Confederate Veteran

Confederate Torpedo Boats

Volume 31, March 1923, pages 93–94

Tomb corrects Scharf on the depth of the David's torpedo and gives his own account of the attack on the Memphis in North Edisto, including why the torpedo failed twice.

Comments furnished by James H. Tomb, Chief Engineer C. S. N., of Jacksonville, Florida, on reading Scharf's history; printed with the Veteran's headnote.

Cite as

James H. Tomb, “Confederate Torpedo Boats,” Confederate Veteran 31, no. 3 (March 1923): 93–94.

The page in the scanned volumeThe whole volume at the Internet Archive

Published
March 1923
Volume
31, no. 3
Pages
93–94
Author
James H. Tomb

CONFEDERATE TORPEDO BOATS.

[The following comes from James H. Tomb, Chief Engineer, C. S. N., now of Jacksonville, Fla., who was one of those brave spirits ready to take a chance in the experiments with Confederate torpedo boats. An interesting article on the subject from him was published in the Veteran for April, 1914, and these comments are made after a perusal of ''Scharf's History of the Confederate Navy,'' the most comprehensive work so far on that subject, but still not all that could be written of the wonderful accomplishments of the Confederate seamen.]

I see from Scharf's account of the attack on the frigate Ironsides, October 5, 1863, at Charleston, S. C., by the Confederate States torpedo boat David, under the command of Lieut. W. T. Glassell, C. S. N., that the depth of the torpedo under water was three feet. As I attached the spar to the David, it was six and a half feet. We got a boiler tube from Wagger & Co., but found a flaw in it and had to cut it out; otherwise the depth would have been eight and a half feet and results to the Ironsides more serious and Lieutenant Glassell more successful. As it was, the Ironsides never fired another shot on Charleston.

Theattack on the UnitedStates steamship Memphisat North Edisto, S. C., March 6, 1864, by the David, under my command, was not a success on account of a defective tube on the torpedo. As we approached the Memphis, we got well under her stern before they saw us, and then they gave us a very hot fire from small arms, as they could not use the heavy guns. The steel cover on the David prevented the shots doing us any harm, as they all passed off. The next moment we struck the Memphis on the port quarter a good blow, some eight and a half feet below the surface, and the torpedo held ninety-five pounds of rifle powder. As the torpedo failed to explode, we turned to port and came at her from that side, but as her engines were working and the ship passing out, the blow was a glancing one and it failed explode again; and as the David passed under the counter of the Memphis, it took off part of our funnel. We then headed up and were under a very heavy fire from the heavy guns, but were not struck. At Church Flats we made an examination and found the first blow was a good one, as the tube was mashed flat and the glass tube containing acid was broken. The second blow was a glancing one and the tube was slightly bent, but glass tube not broken.

After the attack on the Ironsides by Lieutenant Glassell, I was placed in command of the David and instructed by Flag Officer John R. Tucker, C. S. N., to make any changes in the

David that I though best. I put one-sixteenth of an inch of steel over the hull above water, put a cap to the top of the funnel, and so arranged the torpedo spar that it could be lowered or hoisted from inside of the David to any depth or held out of the water, and it was in this condition when we struck the Memphis.

The scan

What the scanner made of this page, and what it is in the printed original.

  • “Theattack on the UnitedStates steamship Memphisat North Edisto” has lost its spaces; “I though best” is “I thought best”; “failed explode” is “failed to explode.”
  • “Wagger & Co.” is probably Wagener & Co. of Charleston.

Editorial notes

Statements in this article that are wrong, doubtful, or worth setting beside another account. The article’s own text is left as printed.

  1. “the depth of the torpedo under water was three feet. As I attached the spar to the David, it was six and a half feet”

    Tomb is the man who attached it, and his figure agrees with James Lachlison's independent account in Volume 16, page 78, down to the flawed boiler tube that cost them the last two feet. Scharf's three feet should be set aside.

  2. “the Ironsides never fired another shot on Charleston”

    Not so. The New Ironsides was shaken but stayed on station, and took part in the bombardments of Fort Sumter into 1864 before going north to refit. The damage was serious, not disabling.

  3. “the torpedo held ninety-five pounds of rifle powder”

    Larger than the sixty-five pounds Tomb gives for the earlier cutter torpedoes in his 1914 paper — the charge grew with experience, and both figures are his own.

  4. “instructed by Flag Officer John R. Tucker, C. S. N.”

    Correct, and it settles the initials: the “Flag Officer I. R. Tucker” of Volume 16, page 78, is John Randolph Tucker.