Norfolk Blockade

[USS ALASKA]

The blockade off Norfolk was lifted in Nov., 1864

Why was the blockade of Norfolk continued until Nov 1864 when the city was re-occupied by the North in May of 1862?

Was it because Norfolk was held under Martial Law? Was New Orleans kept under blockade after it was occupied by the North?

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[USS ALASKA]

Disclaimer - the below quotes were taken from the following thread, https://civilwartalk.com/threads/proclaiming-a-blockade-vs-closing-the-ports.99309/ and were not posted here by @Copperhead-mi nor should that poster be held responsible for my blatant misuse of those quotes.

I know this is an old thread but I thought this information might be interesting.

The blockade of Beaufort, North Carolina, Port Royal, South Carolina, and New Orleans, Louisiana was ended on May 12, 1862, with Proclamation 89; of Alexandria, Virginia on September 24, 1863 by Proclamation 105; of Brownsville, Texas on Feb. 18, 1864 with Proclamation 110; and of Norfolk, Virginia, Fernandina and Pensacola, Florida with Proclamation 120 issued November 19, 1864.

On April 11, 1865 Lincoln issued as one of his final official acts, Proclamation 126, closing many of the ports in the Southern states to all trade.

Excellent questions. I have no idea why the blockade was ended in New Orleans on May 12, 1862 when the city was under martial law for the duration of the war yet continued in Norfolk when it was also under martial law until the war's end. Maybe @Mark F. Jenkins or @AndyHall can weigh in on this.

Been thinking about this in regards to the intra-war cotton trade and Benjamin Butler. Could the reason for the continued blockade of Norfolk, long after her liberation, be to hinder Butler and his cronies or could Butler and his cohorts desired the upkeep of the blockade to keep a firmer grip on the traffic in an out of that area? I know, kinda Machiavellian but is there an Occam-esque answer to this?
388

Just spit-balling here,
USS ALASKA

 

[redbob]

As Norfolk is at the mouth of the James River which flowed from Richmond and had a number of Confederate Ironclads, I would think that the blockade was maintained on the slim chance that one of the Confederate Ironclads could get downriver, past the Union fleet, obstructions, fortifications, through Hampton Roads and out to sea.

 

[Carronade]

I think we may be talking about two different things, the legal state of blockade and the consequent prohibition of commercial shipping vs. the military consideration of maintaining warships to block any potential Confederate naval action. There was no reason to relax the naval alertness in November 1864; the Confederate James rive squadron was no less threatening that it had been previously. I agree it's a bit puzzling that Union-controlled Norfolk was not reopened to commerce in the same manner as New Orleans, Port Royal, Alexandria, etc.

 

[USS ALASKA]

I agree it's a bit puzzling that Union-controlled Norfolk was not reopened to commerce in the same manner as New Orleans, Port Royal, Alexandria, etc.

In this usage, did 'blockade' literally mean 'no commercial traffic' or only official tightly controlled traffic?
468

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[DaveBrt]

A blockade is created by naval units at sea. There was no need for such when entering Union-occupied Norfolk where control would be exercised by the army at the docks. Yes, an interesting question (Butler, cotton, smuggling, etc all come to mind as being involved in the answer).

 

[Carronade]

In this usage, did 'blockade' literally mean 'no commercial traffic' or only official tightly controlled traffic?
468

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

AFAIK the blockade of southern ports meant nothing in or out. I would expect that the lifting of the blockade at Union-occupied ports like New Orleans still allowed for regulation of traffic as well as normal functions like customs and medical inspections.

I'm curious as to why the 'blockade' of Alexandria was maintained through most of 1863. Might it have been as simple as no one realizing there was a need to raise the blockade?

 

[USS ALASKA]

I'm curious as to why the 'blockade' of Alexandria was maintained through most of 1863. Might it have been as simple as no one realizing there was a need to raise the blockade?

That, or they were just making sure they could keep the place!
500

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[USS ALASKA]

OK - 6 years later...

JOURNAL ARTICLE
Blockade or Trade Monopoly? John A. Dix and the Union Occupation of Norfolk
Ludwell H. Johnson III
The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography
Vol. 93, No. 1 (Jan., 1985), pp. 54-78 (25 pages)
Virginia Historical Society

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248777

Full article at above link on JSTOR with Google sign-in (In the upper right-hand corner of the linked page, there is a 'Log in' button. If you have a Gmail account, you have a Google sign-in and this will allow for free reading of 100 articles a month).

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

 

[1950lemans]