Navy O.R.-- Series I--Volume 4 [S# 4]
Operations In The Gulf Of Mexico.
November 15, 1860, To June 7, 1861. pp. 1-57
COMMANDANT'S OFFICE, PENSACOLA NAVY YARD,
Warrington, January 11, 1861.
SIR: You will proceed immediately with the steamer Wyandotte and render to the commanding officer of the store ship Supply aid and assistance in the delivery with all possible dispatch at Fort Pickens of provisions which he has been ordered to land there, and when the deliveries shall have been made and the proper receipts obtained you will take the Supply in tow to the anchorage opposite the principal wharf of this navy yard without delay.
I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
JAS. ARMSTRONG,
Commandant.
Lieutenant Commanding O. H. BERRYMAN,
Commanding U. S. S. Wyandotte, Pensacola Bay.
---------
Order of commandant navy yard, Pensacola, to Lieutenant Berryman, U. S. Navy, commanding U. S. S. Wyandotte, regarding cooperation with Fort Pickens.
COMMANDANT'S OFFICE, PENSACOLA NAVY YARD,
Warrington, January 12, 1861.
SIR: You will continue to cooperate with the commanding officer at Fort Pickens, but should an attack be made you will not fire a gun unless it may be actually necessary in defense of the vessel under your command. In the event of the capture of the fort you will proceed immediately to the station to which you have been ordered by the Navy Department. It is reported that this yard is surrounded by armed men.
I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
JAS. ARMSTRONG,
Commandant.
Lieutenant Commanding O. H. BERRYMAN,
Commanding U. S. S. Wyandotte, Pensacola Bay, Florida.
---------
Navy O.R.-- Series I--Volume 4 [S# 4]
Operations In The Gulf Of Mexico.
November 15, 1860, To June 7, 1861. pp. 1-57
NAVY DEPARTMENT,
April 24, 1861.
At a naval general court-martial convened in the city of Washington on the 12th day of March, 1861, Captain James Armstrong, of the Navy, was tried on the following charges and specifications, preferred against him by the Secretary of the Navy:
CHARGE 1: Neglect of duty.
Specification 1.--In this, that the said Captain James Armstrong, being on the 12th day of January, 1861, in command of the U. S. navy yard at Warrington, State of Florida, and a naval force thereat adequate to the defense of said yard, did then and there, on the demand of commissioners of the State of Florida, supported by a military force from the States of Alabama and Florida, surrender to them without resistance said yard, the public property thereat, and a portion of the force under his command.
Specification 2.--In this, that the said Captain James Armstrong, being on the 7th day of January, or thereabout, 1861, in command of the U. S. navy yard at Warring-ton, State of Florida, and the naval forces thereat, and having reason to apprehend the approach of hostile force, did then and there, and at all times subsequent thereto to the 12th day of January, inclusive, 1861, fail to take the ordinary and proper measures for the defense of said yard and the public property thereat.
Specification 3.--In this, that the said Captain James Armstrong, being on the 9th day of January, 1861, in command as set forth in the last preceding specification, did then and there, and at all times subsequent thereto to the 12th day of January, 1861, neglect to remove to Fort Pickens or other place of safety the men under his command, and munitions of war and other public property in his charge, or the latter to destroy, although at the time aforesaid he was in constant expectation of the approach of a hostile force which he believed he could not, with the forces under his command, successfully resist.
CHARGE 2: Disobedience of orders and conduct unbecoming an officer. Specification 1.--In this, that the said Captain James Armstrong, [being] on the 9th day of January, 1861, in command of the U. S. navy yard at Warrington, Fla., and the naval forces thereat, and in charge of the public property attached thereto and in receipt also at that time of an order from the Secretary of the Navy, dated January 3, 1861, of the tenor following: "Be vigilant to protect the public property. The commanding officer at Fort Barrancas has been instructed to consult with you. You will and to remove to a place of safety the public property in his charge, or to take any measures or to practice any vigilance for the protection of said navy yard and the public property attached thereto, except to double the guard at one of the gates of said yard.
Specification 2.--In this, that the said Captain James Armstrong, being in command of the U. S. navy yard at Warrington, Fla., and the naval force thereat, and under instructions from the Secretary of the Navy directing him to be vigilant to protect the public property and to cooperate with the commanding officer at Fort Barrancas, who was Lieutenant Slemmer, U. S. Army, did on the 10th day of January, 1861, then and there, in accordance with an understanding previously had with Lieutenant Slemmer, dispatch the steamer Wyandotte to aid him, Lieutenant Slemmer, in the defense of his post, Fort Pickens, Fla., to which he, Lieutenant Slemmer, had removed; and thereafter, to wit, on the 12th day of January, 1861, the said Captain James Armstrong, in violation of such understanding and his instructions, issued, without the knowledge of Lieutenant Slemmer, to Lieutenant O. H. Berryman, commanding said steamer, an order of the following tenor:
You will continue to cooperate with the commanding officer at Fort Pickens, but should an attack be made you will not fire a gun unless it be actually necessary in the defense of the vessel under your command. In the event of the capture of the fort you will proceed immediately to the station to which you have been ordered by the Navy Department. It is reported that the yard is surrounded by armed men."
Upon these charges and specifications the "finding" of the court is in the following terms:
The court, having maturely considered the whole case, with the evidence and the defense aforesaid, find as follows:
1. That the first specification of the first charge against the said Captain James Armstrong is proved, except as to the words in said specification "adequate to a defense of said yard."
2. That the second specification of the first charge against the said Captain James Armstrong is proved.
3. That the third specification of the first charge is proved, except that the accused did remove or send to Fort Pickens thirty men (a part of his command), thirty muskets, and some ammunition and a barge load of provisions.
And the court thereupon further find that the said Captain James Armstrong is guilty of the first charge of neglect of duty.
And the court doth further find that the first specification of the second charge against the accused is proved, except that thirty men (a part of his command) were sent by the said Captain James Armstrong to cooperate in the defense of Fort Pickens.
And they further find--
2. That the second specification of the second charge is proved.
And thereupon the court find the said Captain James Armstrong to be guilty of the second charge of disobedience of orders and conduct unbecoming an officer.
And the sentence of the court is---
That the said Captain James Armstrong be suspended from duty for the term of five years, with loss of pay for the first half of said term, and be reprimanded by the honorable Secretary of the Navy in general orders.
I have approved the sentence, and Captain James Armstrong will accordingly be suspended from duty for the term of five years from this date, with loss of pay for the first half of the said term.
In carrying into execution that part of the sentence which directs that Captain Armstrong be reprimanded in general orders I have a painful duty to perform. The sentence in this case might be considered severe without the addition of a reprimand; but a court composed of officers of the highest rank and most experienced in the service has deemed otherwise, and its judgment can not but be approved. The misconduct, indeed, which led to this trial does not affect alone the reputation and discipline of the naval service, but the interests of the whole people; and the age and length of service of the officer who has been found guilty of dereliction of duty under such circumstances, instead of constituting any claim [to] lenity, only render it the more imperative that the discipline of the service should be vindicated.
It was the duty of Captain Armstrong, as the commanding officer of the naval force at Pensacola--a duty which he could not but know was expressly and "strictly enjoined" on him by law--to show in himself "a good example of patriotism," as well as to be "vigilant in inspecting the conduct" of those under his command. Whatever the embarrassments of his position may have been, an earnest patriotism would have taught him to make the best possible use of all the resources at his disposal, adequate or inadequate, and to have imparted zeal by his example to those around him, instead of suffering the promptings of loyalty to be checked either by any speculations or conjectures of his own or any suggestions from others, as to the possible views and designs of superiors in office. Had he discharged his duty with stern fidelity he might have disappointed some, but, as events have recently shown in the case of another officer placed in similar circumstances, he would have been upheld by the applause of his fellow-countrymen and the respect even of antagonists. The safest as well as the most honorable course for every individual in the public service, whether commander or subordinate, is to be true to the flag of his country, no matter what dangers or difficulties encompass it.
This general order will be promulgated as usual at all the naval stations and on board of all vessels of the Navy in commission.
GIDEON WELLES,
Secretary of the Navy.
-----
Bringing the