.175 

Delamater  built  the  machinery  for  several  steamships  including  City  of  Merida  and  Fern.  Because  of 
Ericksson's  influence  with  Delamater,  the  company  periodically  sought  government  contracts,  but 
with  little  success.  Ericsson  designed  a  torpedo  boat  that  he  named  Destroyer,  built  at  Delamater 
and  financed  partially  by  the  firm.  Although  a  number  of  successful  trials  were  carried  out,  the 
Navy  never  showed  much  interest.176 

While  Destroyer  was  being  built  and  tested,  a  submarine  was  constructed  in  another  part  of  the 
plant.  Designed  by  John  P.  Holland,  she  was  built  in  secrecy  for  Irish  revolutionaries.  The  "Fenian 
Ram,"  as  the  submarine  was  called,  never  made  it  to  Ireland,  but  was  towed  to  Connecticut,  and 
evidently  later  sold  for  scrap.177 


31 


Delamater's  non-marine  business  was  prosperous  thoughout  the  year.  Large  numbers  of  Ericsson's 
caloric  engine,  as  well  as  a  hot-air  pumping  engine  designed  by  one  of  the  firm's  engineers,  were 
sold.  In  the  1870s  the  company  did  considerable  ironwork  for  the  elevated  railroad  under 
construction  in  New  York  City.  In  1871  a  steam-powered  drill  for  use  in  mines  was  produced,  and 
later  air  compressors  were  manufactured.  In  the  early  1880s  the  company  began  to  build  and  sell 
refrigerated  ice  machinery.  Despite  the  company's  success,  when  Cornelius  Delamater  died  in  1889, 
his  son  sold  the  business  the  following  year.178 

Continental  Ironworks,  which  had  acquired  a  reputation  as  a  builder  of  iron  steamers  and  armored 
vessels,  rebuilt  one  monitor,  Monadnock,  after  the  war.  The  company  also  constructed  two  iron 
ferries,  Fulton  and  Farragut,  for  the  Union  Ferry  Company;  the  steamer  Nanking  for  the  China  trade; 
several  steamboats  for  Cuban  waters,  and  50  surfboats  for  the  U.S.  Lifesaving  Service.  Continental's 
marine  work  virtually  ended  by  the  mid-1870s.  Nevertheless,  a  story  in  the  Nautical  Gazette 
mentioned  that  "these  works  [were]. .  .capable  in  every  respect  for  the  construction  of  iron  and 
composite  vessels  of  every  description,  revolving  turrets,  armor  plate,  [and]  gun  carriages."179 


After  the  Civil  War,  Delamater  Ironworks  continued  an  active  and  profitable  business.  One  product  of  the  yard  was  John 
P.  Holland's  Fenian  Ram,  a  prototypical  submarine,  inspiration  for  modern  underwater  warfare,  and  a  vessel  as  revolu- 
tionary as  Ericsson's  Monitor. 


Thomas  Rowland,  the  firm's  owner,  also  began  to  design  and  manufacture  steam  engines  and 
boilers  especially  adapted  for  use  in  the  oil  industry  and  gas  works.  Continental  constructed  the  gas 
works  for  Brooklyn  in  1867,  followed  by  similar  plants  throughout  the  country.  Rowland 
experimented  in  iron  and  steel  welding,  and  in  the  late  1880s  designed  the  process  and  the 
equipment  used  by  his  company  in  the  manufacture  of  corrugated  furnaces  and  "Morison 
suspension  furnaces,"  widely  used  for  many  years  in  the  internal  furnace  type  of  boiler.180  Rowland 
died  in  1907,  but  the  company  continued  in  business  for  several  years,  specializing  in  the 
manufacture  of  welded  steel  works. 


32 


Holdane  and  Company  remained  in  business  for  10  years  after  the  end  of  the  Civil  War.  R.  G.  Dun 
reported  in  November  1866,  that  the  firm  was  "doing  a  good  and  cautious  business."  In  1873  Dun 
mentioned  that  Holdane  had  a  good  reputation  in  iron  manufacturing,  and  "has  made  money." 
Two  years  later  Dun  noted  that  the  company  was  "an  old  established  concern  doing  a  legitimate 
steady  business."  Nevertheless,  on  July  10,  1875,  the  company  was  dissolved  by  mutual  consent. 
No  reason  was  given  for  the  decision,  although  a  Dun  report  does  mention  that  James  Holdane 's 
wife  had  inherited  considerable  money.181 

The  Monitor  companies  located  outside  New  York  City  also  survived  in  the  postwar  years.  Clute 
Brothers  specialized  in  Ericsson's  caloric  engine  and  in  repairing  machinery  for  vessels  plying  the 
Erie  Canal.  In  1876  the  company  received  a  contract  to  manufacture  Lay  torpedoes.  That  same  year 
Cadwallader  C.  Clute,  who  had  managed  the  works  since  1842,  died.  In  1879,  Clute  Brothers  closed 
down.182 

The  Niagara  Steam  Forge  in  Buffalo  advertised  in  1866  that  they  manufactured  "all  kinds  of  light 
and  heavy  forgings  and  hammered  shapes  for  rail  roads,  steamboats  and  propellers,  such  as  car 
axles,  crank  axles,  truck  and  driving  axles,  wrought  iron  driving  wheels,  locomotive  frames, 
steamboat  and  propeller  shafts  and  cranks,  connecting  rods,  piston  rods,  crank  pins,  mill  shafts, 
anchors,  hammered  bar  iron  and  shafting  of  any  length  and  size."183 

Patchin  joined  Charles  Delaney  as  a  partner  in  the  works.  Four  years  later,  he  sold  out  to  Delaney. 
Shortly  afterward  the  company  was  reorganized  as  the  Delaney  Forge  &  Iron  Company.  Charles 
Delaney  died  in  1883,  but  his  son  continued  the  business  until  his  death  in  1902.  The  firm  was  then 
reorganized  as  a  corporation  and  continued  in  business  until  the  mid  1920s.184 

Rensselaer  Ironworks  and  the  Albany  Ironworks  in  Troy  emerged  in  the  postwar  years  as  leading 
firms  in  the  nations  new  steel  industry.  In  1863  Alexander  L.  Holley,  an  engineer  and  one  of  the 
editors  of  the  American  Railway  Review,  went  to  England,  evidently  with  instructions  from  Winslow, 
Corning,  and  Griswold,  to  obtain  American  rights  to  the  Bessemer  steel  process.185  A  recent 
biography  of  Holley  suggests  that  he  consulted  Ericsson  after  his  return  from  England  and  that  the 
Swedish  engineer  recommended  him  to  the  Troy  entrepreneurs.  However,  this  does  not  seem 
logical  because  Holley  visited  a  Bessemer  plant  in  1862,  returned  to  the  United  States,  then  went 
back  to  England  in  1863. 186  Holley,  in  partnership  with  three  Troy  businessmen,  erected  the  first 
Bessemer  plant  in  North  America  on  the  grounds  of  the  Rensselaer  Ironworks.  The  Bessemer  Steel 
Company,  as  the  new  firm  was  named,  began  producing  steel  in  February  1865.  Despite 
complications  concerning  patent  rights,  the  depression  of  the  1870s  that  resulted  in  the  works 
temporarily  closing  down,  and  a  series  of  labor  strikes,  the  Bessemer  facility  and  the  two  parent 
ironworks  continued  to  expand  throughout  the  two  decades  following  the  end  of  the  war.187 

During  those  years  the  Troy  iron  and  steel  works  produced  steel  rails,  structural  steel,  axles,  nails, 
plate,  angle  and  bridge  iron,  and  "merchant  iron."  In  1866  Troy  even  cast  an  experimental  steel 
cannon.  There  is  no  evidence  that  they  sought  government  contracts,  although  its  interest  in 
ordnance  suggests  that  they  probably  did  so.  The  firm's  business  relationship  with  Ericsson 
endured  only  briefly.  Griswold  acted  as  his  agent  in  Washington,  and  he  and  Winslow  persevered 
in  backing  the  Swedish  inventor  financially.188  That  changed  in  1867.  Winslow  retired,  selling  out 
his  interest  in  the  works  to  Griswold.  In  1866  Griswold,  who  was  still  in  the  House  of 
Representatives,  changed  committee  assignments,  going  from  the  Naval  Affairs  Committee  to  the 
Ways  and  Means  Committee.  In  1868  he  was  an  unsuccessful  candidate  on  the  Republican  ticket  for 
the  governorship  of  New  York.189 

In  1875  Corning  and  Griswold  consolidated  the  iron  and  steel  works  into  the  Albany  and 
Rensselaer  Iron  &  Steel  Company.  In  1885  the  firm  was  incorporated  as  the  Troy  Steel  and  Iron 
Company.  In  1903  the  United  States  Steel  Corporation  acquired  the  Troy  works.  Griswold  died  in 
1872,  Corning  shortly  after.  The  iron  and  steel  works  under  new  management  prospered  until  the 
early  1890s.  The  depression  of  1893  triggered  a  decline,  and  long  before  U.S.  Steel  obtained  the 
works,  Troy  Steel  was  idle  and  in  receivership.190 


33 


New  York's  proud  citizens  erected  this  monument  to  John  Ericsson  in  Battery  Park  in  1894.  Monitor  was  primarily  a  New 
York  product.  Most  of  the  vessel  was  fabricated  and  co?istmcted  in  the  city,  principal  center  for  iron  shipbuilding  and 
marine  steam  engineering  during  the  1850s  and  1860s.  (National  Park  Service  photograph  by  James  P.  Delgado) 


34 


Like  the  Troy  companies,  Abbott  &  Son  of  Baltimore  continued  expanding  in  the  post-Civil  War 
years.  After  the  war  ended,  the  ironworks  incorporated  as  the  Abbott  Iron  Company,  with  Horace 
Abbott,  the  firm's  longtime  owner,  as  president.  By  1882  the  establishment  covered  approximately 
11  acres  and  consisted  of  three  plate  mills  and  one  rail  mill.  In  those  years  the  company 
concentrated  in  the  manufacture  of  railroad  rails,  and  boiler  and  plate  iron.  Employees  varied  from 
500  to  a  thousand.  Horace  Abbott  died  in  1887,  but  the  company  continued  into  the  present 
century.  Abbott  &  Son,  which  fabricated  more  armor  plate  for  warships  than  any  other  firm  during 
the  Civil  War,  apparently  made  no  effort  to  seek  government  work  when  the  new  steel  warships 
were  laid  down  in  the  mid-1880s.  Instead,  the  plant  specialized  in  railroad  and  domestic  iron  and 
steel  until  it  closed  down.191 

The  Civil  War  was  fought  at  a  time  when  the  United  States  was  accelerating  toward  industrial 
importance.  The  nation  was  already  one  of  the  world's  industrial  leaders  in  1860,  with 
manufacturing  employing  almost  one-seventh  of  the  labor  force.  Before  the  war,  American 
contributions  in  industrial  and  transportation  technology  had  been  gaining  recognition.  The 
American  exhibits  at  the  Crystal  Palace  Exposition  in  London  in  the  mid-1850s  impressed 
Europeans.  Other  inventions,  particularly  in  domestic  industries,  illustrated  American  ingenuity. 
Cyrus  McCormick's  reaper  and  the  sewing  machines  of  Elias  Howe  and  Isaac  Singer  were  sold 
abroad.  By  the  war's  outbreak,  Singer's  European  outlets  were  selling  more  sewing  machines  than 
some  3,000  salesmen  could  sell  in  the  United  States.192 

The  Civil  War  clearly  stimulated  developments  in  technology.  "It  was  the  first  struggle  in  which 
science  and  machinery  played  a  dominant  part,  and  it  was  the  first  time  that  technological 
innovations  and  improvements  were  applied  on  a  large  scale  in  a  major  war."  Bernard  and  Fawn 
Brodie  agreed:  "The  American  Civil  War  was  a  colossal  proving  ground  for  improving  weapons  of 
all  kinds.  For  the  first  time  the  achievements  of  the  industrial  and  scientific  revolution  were  used  on 
a  large  scale  in  war."  Ericsson  himself  wrote  that  "the  time  has  come,  Mr.  President  [Lincoln], 
when  our  cause  will  have  to  be  sustained  not  by  numbers,  but  by  superior  weapons.  By  a  proper 
application  of  mechanical  devices  alone  will  you  be  able  with  absolute  certainty  to  destroy  the 
enemies  of  the  Union."193  The  most  famous  of  these  "mechanical  devices"  was  the  one  designed 
by  Ericsson— Monitor. 

Monitor  has  been  characterized  as  symbolic  of  industrial  and  transportation  revolutions  that 
transformed  the  United  States  in  the  19th  century.  The  companies  that  built  the  warship  were  not 
only  representative  of  those  revolutions,  but  were  significantly  involved  in  the  technological 
developments  that  made  them  possible.  The  history  of  these  companies  graphically  illustrates  the 
emergence  of  the  United  States  as  an  industrial  nation. 


35 


Notes 

'See  William  T.  Hogan,  An  Economic  History  of  the  Iron  and  Steel  Industry  in  the  United  States  (Lexington,  Mass., 
1971);  Peter  Temin,  Iron  and  Steel  in  Nineteenth-Century  America:  An  Economic  Inquiry  (Cambridge,  Mass.,  1961); 
and  Elting  E.  Morison,  From  Know-How  to  Nowhere,  The  Development  of  American  Technology  (New  York,  1974), 
hereafter  cited  as  Morison,  From  Know-How  to  Nowhere. 

2Louis  C.  Hunter,  "Heavy  Industry  Before  1860,"  in  The  Growth  of  the  American  Economy  (New  York,  1944),  ed. 
Harold  F.  Williamson,  211;  see  also  Douglas  A.  Fisher,  The  Epic  of  Steel  (New  York,  1963). 

3Fisher,  The  Epic  of  Steel,  97;  George  Rogers  Taylor,  The  Transportation  Revolution,  1815-1860  (New  York,  1951), 
208. 

4Fisher,  The  Epic  of  Steel,  98.  Redlich  says  1819.  Fritz  Redlich,  History  of  American  Business  Leaders:  Theory,  Iron  & 
Steel,  Iron  Ore  Mining  (Ann  Arbor,  Mich.,  1940)  I,  83. 

5Fisher,  The  Epic  of  Steel,  99. 

6Hogan,  An  Economic  History,  I,  5,  12;  Fisher,  The  Epic  of  Steel,  99. 

7Hogan,  An  Economic  History,  I,  12-13;  History  of  The  State  of  New  York  (6  vols.,  Port  Washington,  New  York, 
1962),  V,  206-208. 

"Holdane  &  Company  to  John  Griswold,  October  19,  1861,  John  Griswold  Papers,  Division  of  Armed  Forces 
History,  Smithsonian  Institution,  Washington,  D.C.,  hereafter  cited  as  Griswold  papers;  drawing  of  angle  iron 
provided  Holdane  &  Company,  October  14,  1861,  copy  in  Monitor  Archives,  Program  in  Maritime  History  and 
Underwater  Research,  East  Carolina  University,  Greenvile,  North  Carolina;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series, 
V(October  23,  1861),  331. 

9New  York,  Vol.  323,  p.  890a,  R.  G.  Dun  &  Co.  Collection,  Baker  Library,  Harvard  University  Graduate  School 
of  Business  Administration,  Boston,  Mass.,  hereafter  cited  as  Dun  Col. 

"New  York,  Vol.  393,  p.  890a,  Dun  Col. 

"New  York,  Vol.  393a,  p.  890a,  Dun  Col. 

12A.  Z.  Holley  and  Lenox  Smith,  "American  Iron  and  Steel  Works,"  Engineering,  XV(December,  1880),  590; 
Edward  Hungerford,  Pathway  of  Empire  (New  York,  1935,  286. 

"Irene  D.  Neu,  Erastus  Corning,  Merchant  and  Financier,  1794-1872  (Ithaca,  New  York,  1960),  54,  hereafter  cited 
as  Neu,  Corning. 

"Neu,  Corning,  39;  "Erastus  Corning,"  Dictionary  of  American  Biography,  IV,  446,  hereafter  cited  as  D.A.B.; 
Arthur  J.  Weise,  Troy's  One  Hundred  Years,  1789-1889  (Troy,  New  York,  1891),  264,  hereafter  cited  as  Weise, 
Troy. 

"Weise,  Troy,  264;  Neu,  Corning,  39-40;  Redlich,  History  of  American  Business  Leaders,  I,  96. 

"Samuel  Rezneck,  "John  Flack  Winslow  (1810-1892),  Troy  Iron  and  Steel  Master,"  in  Profiles  Out  of  the  Past  of 
Troy,  New  York,  Since  1789,  (Troy,  New  York,  1946),  97. 

"Neu,  Corning,  42. 

"Redlich,  History  of  American  Business  Leaders,  I,  96;  J.  Leander  Bishop,  A  History  of  American  Manufactures  from 
1608  to  1860  (third  ed.,  3  vols.,  New  York,  1966),  III,  251. 

"Neu,  Corning,  42-43.  This  work  is  based  on  an  extensive  examination  of  the  Corning  manuscript  Collection.  It 
is  the  best  account  of  the  early  years  of  the  iron  works. 

20Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  250.  The  "chair-machinery"  produced  rails. 


36 


21Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  632-633;  Neu,  Corning,  42-44;  the  Troy  Business  Directory  for  the  Year  1861. . . 
(Troy,  1860),  88,  295;  Daniel  J.  Walkowitz,  Worker  City, Company  Town:  Iron  and  Cotton-Worker  Protests  in  Troy  and 
Cahoes,  New  York,  1855-84  (Urbana,  Illinois,  1978,)  23. 

22J.  P.  Lesley,  The  Iron  Manufacturer's  Guide  to  the  Furnaces,  Forges,  and  Rolling  Mills  of  the  United  States  (New 
York,  1866),  225. 

"Neu,  Corning,  47-48.  Weise  claims  that  Winslow  owned  the  mill  first  and  sold  it  to  Griswold.  Weise,  Troy, 
265.  The  Troy  Business  Directory  of  1862  includes  an  advertisement  for  the  Rensselaer  Iron  Works  that  lists 
Griswold  as  "agent."  The  Troy  Directory  for  the  year  1862. . . .  (Troy,  n.d.),  1.  Advertising  at  back  of  the 
directory  with  new  pagination.  Copies  of  Troy  directories  in  Library  of  Congress. 

24"John  Griswold,"  D.A.B.,  VIII,  8-9;  Neu,  Corning,  47-49;  Rezneck,  "John  Augustus  Griswold  (1818-1872) 
Business  and  Civil  Leader  of  Troy,"  in  Profiles  out  of  the  Past  of  Troy,  New  York  Since  1789,  101-103. 

25Rezneck,  "Griswold,"  101.  See  also  Lesley,  The  Iron  Manufacturers  Guide,  3. 

26"John  Flack  Winslow,"  D.A.B.,  X,  399.  The  Albany  Iron  Works  was  also  beginning  to  use  steel  in  its 
manufactured  railroad  products.  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  IV  (January  5,  1861),  3. 

27Gordon  P.  Watts,  Jr.,  "Monitor  of  a  New  Age:  The  Construction  of  the  U.S.S.  Monitor."  M.A  Thesis,  East 
Carolina  University,  1975,  51;  Stimers  to  Ericsson,  May  6,  1862,  John  Ericsson  Papers,  New  York  Historical 
Society,  New  York  City. 

28Henry  P.  Smith,  History  of  Buffalo  and  Erie  County  (2  vols.,  Syracuse,  1884),  II,  240;  Henry  W.  Hill,  Municipality 
of  Buffalo,  Neiv  York:  A  History,  1720-1923  (2  vols.,  New  York,  1923),  II,  862;  The  Manufacturing  Interests  of  the 
City  of  Buffalo  (second  edition,  Buffalo,  1866),  50. 

29Mark  Goldman,  High  Hopes:  The  Rise  and  Decline  of  Buffalo,  New  York  (Albany,  1983),  64,  hereafter  cited  as 
Goldman,  High  Hopes:  The  Manufacturing  Interests  of  the  City  of  Buffalo  Including  Sketches  of  the  History  of  Buffalo 
(Buffalo,  1866),  72.  A  copy  of  this  directory  is  in  the  Library  of  Congress. 

30The  Buffalo  City  Directory  for  the  Year  1862  (Buffalo,  1861),  listed  him  as  a  ship's  carpenter.  See  page  170. 

3lBuffalo  Commercial  Advertiser,  September  24,  1883. 

32Copy  of  advertisement  in  The  Buffalo  City  Directory  for  the  Year  1862,  83;  The  Manufacturing  Interests  of  the  City 
of  Buffalo,  50-51. 

33Sherry  H.  Olson,  Baltimore:  The  Building  of  an  American  City  (Baltimore,  1980),  77. 

34Peter  Cooper,"  D.A.B.,  TV,  409-410.  See  also  Allan  Nevins,  Abram  S.  Hewitt  With  Some  Account  of  Peter  Cooper 
(New  York,  1935)  and  Edward  C.  Mack,  Peter  Cooper:  Citizen  of  New  York  (New  York,  1949). 

35Mack,  Peter  Cooper,  117.  Most  authorities  say  that  Abbott  purchased  the  iron  works  in  1836,  but  Cooper's 
biographer  (Mack)  using  his  manuscripts  has  concluded  that  it  was  1847. 

36"Horace  Abbott,"  D.A.B.,  I,  21;  "Horace  Abbott,"  in  pamphlet  file,  Maryland  Historical  Society,  Baltimore;  J. 

Thomas  Scharf,  History  of  Baltimore  City  and  County  (Philadelphia  1881),  427; ,  Chronicles  of  Baltimore 

(Baltimore  1874),  490;  Gary  L.  Browne,  Baltimoe  in  the  Nation,  1789-1861  (Chapel  Hill,  North  Carolina,  1980), 
182,  287;  Victor  S.  Clark,  History  of  Manufactures  in  the  United  States  (2  vols.,  New  York,  1929),  II,  506,  hereafter 
cited  as  Clark,  Manufactures;  Baltimore  Sunday  Sun  Magazine,  July  26,  1953.  The  1858  city  directory,  The 
Monumental  City  or  Baltimore  Guide  Book,  does  not  mention  the  iron  works,  but  an  1864  directory  does.  Copies 
of  these  directories  are  found  in  the  Library  of  Congress. 

37Lesley,  The  IRON  Manufactures  Guide,  243. 

38Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  116-117. 

39Temin,  Iron  and  Steel  in  Nineteenth  Century  America,  40-41;  Nathan  Rosenberg,  Technology  and  American  Economic 
Growth  (New  York,  1972),  64;  Taylor,  Transportation  Revolution,  223. 

40Rosenberg,  Technology  and  American  Economic  Growth,  67. 

37 


"Rosenberg,  Technology  and  American  Economic  Growth,  69;  Taylor,  Transportation  Revolution,  58. 

42Cedric  Ridgely-Nevitt,  American  Steamships  on  the  Atlantic  (Newark,  Delaware,  1981),  348,  hereafter  cited  as 
Nevitt,  American  Steamships. 

"Robert  G.  Albion,  The  Rise  of  New  York  Port,  1815-1860  (New  York,  1939),  148.  See  also  Fred  E.  Dayton, 
Steamboat  Days  (New  York,  1939),  376;  and  Leonard  A.  Swann,  Jr.,  John  Roach,  Maritime  Entrepreneur 
(Annapolis,  Maryland,  1965),  181.  Philadelphia,  with  firms  such  as  Merrick  &  Towne,  Merrick  &  Sons,  and 
Reaney  &  Neafie,  won  a  close  second  in  engine  works. 

44Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  122. 

i5The  Scientific  American,  IX  (December  17,  1853),  110;  Carroll  W.  Pursell,  Jr.,  Early  Stationary  Steam  Engines  in 
America  (Washington,  D.C.,  1969).  See  also  Pursell's  dissertation,  "Stationary  Steam  Engines  in  America  before 
the  Civil  War,",  PhD  dissertation,  University  of  California,  Berkeley,  1964,  183,  hereafter  cited  as  Pursell, 
"Stationary  Steam  Engines." 

46The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  IV  (March  23,  1861),  186. 

47Pursell  says  1927.  See  Stationary  Steam  Engines,  24.;  Codman  Hislop,  "The  S.S.  Novelty,"  New  York  Historical 
Society  Quarterly,  49  (October,  1965),  330  gives  the  date  as  1831;  and  Dayton,  Steamboat  Days  suggests  1833  (p. 
382).  See  also  Codman  Hislop,  Elipholet  Nott  (Middleton,  Conn.,  1971),  352,  passim. 

48Pursell,  "Stationary  Steam  Engines." 

49Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  125-126.  Novelty  was  enrolled  on  January  9,  1833. 

50Hislop,  "The  S.S.  Novelty,"  329. 

5,Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  126 

"Quoted  in  John  H.  Morrison,  History  of  American  Steam  Navigation  (New  York,  1903),  52-53.  See  also,  Dayton, 
Steamboat  Days,  43,  382;  and  Hislop,  "The  S.S.  Novelty,"  329. 

"New  York,  Vol.  368,  p.  401,  Dun  Col. 

54John  A.  Kouwenhoven,  Partners  in  Banking. .  .Brown  Brothers,  Harriman  &  Co.,  1818-1968  (Garden  City,  1968), 
241.  See  also  John  Crosby  Brown,  A  Hundred  Years  of  Merchant  Banking  (New  York,  1909),  241. 

55Kouwenhoven,  Partners  in  Banking,  153;  New  York,  Vol.  368,  P.  401,  Dun  Col.;  Peter  Cooper  also  purchased 
stock  in  the  company.  Mack,  Peter  Cooper,  199. 

56There  is  a  large  number  of  brief  biographical  sketches  of  Allen.  For  some  of  the  better  ones  see  Alfred 
Mathews,  "Horation  Allen,"  Cassier's  Magazine,  X  (May-June,  1986),  471-474;  Edward  H.  Mott,  The  Story  of  Erie 
(New  York,  1980),  462;  "Horatio  Allen,"  D.A.B.,  I,  193-194;  "A  Memorial  of  Horatio  Allen,"  Transactions  of  the 
American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers,  II  (November,  1889-May,  1980),  1156-1181. 

57Taylor,  Transportation  Revolution,  32-52;  "Allen,"  D.A.B.,  I,  193.  See  also  Robert  H.  Thurston,  A  History  of  the 
Growth  of  the  Steam-Engine  (New  York,  1878),  208.  Stourbridge  Lion  made  only  two  runs  and  because  of  her 
weight  crushed  the  hemlock  rails.  The  locomotive  was  then  put  in  storage  and  never  used  again.  Morison, 
From  Know-How  to  Nowhere,  52.  For  Allen's  involvement  with  the  Delaware  and  Hudson  Company  see  A 
Century  of  Progress:  History  of  the  Delaware  and  Hudson  Company,  1823-1923  (Albany,  New  York,  1926),  46-61. 

58Nevins,  Hewitt,  70. 

59For  Allen's  work  with  the  South  Carolina  Railroad  see  Samuel  M.  Derrick,  Centennial  History  of  South  Carolina 
Railroad  (Columbia,  S.C.,  1930),  31-78;  Morison,  From  Know-How  to  Nowhere,  54-56. 

60Nelson  M.  Blake,  Water  for  the  Cities,  A  History  of  The  Urban  Water  Supply  Problem  in  the  United  States  (Syracuse, 
1956),  145-153;  Morison,  From  Know-How  to  Nowhere,  62-69. 

"Nevins,  Hewit,  199;  Mott,  The  Story  of  Erie,  67-73;  Edward  Hungerford,  Men  of  Erie  (New  York  1946),  65-67. 

62Alex  Perez-Venero,  Before  the  Five  Frontiers,  Panama  From  1821-1903  (New  York,  1978),  63. 

38 


63"A  Memorial  for  Horatio  Allen,  "Transactions  of  the  American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers,  1740;  T.  Main,  The 
Progress  of  Marine  Engineering  (New  York,  1893),  28,  hereafter  cited  as  Main,  Marine  Engineering. 

64Charles  T.  Porter,  Engineering  Reminiscences  Contributed  to  "Power"  and  "American  Machinist"  (New  York,  1908), 
254,  hereafter  cited  as  Porter,  Engineering  Reminiscences. 

65Nevitt,  American  Steamships,  153.  True  also  of  Adriatic. 

66"Memorial  for  Horatio  Allen,"  Transactions  of  the  American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers,  1174. 

67  "Memorial  for  Horatio  Allen,"  Transactions  of  the  American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers,  1174-1175. 

^Annual  Report  of  the  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Navigation  (Washington,  D.C.,  1894),  268.  For  Novelty's  prominence 
see  Louis  C.  Hunter,  A  History  of  Industrial  Power  in  the  United  States  1780-1930.  Volume  Two:  Steam  Power 
(Charlottesville,  Virginia,  1985),  242-243. 

69Nevitt,  American  Steamships,  98. 

70Carl  C.  Cutler,  Queens  of  the  Western  Ocean  (Annapolis,  Maryland,  1961),  277.  Horatio  Allen  was  one  of  the 
company's  directors.  Newitt,  American  Steamships,  128-130.  See  Also  David  B.  Tyler,  Steam  Conquers  the  Atlantic 
(New  York,  1939),  154-156. 

71Main,  Marine  Engineering,  30-31;  John  G.  B.  Hutchins,  The  American  Maritime  Industries  and  Public  Policy, 
1789-1914  (Cambridge,  1941),  354,  355;  Frank  C.  Bowen,  A  Century  of  Atlantic  Travel,  1830-1930  (Boston,  1930), 
56-67. 

72  Alexander  Crosby  Brown,  Women  and  Children  Last:  The  Loss  of  the  Steamship  Arctic  (New  York,  1961). 
Thurston  in  A  History  of  the  Growth  of  the  Steam  Engine  said  that  the  Arctic's  machinery  "was  for  that  time 
remarkably  powerful  and  efficient."  p.  290.  See  also  The  Scientific  American,  IX  (October  1,  1853),  78. 

73For  a  detailed  account  of  the  Atlantic  liners  including  those  with  Novelty-supplied  machinery  see  Nevitt, 
American  Steamships. 

74John  Haskell  Kemble,  The  Panama  Route,  1848-1869  (Berkeley,  1943)  118-119.  For  a  list  and  brief  history  of 
these  vessels  see  Kemble,  213-251. 

75Dayton,  Steamboat  Days,  383;  Porter,  Engineering  Reminiscences,  55;  Nevitt,  American  Steamships,  167-169. 

76Tyler,  Steam  Conquers  the  Atlantic,  237;  Nevit,  American  Steamships,  167-169;  New  York  Vol.  368,  p.  440,  Dun 
Col. 

77Nevitt,  American  Steamships,  262-263.  See  also  Franklin  N.  Chance,  et  al.,  Tangled  Machinery  and  Charred  Relics: 
The  Historical  and  Archaeological  Investigation  of  the  C.S.S.  Nashville  (Orangeburg,  S.C.,  1985). 

™The  Scientific  American,  IX  (April  29,  1854),  262. 

"The  Scientific  American,  new'series,  III  (October  13,  1860),  240. 

B0The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  III  (December  1,  1860),  256;  New  York,  Vol.  368,  p.  440,  Dun  Col. 

81The  Argument  of  Mr.  Edward  N.  Dickerson. .  .in  the  Case  of  Sickels  vs.  Borden,  Defended  by  'The  Novelty  Iron  Works' 
and  Mr.  Horatio  Allen  (New  York,  1856),  14. 

82Porter,  Engineering  Reminiscences,  65.  See  also  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  I  (September  3,  1859),  149;  II 
(April  7,  1860),  78;  III  (October  6,  1860),  234.  For  fire  engines  the  April  7,  1860  issue  of  The  Scientific  American 
shows  a  Novelty  built  engine.  For  sugar  machinery  see  Albion,  The  Rise  of  New  York  Port,  178. 

83Clark  Reynolds,  "The  Great  Experiment;  Hunter's  Horizontal  Wheel,"  American  Neptune,  XXIV  (January, 
1964),  6-7. 

84The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  II  (March  11,  I860),  79 

85Dayion,  Steamboat  Days,  383. 

39 


86"The  Novelty  Works,"  in  Harper's  New  Monthly  Magazine,  II  (May,  1851),  721-734.  See  also  Albion,  The  Rise  of 
New  York  Port,  150-151;  Tyler,  Steam  Conquers  the  Atlantic,  179;  Bishop,  American  Manufactuers,  III,  127;  The 
Scientific  American,  IX  (December  17,  1863),  110.  A  British  Parliamentary  committee  investigating  manufacturing 
in  the  U.S  visited  the  Novelty  works  and  reported  they  "did  not  see  any  thing  new  to  them,  or  any  machinery 
not  used  in  similar  works  in  Great  Britain."  The  American  System  of  Manufactures,  ed.,  Nathan  Rosenberg 
(Edinburgh,  1969),  105.  Benjamin  F.  Isherwood,  later  Engineer  in  Chief  of  the  Navy,  learned  about  marine 
engines  while  he  was  employed  at  the  Novelty  works  in  the  1840s.  Edward  William  Sloan  III,  Bemjamin 
Franklin  Isherwood,  Naval  Engineer,  (Annapolis,  1965),  9.  John  Rogers,  well  known  19th  century  sculptor,  was 
employed  at  Novelty,  1852-1853.  See  David  H.  Wallace,  John  Rogers;  the  People's  Sculptor,  (Middleton, 
Connecticut,  1967). 

87John  H.  Morrison,  History  of  New  York  Ship  Yards,  (New  York,  1909)  150. 

88New  York,  Vol.  368  p.  440,  441,  Dun  Col.; 

89The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  III  (December  22,  1860),  408. 

90The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  IV  (March  23,  1861),  186. 

91Holbrook  Fitz  John  Porter,  The  Delamater  Iron  Works— The  Cradle  of  the  Modern  Navy  (New  York,  1918);  Dayton, 
Steamboat  Days,  384-385;  Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  129-130. 

92Dayton,  Steamboat  Days,  384;  Porter,  The  Delamater  Iron  Works,  5.  For  Cornelius  Delamater  see  D.A.B.,  V, 
211-212;  American  Machinist,  XII  (1899),  7;  Transactions,  American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers,  X  (October, 
1888),  386-388. 

"William  C.  Church,  The  Life  of  John  Ericsson,  (2  vols.,  New  York,  1911),  I,  244. 

94Porter,  The  Delamater  Iron  Works,  5;  Church,  Ericsson,  I,  244.  An  obituary  for  Delamater  said  that  he  "did  more 
for  Captain  Ericsson  than  any  one  else  engaged  in  the  line  of  engineering."  American  Machinist,  XII  (1889),  7. 
See  also  D.A.B.,  V,  211. 

95Watts,  "Monitor  of  A  New  Iron  Age,"  60-61. 

96A  Dun  report  dated  June  23,  1855  said:  "Have  not  learned  upon  what  terms  [Delamater]  purchased  out  his 

partner,  but  he  is  believed  to  have  strength  to  go  on  alone Those  who  know  him  have  great  confidence  in 

his  integrity  and  reliability."  New  York,  Vol.  316a,  180,  Dun  Col. 

97James  P.  Baughman,  The  Mallorys  of  Mystic  (Middletown,  Connecticut,  1972),  117. 

98Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  130. 

"Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  132. 

100New  York,  Vol.  316a,  185,  Dun  Col. 

101Porter,  The  Delamater  Iron  Works,  6-7;  Ericsson  to  Sargent,  April  23,  1845,  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish 
History  Museum;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  V  (July  6,  1861). 

102Lee  M.  Pearson,  "The  Princeton  and  the  'Peacemaker':  A  Study  in  Nineteenth-Century  Naval  Research  and 
the  Development  Procedures,"  Technology  and  Culture,  VII  (Spring,  1966),  164.  Frank  M.  Bennett  in  The  Steam 
Navy  of  the  United  States  (Pittsburgh,  1896),  62,  states  that  the  machinery  was  built  by  Merrick  &  Towne. 
Church  in  his  biography  of  Ericsson  gives  Hogg  and  Delamater  credit  for  building  it  (Vol.  I,  226).  So  does 
Robert  MacFarlane,  Editor  of  The  Scientific  American.  See  his  History  of  Propellers  and  Steam  Navigation  (New 
York,  1851),  116-117.  Ericsson  had  difficulty  collecting  compensation  from  the  Navy  Department  and  did  not 
seek  government  work  again  until  1854  when  he  proposed  to  design  machinery  for  five  auxiliary  steamers;  the 
work  to  be  done  at  Hogg  &  Delamater.  He  did  not  get  the  contract.  Ericsson  to  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  August 
30,  1854,  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish  History  Museum.  For  Ericsson's  problems  with  the  Navy 
Department  see  Church,  Ericsson,  I,  140-154. 

103Nevitt,  American  Steamships,  83-83;  Church,  Ericsson,  I,  109-110. 

104Robert  B.  Forbes,  Personal  Reminiscences  (2d.  edition,  Boston,  1882),  208-210;  Nevitt,  American  Steamships,  86. 


40 


105A  large  number  of  Ericsson-designed  propellers  were  built  by  Great  Lakes  firms.  For  many  of  the  vessels 
that  Hogg  &  Delamater  provided  machinery,  see  Dayton,  Steamboat  Days;  Forbes,  Reminiscences;  Nevitt, 
American  Steamships;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series  IV  (January  12,  1861),  28;  Main,  The  Progress  of  Marine 
Engineering,  33. 

106Baughman,  The  Mallorys  of  Mystic,  102-103.  Baughman  wrote,  "For  machinery,  the  Mallory  yard  depended 
primarily  on  the  Delamater  Iron  Works  [and  two  local  works]. .  .Delamater  filled  the  bulk  of  Mallory's  order  for 
engines,  boilers,  shafts,  pumps,  and  winches."  p.  117.  See  also  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  II  (February 
25,  1860),  131;  (March  23,  1860),  182. 

io7New  York,  Vol.  316a,  180,  Dun  Collection. 

108John  B.  Kitching,  Ericsson's  Caloric  Engine  (New  York,  1859);  Eugene  Ferguson,  "John  Ericsson  and  the  Age 
of  Caloric,"  Bulletin  No.  298:  Contributions  from  the  Museum  of  History  and  Technology  (Washington,  D.C.,  1963); 
Ericsson's  Contributions  to  the  Centennial  Exhibition  (New  York,  1876);  Articles  Descriptive  of  the  Caloric  Ship  Ericsson 
and  of  her  Trial  Excursion  of  January  19,  1853,  Taken  from  the  Daily  Journals  of  the  City  of  New  York  (Washington, 
D.C.,  1853). 

109Dayton,  Steamboat  Days,  56. 

U0The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  I(October  8,  1859),  255;  Journal  of  the  Franklin  Institute,  1860,  185. 

mMyron  S.  Westover,  ed.,  Schenectady  City  and  County  Directory  for  1862  (Schenectady,  1862),  36.  A  copy  of  this 
directory  is  in  the  Library  of  Congress.  Joel  H.  Monroe,  Schenectady  Ancient  and  Modern  (Geneva,  New  York, 
1914),  247-248. 

U2Kitching,  Ericsson's  Caloric  Engine,  9 

n3For  biographical  sketches  of  Rowland  see  the  D.A.B.;  Harper's  Weekly,  VI  (September  6,  1862),  1;  The  Nautical 
Gazette,  January  13,  1875.  Although  trained  as  an  engineer,  Rowland  called  himself  a  shipbuilder.  See  the 
Brooklyn  City  Directory  for  the  year  ending  May  1st,  1963,  375.  A  copy  of  this  directory  is  located  in  the  Library  of 
Congress. 

n4In  April  1861  the  Harriet  Lane  was  the  vessel  ordered  to  carry  supplies  to  Fort  Sumter  in  Charleston,  South 
Carolina.  This  led  to  the  firing  on  the  fort  by  Southerners  and  the  beginning  of  the  Civil  War.  For  a  detailed 
description  of  the  vessel,  including  drawings  of  the  hull,  see  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  I  (October  8, 
1859),  242.  For  the  Sneeden  yard  see  "The  Shipbuilding  Industry  in  Brooklyn,"  Brooklyn  Life,  LIX  (April  26, 
1919)  141;  Harold  C.  Syrett,  The  City  of  Brooklyn,  1865-1898  (New  York),  1968,  15-16. 

115Syrett,  The  City  of  Brooklyn,  See  also  Dayton,  Steamboat  Days,  165,  and  Harper's  Weekly,  VI  (September  6,  1862. 

116Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  132-133. 

117Dayton,  Steamboat  Days,  166. 

118Sloan,  Isherwood,  30. 

n9Sloan,  Isherwood,  30-31;  Porter,  Engineering  Reminiscences,  60.  Bennett  in  The  Stream  Navy  of  the  United  States 
contradicts  himself.  On  page  4  he  writes  that  Novelty  built  four,  but  in  his  list  of  vessels  in  Appendix  "B"  he 
list  six  with  machinery  provided  by  Novelty.  For  a  brief  history  and  statistics  of  these  vessels  see  the 
appropriate  volumes  in  the  Dictionary  of  American  Fighting  Ships  (Washington,  D.C.,  1959).  See  also  The  Scientific 
American,  new  series,  V  (July  20,  1961),  54;  (October  11,  1861),  192;  (October  19,  1861),  250.  Drawings  of  one  of 
the  gunboats  with  machinery  under  construction  can  be  found  in  Harper's  Weekly,  August  31,  1861. 

l20The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  V  (August  17,  1861),  106. 

,21New  York,  Vol.  368,  441.  Dun  Col. 

122Quoted  in  Church,  Ericsson,  I,  242.  For  work  during  the  spring  and  summer  1861  see  Journal  of  the  Franklin 
Institute  September,  1861,  202. 

,23Porter,  The  Delamater  Iron  Works,  8. 


41 


""Charles  L.  Dufour,  The  Night  The  War  Was  Lost  (Garden  City,  I960),  150-153;  Robert  V.  Bruce,  Lincoln  and  the 
tools  of  War  (Indianapolis,  1956)  Bishop,  American  Manufactures  III,  133.  For  the  quote  on  Rowland  see  Church, 
Ericsson,  I,  258. 

125For  a  detailed  description  of  the  proposed  vessel  see  James  P.  Baxter,  III,  The  Introduction  of  the  Ironclad 
Warship  (Cambridge,  1933),  250-252;  "Report  of  Board  to  examine  plans  of  iron-clad  vessels,  under  Act  of 
August  3,  1861  in  Report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  in  Relation  to  Armored  Vessels  Washington,  D.C.,  1864,  87. 

126Baxter,  Introduction  of  the  Ironclad  Warship,  252,  See  also  Church,  Ericsson,  258-259,  for  a  different  version.  In  a 
"History  of  the  Continental  Iron  Works"  A.  R.  Whitney  is  mentioned  as  one  who  "furnished  transportation 
for  the  iron,  and  later  became  a  dealer  in  iron,  and  furnished  large  amounts  of  metal  to  Mr.  Rowland  for  later 
vessels."  Copy  of  "History"  Provided  the  writer  by  E.  W.  Peterkin,  29  September,  1985. 

127Quoted  in  Neu,  Corning,  53,  John  Niven,  Digeon  Welles,  Lincoln's  Secretary  of  the  Navy  (New  York,  1973),  367. 

128The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  IV  (June  8,  1861),  356;  V  (September  7,  1861),  149;  (November  2,  1861), 
277-278.  The  November  issue  included  drawings  of  the  gun  and  targets. 

1MThe  Scientific  American,  new  series,  V  (November  2,  1861),  276-277;  and  (April  12,  1862),  include  detailed 
descriptions  and  drawings  of  Winslow's  plating  system  for  the  Galena.  The  Galena  was  badly  damaged,  at  least 
eighteen  shots  penetrating  her  armor,  when  she  engaged  Confederate  forts  near  Richmond  in  May,  1862.  See 
also  Francis  B.  Wheeler,  John  F.  Winslow,  LL.D.  and  the  Monitor  (Poughkeepsie,  New  York,  1893),  21. 

i3oNew  York,  Vol.  323,  890a-b  Dun  Col. 

"'Goldman,  High  Hopes,  124-125. 

132See  Baxter,  The  Introduction  of  the  Ironclad  Warship;  Edward  M.  Miller,  The  U.S.S.  Monitor,  The  Ship  That 
Launched  the  Modern  Navy,  (Annapolis,  1979). 

133Winslow,  and  Griswold,  and  probably  Corning,  secured  the  funds  locally  for  the  project.  Jeanne  McHugh, 
Alexander  Holley  and  the  Makers  of  Steel  (Baltimore,  1980),  69-70;  Neu,  Corning,  53-55.  Copies  of  the  contract  are 
located  in  the  John  Ericsson  Papers,  Library  of  Congress,  and  the  Griswold  Papers. 

134Griswold  to  Ericsson,  October  14,  1861,  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish  History  Museum. 

"5Ericsson  to  Winslow,  October  8,  1861;  C.  W.  Whitney  to  Griswold,  October  22,  1861;  November  8,  1861; 
Rowland  to  Winslow,  October  19,  November  4,  1861,  Griswold  Papers;  Winslow  to  Ericsson,  September  20, 
October  9,  20,  1861,  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish  History  Museum;  Ericsson  to  Smith,  October  8,  1861, 
Records  of  the  office  of  the  Chief  of  the  Bureau,  Entry  5,  section  7,  Miscellaneous  Correspondence,  1842-1885, 
Letters  Received,  RG71,  Records  of  the  Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks,  National  Archives,  hereinafter  cited  as 
Entry  5,  RG  71;  Baxter,  Introduction  of  the  Ironclad  Warship,  266. 

136Ericsson  to  Smith,  October  19,  1861,  Entry  5,  RG  71;  Wheeler,  Winslow,  29;  Rezneck,  "Winslow,"  89. 
Winslow  contracted  with  Delaney  for  the  port  stoppers. 

137November  12,  1861,  Holdane  to  Griswold,  October  19,  1861,  Griswold  Papers. 

""Ericsson  to  Clute,  November  6,  1861,  Griswold  Papers;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  V  (November  11, 
1861),  331. 

"9A  copy  of  the  contract  dated  October  25,  1861  is  in  the  Griswold  Papers. 

U0John  Ericsson,  "The  Building  of  the  Monitor,"  Battles  and  Leaders  of  the  Civil  War,  Robert  U.  Johnson,  and 
Clarence  C.  Buel,  eds.,  (4  vols.,  New  York,  1884-1888),  I,  731. 

141Watts,  "Monitor  of  a  New  Iron  Age.,"  59. 

142Ernest  W.  Peterkin,  "Building  a  Behemoth,"  Civil  War  Times  Illustrated,  XX  (July,  1981),  17. 

,43Ericsson  tried  a  kind  of  mass-production  method  with  these  vessels.  "They  would  be  alike  in  every 
particular.  For  instance  the  main  frames  of  the  engines  of  5  of  these  vessels  have  been  cast  from  one  pattern  at 
the  Delamater  Iron  Works.  The  turret  engines.  .  .have  been  cast  from  one  pattern."  Ericsson  to  Bennett,  June 
27,  1862,  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish  History  Museum. 

42 


144Neu,  Corning,  55. 

145November  5,  1862  in  Court  of  Claims  of  the  United  States,  Report  of  Navy  Department  Documents  Relating  to  the 
Harbor  and  River  Monitors  Manhattan,  Mahopac,  and  Tecumseh  (Washington,  D.C.,  1912),  1029,  hereinafter  cited  as 
Documents  Relating  to  the  Harbor  and  River  Monitors.  See  additional  correspondence  Documents  Relating  to  the 
Harbor  and  River  Monitors,  1029-1031.  For  Abbott  see  Olson,  Baltimore,  145;  BUI  of  H.  Abbott  for  dock  plate, 
March  16,  1863,  in  Documents  Relating  to  the  Harbor  and  River  Monitors,  1519;  Scharf,  Chronicles  of  Baltimore, 
490-491;  Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  116;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  VII  (November  8,  1862),  298. 
For  Holdane  see  New  York,  Vol.  323,  G890a,  Dun  Col.  Clute  may  have  provided  parts. 

146Ericsson  to  Clute  Brothers,  January  15,  1865,  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish  History  Museum. 

147For  contracts  see  Entry  231,  Records  of  the  United  States  General  Accounting  Office,  RG231,  National  Archives. 
See  Dictionary  of  American  Naval  Fighting  Ships,  III,  762-764  for  data.  Church's  Ericsson  discusses  the  two  vessels 
but  ignores  their  failings.  Robert  Johnson  in  Rear  Admiral  John  Rodgers,  1812-1882  (Annapolis,  1967),  261-279  is 
far  more  objective,  particularly  of  the  Dictator  that  Rodgers  commanded.  See  also  The  Scientific  American,  new 
series,  VIII  January  17,  1863),  41;  and  IX  (April  2,  1864),  217.  Porter  in  The  Delamater  Iron  Works  is  in  error 
when  he  gives  Delamater  credit  for  building  Puritan's  machinery  (12). 

148Gideon  Welles,  Diary  of  Gideon  Welles,  ed.  Howard  K.  Beale  (3  vols.,  New  York,  1960),  II  2-1-201,  207. 

149Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  133;  Harper's  Weekly,  September  6,  1862.  The  Scientific  American,  new 
series,  VIII  (May  23,  1863),  330;  Documents  Relating  to  the  River  and  Harbor  Monitor,  1474,  1529. 

^Harper's  New  Monthly  Magazine,  XXV  (November  8,  1862),  298. 

15177ie  Scientific  American,  new  series,  VII  (November  8,  1862),  298. 

152Letter  in  Documents  Relating  to  the  Harbor  and  River  Monitors,  1520. 

15377ie  Scientific  American,  new  series,  VII  (September  27,  1862),  201;  (November  8,  1862),  297;  (October  11, 
1862),  234;  (August  2,  1820),  73.  See  also  Henry  R.  Stiles,  The. .  .History  and  Commercial  and  Industrial  Record  of 
the  County  of  Kings  and  the  City  of  Brooklyn,  N.Y.,  from  1683  to  1884  (2  vols.,  New  York,  1884),  ii  498. 

""Augustus  C.  Buel,  The  Memoirs  of  Charles  H.  Cramp  (Philadelphia,  1906),  72-85. 

155Dana  M.  Wegner,  "Alban  C.  Stimers  and  the  Office  of  the  General  Inspector  General  of  Ironclads, 
1862-1864,"  M.A.  thesis,  State  University  of  New  York,  Oneonta,  1979,  29. 

,56Wegner,  "Alban  C.  Stimers,"  47. 

157Documents  Relating  to  the  Harbor  and  River  Monitors,  1529. 

158Scharf,  Chronicles  of  Baltimore,  490;  Sunday  Sun  Magazine  (Baltimore),  July  26,  1953.  For  the  mortar  beds  see 
Nevins,  Hewitt,  202-203;  Dufour,  The  Night  the  War  Was  Lost,  149-155;  Bruce,  Lincoln  and  the  Tools  of  War, 
156-164;  Cooper,  Hewitt  &  Co.,  to  General  Ripley,  January  24,  1862;  The  War  of  the  Rebellion:  A  Compilation  of 
the  Official  Records  of  the  Union  and  Confederate  Armies.  (130  Vols.,  Washington,  D.C.  1880-1901),  Ser  III,  vol.  I, 
899,  hereinafter  cited  as  O.R.A..  See  also  correspondence  concerning  the  monitor  beds  in  O.R.A.,  Ser.  Ill,  vol. 
I,  810,  874,  878,  884,  887.  No  information  has  been  found  to  suggest  what  Abbott  provided  to  receive  the 
commendation. 

159Smith,  History  of  Buffalo,  II,  240-241;  John  T.  Norton,  et.  ah,  History  of  Northwestern  New  York  (3  vols.,  New 
York,  1942),  I,  185. 

160Sloan,  Isherwood,  56. 

161For  a  detailed  description  of  Novelty's  work  on  the  Roanoke,  including  drawings,  see  Harper's  New  Monthly 
Magazine,  XXV  (September,  1862),  434-442.  See  also  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  VII  (July  26,  1862),  57; 
VI  (October  11,  1862),  226;  VII  (December  6,  1862),  362;  VIII  (January  31,1863),  73-74;  (April  4,  1863),  217;  (April 
25,  1863),  265.  For  the  vessel's  history  see  John  D.  Alden,  "Born  Forty  Years  Too  Soon,"  American  Neptune, 
XXII  (October,  1962),  252-263;  and  Baxter,  Introduction  of  the  Ironclad  Warship,  304-305. 

162Dana  Wegner,  "Ericsson's  High  Priest",  Civil  War  Times  Illustrated,  XIII  (February,  1975),  33-34;  Wegner, 
"Alban  C.  Stimers.  Stimers  and  Ericsson  got  along  generally  until  early  in  1863. 

43 


163Sloan,  Isherwood,  90-91;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  X  (April  2,  1864),  211-212;  "A  Memorial  of  Horatio 
Allen,"  1175-1176.  For  Ericsson  and  Isherwood's  relationship  see  Sloan,  Isherwood,  143-158. 

164Sloan,  Isherwood,  passim;  Bennett,  Steam  Navy  of  the  United  States,  399,  555,  576-577. 

165Bennett,  Steam  Navy  of  the  United  States,  appendix;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  VIII  (June  13,  1863), 
378.  For  copies  of  Novelty's  contracts  with  the  Navy  department  see  Entry  231,  RD217. 

U6The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  (February  24,  1864),  131-132;  III  (January  31,  1863),  74;  VII  (September  1, 
1862),  201.  See  also  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  XI  (August  20,  1864),  106;  X  Qune  H,  1864),  378;  Journal 
of  the  Franklin  Institute,  January,  1863,  40,  44. 

i67New  York,  Vol.  368,  931,  Dun  Col.;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  VII  (April  4,  1863),  229;  X  (April  6, 
1864),  243. 

168Baughman,  The  Mallory's  of  Mystic,  115;  The  Scientific  American,  new  series,  VII  (August  2,  1862),  74; 
(November  22,  1862),  326;  Journal  of  the  Franklin  Institute,  175-178;  341-342;  344-347;  378-380. 

169Lance  C.  Buhl,  "Mariners  and  Machines:  Resistance  to  Technical  Change  in  the  American  Navy,  1865-1869," 
The  Journal  of  American  History,  LXI  (December,  1974),  703-727;  Walter  R.  Herrick,  Jr.,  The  American  Naval 
Revolution  (Baton  Rouge,  1966),  13-38. 

170James  M.  Morris,  Our  Maritime  Heritage  (1979),  198. 

171Nevitt,  American  Steamships,  340,  348-349.  See  also  Swann,  John  Roach,  23;  and  Syrett,  The  City  of  Brooklyn,  23. 

172Henry  Hall,  Report  on  the  Shipbuilding  Industry  of  the  United  States  (Washington,  D.C.,  1882),  202. 

173Nevitt,  American  Steamships,  341;  Elting  M.  Morison,  Men,  Machines  and  Modern  Times,  (Cambridge,  1966), 
98-99.  New  York,  Vol.  368,  931,  Dun  Col.;  Pursell,  "Stationary  Steam  Engines,"  183;  Kouwenhoven,  Partners 
in  Banking,  133-134. 

174For  Allen's  involvement  see  David  McCullough,  The  Great  Bridge  (New  York,  1972),  22-23,  passim.  For 
Allen's  social  and  civil  life  during  his  later  years  see  "A  Memorial  for  Horatio  Allen,"  1179-1181;  George  T. 
Strong,  Diary,  Allan  Nevins  and  M.  H.  Thomas,  eds.,  (4  vols.,  New  York,  1952),  III,  passim;  and  Henry  W. 
Bellows  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Union  League  Club  of  New  York  (New  York,  1879),  passim.  Allen  continued  to 
correspond  with  Ericsson.  See,  for  example,  Allen  to  Ericsson,  January  19,  1872,  and  Ericsson  to  Allen,  October 
13,  1873,  in  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish  History  Museum. 

175Porter,  The  Delamater  Iron  Works,  15-17;  Church,  Ericsson,  II,  127-130;  Carol  W.  Kimball,  "The  Spanish 
Gunboats,"  The  Log  of  Mystic  Seaport,  XXII(Summer,  1970),  51-58;  Baughman,  The  Malloy's  of  Mystic,  129-131; 
Lawrence  A.  Clayton,  "The  Incident  of  the  Spanish  Gunbats,"  unpublished  manuscript,  Mystic  Seaport 
Library,  Mystic  Seaport,  Connecticut.  Ericsson  designed  the  gunboats.  See  Ericsson  to  Delamater,  December 
30,  1869,  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish  History  Museum. 

176For  example,  see  Ericsson  to  Fox,  November  24,  1865,  February  23,  1867,  Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish 
History  Museum.  Ericsson,  II  166-170,  158  passim;  Ericsson  to  Delamater,  November  23,  1880,  Ericsson  Papers, 
American  Swedish  History  Museum. 

177Richard  K.  Morris,  John  P.  Holland,  1841-1914,  Inventor  of  the  Modern  Submarine  (Annapolis,  1966),  35-43, 
186-188;  Simon  Lake,  The  Submarine  in  War  and  Peace  (Philadelphia,  1918),  96-111 

178Porter,  The  Delamater  Iron  Works,  13-20;  Church,  Ericsson  II,  284-275;  "Cornelius  Delamater,"  in  D.A.B.; 
Ericsson  Papers,  American  Swedish  History  Museum;  advertisement  for  a  hot  air  pumping  engine  by 
Delamater,  dated  February,  1880,  copy  in  Eleutherian  Mills  Historical  Library,  Wilmington,  Delaware.  The  copy 
includes  illustrations. 

179Supplement,  January  13,  1875,  See  also  Bishop,  American  Manufactures,  III,  133;  "Thomas  Rowland,"  D.A.B. 
A  1908  advertisement  included  a  drawing  of  the  works  showing  vessels  under  construction  and  others 
alongside  docks. 

,80"77iomas  Rowland,"  D.A.B.  See  also  advertisement  for  Morison  suspension  furnace  including  illustration 
dated  1908  in  Eleutherian  Mills  Library,  Wilmington,  Delaware. 

44 


181  Various  comments  of  R.  G.  Dun  &  Co.,  in  New  York,  Vol.  323,  G900,  G890a,  G890b,  Dun  Col.  No  reason  is 
given  for  dissolving  the  business. 

182Monroe,  Schnectady,  Ancient  and  Modern,  241-284;  Westover,  Schenectady  Past  and  Present,  49-50. 

™3The  Manufacturing  Interests  of  the  City  of  Buffalo  (Buffalo,  1866),  126.  120  hands  were  employed  at  that  time. 
See  also  Smith,  History  of  Buffalo,  II  240. 

184Henry  W.  Hill,  Municipality  of  Buffalo,  New  York,  A  History  (2  vols.,  New  York,  1923),  II,  802. 

185Neu,  Corning,  55-56;  "John  Flack  Winslow,"  D.A.B.;  Morison,  Men,  Machines  and  Modem  Times,  140. 

i86See  McHugh,  Holley,  171-172. 

187Weise,  Troy's  One  Hundred  Years,  265-266;  James  M.  Swank,  History  of  the  Manufacture  of  Iron  in  All  Ages 
(Philadelphia,  1892),  409-410;  A.L.  Holley  and  Lenox  Smith,  "American  Iron  and  Steel  Works,"  Engineering,  XL 
(December  24,  1880),  590-616;  Wolfgang  P.  Strassmann,  Risk  and  Technological  Innovations:  American 
Manufacturing  Methods  During  the  Nineteenth  Century  (New  York,  1959),  34-35;  Memorial  of  Alexander  Lyman 
Holley,  C.E.,  LL.D.  (New  York,  1884),  passim. 

188Ericsson  to  Giswold,  December  9,  1865,  February  2,  June  6,  September  13,  October  17,  1866,  Ericsson  Papers, 
American  Swedish  History  Museum;  Sloan,  Isherwood,  47-48;  Church,  Ericsson,  II.  187-188;  Joel  Munsell,  The  Annals 
of  Albany  (2d  edition,  Albany,  1869),  52,  54,  56. 

189"John  Flack  Winslow,"  D.A.B.;  Redlich  History  of  American  Business  Leaders  I,  96-107;  Rezneck,  Profiles  Out  of 
the  Past,  99,  102-103;  Wheeler,  Winslow,  8-9.  For  Griswold's  political  career  see  Donald  B.  Chidsey,  The 
Gentleman  from  New  York;  A  Life  of  Roscoe  Conkling  (New  Haven,  1935),  135-137,  167;  James  G.  Blaine,  Twenty 
Years  of  Congress  (2  vols.,  Norwich,  Connecticut,  1884),  I  497,  II,  252-255,  526-527;  Welles,  Diary,  I,  531,  II,  31; 
Robert  P.  Sharkey,  Money,  Class,  and  Party:  An  Economic  Study  of  Civil  War  and  Reconstruction  (Baltimore,  1959), 
73-passim;  David  M.  Jordan,  Roscoe  Conkling  of  New  York:  Voice  in  the  Senate  (Ithaca,  New  York,  1971),  110-114; 
Michael  Lee  Benedict,  A  Compromise  of  Principle:  Congressional  Republicans  and  Reconsirution,  1863-1869  (New 
York,  1974),  226  passim;  Strong,  Diary,  IV,  231,  244. 

190Weise,  Troy's  One  Hundred  Years,  266;  Hogan,  Economic  History  of  the  Iron  and  Steel  Industry  in  the  United  States, 
vol.  II,  Pt.  Ill,  487;  Neu,  Corning,  59-61. 

^Industries  of  Maryland:  A  Descriptive  Review  of  the  Manufacturing  and  Mercantile  Industries  of  the  City  of  Baltimore 
(New  York,  1889),  179;  Baltimore  Sun  Magazine,  July  7,  1953;  Scharf,  History  of  Baltimore,  427. 

192William  N.  Still,  Jr.  "The  Historical  Importance  of  the  USS  Monitor,"  unpublished  MSS  in  possession  of  the 
author. 

193Quoted  in  Still,  "The  Historical  Importance  of  the  USS  Monitor." 


45 


Bibliography 

A  Century  of  Progress,  History  of  the  Delaware  and  Hudson  Company,  1823-1923.  Albany,  N.Y.,  1925. 

Albion,  Robert  G.  The  Rise  of  New  York  Port,  1815-1860.  New  York,  1939. 

Alden,  John  D.  "Born  Forty  Years  Too  Soon,"  American  Neptune,  XXII  (October,  1962),  252-263. 

"A  Memorial  for  Horatio  Allen,"  Transactions  of  the  American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers,  II  (November, 
1899-May,  1890),  1156-1181. 

American  Machinist,  XII  (1889),  7. 

Articles  Descriptive  of  the  Caloric  Ship  Ericsson  and  of  her  Trial  Excursion  of  January  19,  1853,  Taken  from  the  Daily 
Journals  of  the  City  of  New  York.  Washington,  D.C.  1853. 

Baltimore  Sunday  Sun  Magazine,  July  26,  1953. 

Baughman,  James  P.  The  Mallorys  of  Mystic.  Middleton,  Conn.,  1972. 

Baxter,  James  P.,  III.  The  Introduction  of  the  Ironclad  Warship.  Cambridge,  Mass.,  1933. 

Bellows,  Henry  W.  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Union  League  Club  of  New  York.  New  York,  1879. 

Benedict,  Michael  L.  A  Compromise  of  Principle:  Congressional  Republicans  and  Reconstruction,  1863-1869.  New  York, 
1974. 

Bennett,  Frank  M.  The  Steam  Navy  of  the  United  States.  Pittsburgh,  1896. 

Bishop,  Leander.  A  History  of  American  Manufactures  from  1608  to  1860.  3rd.  ed.,  3  vols.,  New  York,  1966. 

Blaine,  James  G.  Twenty  Years  of  Congress.  2  vols.,  Norwich,  Conn.,  1894. 

Blake,  Nelson  M.  Water  for  the  Cities,  A  History  of  the  Urban  Water  Supply  Problem  in  the  United  States.  Syracuse, 
1956. 

Bowen,  Frank  C.  A  Century  of  Atlantic  Travel,  1830-1930.  Boston,  1930. 

Brooklyn  City  Directory  for  the  Year  ending  May  1st,  1863.  1863. 

Brown,  Alexander  Crosby.  Women  and  Children  Last:  The  Loss  of  the  Steamship  Arctic.  New  York,  1961. 

Brown,  John  Crosby.  A  Hundred  Years  of  Merchant  Banking.  New  York,  1909. 

Browne,  Gary  L.  Baltimore  in  the  Nation,  1789-1861.  Chapel  Hill,  1980. 

Bruce,  Robert  V.  Lincoln  and  the  Tools  of  War.  Indianapolis,  1956. 

Buell,  Augustus  C.  The  Memoirs  of  Charles  H.  Cramp.  Philadelphia,  1906. 

Buhl,  Lance  C.  "Mariners  and  Machines:  Resistance  to  Technical  Change  in  the  American  Navy,  1865-1869" 
The  Journal  of  American  History,  LXI  (December  1974),  703-727. 

Buffalo  Commercial  Advertiser,  September  24,  1883. 

Chance,  Franklin  N.,  et  al.  Tangled  Machinery  and  Charred  Relics:  The  Historical  and  Archaeological  Investigation  of 
the  C.S.S.  Nashville.  Orange,  S.C.,  1985. 

Chidsey,  Donald  D.  The  Gentleman  from  New  York:  A  Life  of  Roscoe  Conkling.  New  Haven,  1935. 

Church,  William  C.  The  Life  of  John  Ericsson.  2  vols.,  New  York,  1911. 


46 


Clark,  Victor  S.  History  of  Manufactures  in  the  United  States.  2  vols.,  New  York,  1929. 

Clayton,  Lawrence  A.  "The  Incident  of  the  Spanish  Gunboats,"  unpublished  MSS,  Mystic  Seaport  Library, 
Mystic,  Conn. 

Court  of  Claims  of  the  United  States.  Report  of  Navy  Department  Relating  to  the  Harbor  and  River  Monitors 
Manhattan,  Mahopac,  and  Tecumseh.  Washington,  D.C.  1912. 

Cutler,  Carl  C.  Queens  of  the  Western  Ocean.  Annapolis,  Md.,  1961. 

Dayton  Fred  E.  Steamboat  Days.  New  York,  1939. 

Derrick,  Samuel  M.  Centennial  History  of  South  Carolina  Railroad.  Columbia,  S.C.,  1930. 

Dictionary  of  American  Biography 

Dictionary  of  American  Fighting  Ships.  8  vols.,  Washington,  D.C,  1959-1981. 

Dufour,  Charles  L.  The  Night  the  War  Was  Lost.  Garden  City,  N.  J.,  1960. 

Ericsson,  John.  Papers,  New  York  Historical  Society  ,  New  York,  N.Y. 

Ericsson,  John.  Papers.  American  Swedish  Historical  Museum,  Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania. 

Ericsson,  John.  "The  Building  of  the  Monitor,"  Battles  and  Leaders  of  the  Civil  War.  Robert  U.  Johnson,  and 
Clarence  C.  Buel,  eds.,  4  vols.,  New  York,  1884-1888. 

Ericsson's  Contribution  to  the  Centennial  Exhibition.  New  York,  1876. 

Ferguson,  Eugene  S.  "John  Ericsson  and  the  Age  of  Caloric,"  Bulletion  No.  298:  Contributions  from  the  Museum 
of  History  and  Technology.  Washington,  D.C,  1963. 

Fisher,  Douglas  A.  The  Epic  of  Steel.  New  York,  1963. 

Forbes,  Robert  B.  Personal  Reminiscences.  Boston,  1882. 

Goldman,  Mark.  High  Hopes:  The  Rise  and  Decline  of  Buffalo,  New  York.  Albany,  1983. 

Griswold,  John.  Papers,  Divison  of  Armed  Forces  History,  Smithsonian  Institution,  Washington,  D.C. 

Hall,  Henry.  Report  on  the  Shipbuilding  Industry  of  the  United  States.  Washington,  D.C,  1882. 

Harper's  Weekly,  VI  (September  6,  1862). 

Herrick,  Walter  R.,  Jr..  The  American  Naval  Revolution.  Baton  Rouge,  La.,  1966. 

Nevins,  Allan.  Abram  S.  Heritt  With  Some  Account  of  Peter  Cooper.  New  York,  1935. 

Hill,  Henry  W.  Municipality  of  Buffalo,  New  York:  A  History,  1720-1923.  2  vols.,  New  York,  1923. 

Hislop,  Codman.  Eliphalet  Nott.  Middletown,  Conn.,  1971. 

,  "The  S.S.  Novelty,"  New  York  Historical  Society  Quarterly,  49  (October,  1965), 

History  of  the  State  of  New  York.  6  vols.,  Port  Washington,  N.Y.,  1962. 

Hogan,  William  T.  An  Economic  History  of  the  Iron  and  Steel  Industry  in  the  United  States.  Lexington,  Mass.,  1971. 

Holley,  A.  Z.,  and  Lenox  Smith.  "American  Iron  and  Steel  Works,"  Engineering,  XV  (December,  1880),  590. 

"Horace  Abbott,"  pamphlet  file,  Maryland  Historical  Society,  Baltimore,  Md. 


47 


Hungerford,  Edward.  Pathway  of  Empire.  New  York,  1935. 

,  Men  of  Erie.  New  York,  1946. 

Hunter,  Louis  C.  A  History  of  Industrial  Power  in  the  United  States  1780-1930,  Volume  Two:  Steam  Power. 
Charlottesville,  Va.,  1985. 

,  "Heavy  Industry  Before  1860,"  in  The  Growth  of  the  American  Economy.  New  York,  1944. 


Hutchins,  John  G.  B.  The  American  Maritime  Industries  and  Public  Policy,  1789-1914.  Cambridge,  Mass.,  1941. 

Industries  of  Maryland:  A  Descriptive  Review  of  the  Manufacturing  and  Mercantile  Industries  of  the  City  of  Baltimore. 
New  York,  1889. 

Johnson,  Robert.  Rear  Admiral  John  Rodgers,  1812-1882.  Annapolis,  1967. 

Journal  of  the  Franklin  Institute 

Kemble,  John  Haskell.  The  Panama  Route,  1848-1869.  Berkeley,  Calif.,  1943. 

Kimball,  Carol  W.  "The  Spanish  Gunboats,"  The  Log  of  Mystic  Seaport,  XXII  (Summer,  1970),  51-58. 

Kitching,  John  B.  Ericsson's  Caloric  Engine.  New  York,  1859. 

Kouwenhoven,  John  A.  Partners  in  Banking..  .Brown  Brothers,  Harriman  &  Co.,  1818-1968.  Garden  City,  N.J., 
1968. 

Lake,  Simon.  The  Submarine  in  War  and  Peace.  Philadelphia,  1918. 

Lesley,  J.  P.  The  Iron  Manufacturer's  Guide  to  the  Furnaces,  Forges,  and  Rolling  Mills  of  the  United  States.  New 
York,  1866. 

McCullough,  David.  The  Great  Bridge.  New  York,  1972. 

McFarlane,  Robert.  History  of  Propellers  and  Steam  Navigation.  New  York,  1851. 

McHugh,  Jean.  Alexander  Holley  and  the  Makers  of  Steel.  Baltimore,  1980. 

Mack,  Edward  C.  Peter  Cooper:  Citizen  of  New  York.  New  York,  1949. 

Main,  T.  The  Porgress  of  Marine  Engineering.  New  York,  1893. 

Mathews,  Alfred.  "Horatio  Allen,"  Cassier's  Magazine,  X  (May-June,  1896),  471-474. 

Memorial  of  Alexander  Lyman  Holley,  C.E.,  LL.D..  New  York,  1884. 

Miller,  Edward  M.  The  U.S.S.  Monitor,  The  Ship  That  Launched  the  Modern  Navy.  Annapolis,  1979. 

Monroe,  Joel  H.  Schenectady  Ancient  and  Modern.  Geneva,  N.  Y.,  1914. 

Morison,  Elting  E.  From  Know-How  To  Nowhere,  The  Development  of  American  Technology.  New  York,  1974. 

,  Men,  Machines,  and  Modern  Times.  Cambridge,  Mass.,  1966. 

Morris,  James  M.  Our  Maritime  Heritage.  Washington,  D.C.,  1979. 

Morris,  Richard  K.  John  P.  Holland,  1841-1914,  Inventor  of  the  Modern  Submarine.  Annapolis,  1966. 

Morrison,  John  H.  History  of  American  Steam  Navigation.  New  York,  1903. 

History  of  New  York  Ship  Yards.  New  York,  1909. 


48 


Mott,  Edward  H.  The  Story  of  Erie.  New  York,  1908. 

Munsell,  Joel.  The  Annals  of  Albany.  2d.  ed.,  Albany,  N.Y.,  1869. 

Neu,  Irene  D.  Erastus  Corning,  Merchant  and  Financier,  1794-1872.  Ithaca,  N.  Y.,  1960. 

Niven,  John.  Gideon  Welles,  Lincoln's  Secretary  of  the  Navy.  New  York,  1973. 

Norton,  John  T.,  et  al.  History  of  Northwestern  New  York.  3  vols.,  New  York,  1942. 

Olson,  Sherry  H.  Baltimore:  The  Building  of  an  American  City.  Baltimore,  1980. 

Pearson,  Lee  M.  "The  Princeton  and  the  'Peacemaker':  A  Study  in  Nineteenth-Centuury  Naval  Research  and 
the  Development  Procedures,"  Technology  and  Culture,  VII  (Spring,  1966),  163-183. 

Perez-Venero,  Alex.  Before  the  Five  Frontiers,  Panama  From  1821-1903.  New  York,  1978. 

Peterkin,  Ernest  W.,  "Building  a  Behemoth,"  Civil  War  Times  Illustrated,  XX  (July,  1981),  12-19. 

Porter,  Charles  T.  Engineering  Reminiscences  Contributed  to  "Power"  and  "American  Machinist".  New  York,  1908. 

Porter,  Holbrook  Fitz  John.  The  Delamater  Iron  Works— The  Cradle  of  the  Modern  Navy.  New  York,  1918. 

Pursell,  Carroll  W.,  Jr.,  Early  Stationary  Steam  Engines  in  America.  Washington,  D.C.,  1969. 

"Stationary  Steam  Engines  in  America  before  the  Civil  War,"  PhD  dissertation,  University  of 


California,  Berkeley,  1964. 

Redlich,  Fritz.  History  of  American  Business  Leaders:  Theory,  Iron  &  Steel,  Iron  Ore  Mining.  Ann  Arbor,  Michigan, 
1940. 

Rezneck,  Samuel,  "John  Flack  Winslow  (1810-1892),  Troy  Iron  and  Steel  Master,"  in  Profiles  Out  of  the  Past  of 
Troy,  New  York  Since  1789.  Troy,  New  York,  1946. 

Reynolds,  Clark.  "The  Great  Experiment;  Hunter's  Horizontal  Wheel,"  American  Neptune,  XXTV  (January, 
1964),  6-7. 

R.  G.  Dun  &  Co.  Collection,  Baker  Library,  Harvard  University  Graduate  School  of  Business  Administration, 
Boston,  Mass.. 

Ridgely-Nevitt,  Cedric.  American  Steamboats  on  the  Atlantic.  Newark,  Delaware,  1981. 

Records  of  the  Office  of  the  Chief  of  the  Bureau,  Entry  5,  section  7,  Miscellaneous  Correspondence,  1842-1885. 
Letters  Received,  RG71,  Records  of  the  Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks,  National  Archives,  Washington,  D.C. 

Records  of  the  United  States  General  Accounting  Office,  RG231.  Fourth  Auditor  Records,  National  Archives, 
Washington,  D.C. 

Report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  in  Relation  to  Armored  Vessels.  Washington,  D.C,  1864. 

Rosenberg,  Nathan,  ed.  The  American  System  of  Manufactures.  Edinburgh,  Scotland.  1969. 

,  Technology  and  American  Economic  Growth.  New  York,  1978. 

Scharf,  J.  Thomas.  History  of  Baltimore  City  and  County.  Philadelphia,  1881. 

,  Chronicles  of  Baltimore.  Baltimore,  1874. 

Sharkey,  Robert  P.  Money,  Class,  and  Party:  An  Economic  Study  of  Civil  War  and  Reconstruction  (Baltimore,  1959). 

Schenectady  City  and  County  Directory  for  1862.  Schenectady,  N.Y.,  1862. 


49 


Sloan,  Edward  William.  Benjamin  Franklin  Isherwood,  Naval  Engineer.  Annapolis,  1965. 

Smith,  Henry  P.  History  of  Buffalo  and  Erie  County.  2  vols.,  Syracuse,  N.Y.,  1884. 

Stiles,  Henry  R.  The. .  .History  and  Commercial  and  Industrial  Record  of  the  County  of  Kings  and  the  City  of  Brooklyn, 
N.Y.,  from  1633  to  1884.  2  vols.,  New  York,  1884. 

Strong,  George  T.  Diary.  Allen  Nevins  and  M.  H.  Thomas,  eds.,  4  vols.,  New  York,  1952. 

Still,  William  N.,  J.  "The  Historical  Importance  of  the  USS  Monitor,"  unpublished  MSS  in  possession  of 
author. 

Strassmann,  Wolfgang  P.  Risk  and  Technological  Innovation:  American  Manufacturing  Methods  During  the  Nineteenth 
Century.  New  York,  1959. 

Swank,  James  M.  History  of  the  Manufacture  of  Iron  in  All  Ages.  Philadelphia,  1892. 

Swann,  Leonard  A.,  Jr.  John  Roach,  Maritime  Entrepreneur.  Annapolis,  1965. 

Syrett,  Harold  C.  The  City  of  Brooklyn,  1865-1898.  New  York,  1968. 

Taylor,  George  Rogers.  The  Transportation  Revolution,  1815-1860.  New  York,  1951. 

Temin,  Peter.  Iron  and  Steel  in  Nineteenth-Century  America:  An  Economic  Inquiry.  Cambridge,  Mass.,  1961. 

The  Argument  of  Mr.  Edward  N.  Dickerson. .  .In  the  Case  of  Sickels  vs.  Borden,  Defended  by  'the  Novelty  Iron  Works' 
and  Mr.  Horatio  Allen.  New  York,  1856. 

The  Buffalo  City  Directory  for  the  Year  1862.  Buffalo,  1861. 

The  Manufacturing  Interests  of  the  City  of  Buffalo.  2d  edition,  Buffalo,  N.Y.,  1866. 

The  Nautical  Gazette,  January  13,  1875. 

"The  Novelty  Works,"  in  Harper's  New  Monthly  Magazine,  II  (May,  1851),  721-734. 

The  Scientific  American 

"The  Shipbuilding  Industry  in  Brooklyn,"  Brooklyn  Life,  LIX  (April  26,  1919),  139-146. 

The  Troy  Directory  for  the  year  1861 Troy,  n.d. 

The  War  of  the  Rebellion:  A  Compilation  of  the  Official  Records  of  the  Union  and  Confederate  Armies.  130  vols., 
Washington,  D.C.,  1880-1901. 

Thurston,  Robert  H.  A  History  of  the  Growth  of  the  Steam-Engine.  New  York,  1878. 

Troy  Business  Directory  for  the  Year  1861 Troy,  N.Y.,  1860. 

Transactions,  American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers,  X  (October,  1888),  386-388. 

Tyler,  David  B.  Steam  Conquers  the  Atlantic.  New  York,  1939. 

Walkowitz,  Daniel  J.  Worker  City,  Company  Town:  Iron  and  Cotton-Worker  Protests  in  Troy  and  Cahoes,  New  York, 
1855-84.  Urbana,  Illinois,  1978. 

Wallace,  David  H.  John  Rogers;  the  People's  Scuptor.  Middletown,  Conn.,  1967. 

Watts,  Gordon  P.,  Jr.,  "Monitor  of  a  New  Age:  The  Construction  of  the  U.S.S.  Monitor."  M.A.  Thesis,  Easton 
Carolina  University,  Greenville,  N.C.  1975. 


50 


Wegner,  Dana  M.,  "Alban  C.  Stimers  and  the  Office  of  the  Inspector  General  of  Ironclads,  1862-1864."  M.A. 
Thesis,  State  University  of  New  York,  Oneonta,  1979  26-34. 

,  "Ericsson's  High  Priest,"  Civil  War  Times  Illustrated,  XII  (February,  1975), 


Weise,  Arthur  J.  Troy's  One  Hundred  Years,  1789-1889.  Troy,  N.Y.,  1891. 

Welles,  Gideon.  Diary  of  Gideon  Welles,  ed.  Howard  K.  Beale,  3  vols.,  New  York,  1960. 

Westover,  Myron  S.,  ed.  Schenectady  Past  and  Present.  Strasburg,  Va.,  1931. 

Wheeler,  Francis  B.  John  F.  Winslow,  LL.D.  and  the  Monitor.  Poughkeepsie,  N.Y.,  1893. 


5  J 


111111 

3  1604  004  719  342 


DATE  DUE 

Demco.  Inc   38-;