fort mchenry - npshistory.com · report by facilitating the reproduction of old views in the museum...
TRANSCRIPT
.:4111 ·~·
..... ''Iii"' ' .
'
•
' ' 6i:.: ,, ,. ,:: Historic American Buildings Survey ·--
1
"' \..0-<)"E_':±=
·. ~3 AN ARCHITECTURAL STUDY
of
FORT McHENRY
Department of the Interior
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Eastern OfficC'-Division of Design and Construction
IN STOllAG!
B&W Scans Philadelphia 6, Pennsylvania S·Z-·c=S-
•
•
•
•
-HlSTORlC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY
Architectural Study
F o R T Mc H E N R Y
FORT MCHENRY NATIONAL MONUMENT AND HISTORIC SllRINE Baltimore, ~1aryland
,, LEE H. NELSON
ARCHITECT
January, 1961
DEPllN.TMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIOWIL PARK SERVICE
Eastern Office, Di.vision of Design and ConGtruction 143 South Third Street
Philadelphia 6, Pennsylvania
\ ' \ j
•
• '
FORE\\'ORD
This architecturally-oriented study is limited to the physical history of the "star fort" and its successor, the pentagonal fort, on Whetstone Point, Baltimore, from 1776 to 1857, Later changes, though interesting, are not included since the fort and buildings have not undergone any structural change since that date.
This study does not deal with the outworks or outer buildings, nor is it concerned "'ith. general llistoric events, except as they affected the construction and the alteration of the fort, Those aspects are discussed at length by Dr, s. Sydney Bradford and Franklin R, Mullaly, National Park Service Historians, in their report, "Fort McHenry, Historical and Archeological Research Project, 1957~1958." The "riter acknowledges their cooperation in undertaking the architectural evaluotion of the documents, which they collected and arranged for the Fort }JcHenry research library. Credit is also due G. Hubert Smith, Archeologist, l1issouri Basin Project, Smithsonian institution, for his assistance during th" smrimer of 1958, and for reading the te:><t 0£ this report.
The research and ""iting of this physical history was made possible by liistoric Am<lrican Buildings Survey funds, and was conducted during the summer of 1958 as a ll.A.B.s. project at Fort ~lcllenry. Four buildings ;:ere measured land recorded (under the ''riter 1s direction) by an e:><cellcnt team of student architects, as follows: Benjamin F. Barr II, University of Pennsylvania; Orville W. Carroll, University of Oregon; aarold A. Nelson, University of Michigan; Trevor R. Nelson, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and George L. Wrenn III, Harvard University. Two other structures (Buildings "A" and "C") \Oere not measured because of the time limitation.
The writer acknowledges the assistance of Fort McHenry Superintendent Robert H. Atkinson, for furnishing drafting space, and his successor, \./alter T. Berrett, for his overall cooperotion which simplifled tbe completion of the H,A.B.S. project. Wilbur H. Hunter, Jr., Peale tluseum, Baltimore, cont.-ibuted to this report by facilitating the reproduction of old views in the museum collection. The •1riter is especially indebted to Charles E. Peterson, Supervising Architect, Historic St.-uctures, Eastern Office, Division of Design and Construction, for his suggestions and direction of this architectural study.
The written data, tbe photographs, and the drawings com~ prising this st~dy are in the Historic American Buildings Survey collection in the Library of Congress, from which copies are available •
Lee H. Nelson Philadelphia January, 1961
• CHAPTER 1.
PART A.
•
PART B, •
CONTENTS
FORT WHE'fSTOt\E AND FORT MCHENRY (including Sally Port, Casemates, and Guard-Rooms), 1776-1857
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
FORT \.l~TSTONE, 1776-1797 •••••• , , • , , ••••••• , , , , ., • • l The Earthen Redo<lbt or "Star Fort''
Felix Louis Massenbach, 1776 Colonel Francis Ware, 1776 James Alcock, 1776
Plans for Rebuilding, 1793-1795 John Jacob Ulrich Rivardi, 1794•1195 Samuel Dodge, 1794 Alexis De Lcyrit~, 1795-1798
TllE BUILDING OF FORT MCHENRY, 1798-1800,., ••••• , •• , 1$ The Pentagonal Brick-f'aced Fo.-t with Five IJastions
Major Louis Tousard, 1798 John Foncin, 1799-1800
THE \/AR OF 1812,,,,, ••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••• 27 Colonel Decius Wadsworth, 1813 Captain Samuel Babcock, 1813
Fort Mclienry in 1814 Maximilian Godefroy, 1815
LATER IMPROVEMENTS, 1829-18!'>7 ••, ••, ••, ••, •• ••• •••,. 36 Lt. Henry A. Thompson, 1833-1839 Lt, Thomas J, Lee, 1834-1835 Captain Richard Delafield, 1836
CONCLUSIONS ••• , ••••••••• , •,.,, •., • •• •, • • • • •• , • • •,,. 47
Appendix l ~hetstone Point Lands •• , •••••••••••••••• SO
Appendix II Foncin's Estimate ••••••••••• ,, ••••••••• 54
Appendix Ill Foncin and Fort Independence, Boston, 1800-1802,.,, •• ,. ••···•••·••·•··•••··•··••· 55
Appendix IV Foncin and Fort Hamilton, Philadelphia, 1814 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 62
ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION .••..•. , •••.••••••••••••.• 67
ILLUSTRATIONS AND DRAWlNCS, •• ,.,,.(follow page).,,. 70
----------- - - -
•
•
• I
CHl\PTER II. C0Ml111ND1NG OFFICE!< 1 S OFFICE AND QUARTERS (Illustrations only)
CHAPTER III. THE PQ\,lllf.ll. l•L\GAZlllE
PART A. HISTORICAL INFORtlATlON,,, , • , •••• , • , , , , , , , , , ••• , , , • , 71
PART B. ARCHITECTURAL INFORt~TION., ..•. ,., .• , .•••••• , ••.• ,. 82
ILLUSTRATIONS Ai'ID DRA11INCS •• ,(follow page) •• ,,,.,,, 84
CHAPTER IV. OFF!CERS' QUARTERS (Illustrations only)
CHAPTER V, NO, l SOLDIERS' BARRACKS
PARl A, HISTORICAL INFORl'V<TION •••••••• , •• ,,., •• ,,, •• , •••••• 85
PART B. ARCHITECTURAL ll'IFORMllTION., ••••• ,,. •• ••,, • ••,, •,, •, 97
ILLUSTRATIONS AND ORAWJ;NGS,,,(follow page),, ••••••• 99
CHAPTER VI. NO. 2 SOLDIERS' ill\RRACKS
PART A. HISTORICAL 11-IFORJ.!i\TlON •••••••••• , •••••••••••••••••• 100
PART B. ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION ••• ••••••••••••••••••••••• lll
ILLUSTRATIONS AND DRAWI~GS, •• (follow page) •• , •••• ,. 113
I -----
•
•
•
CllAPTE:R I
FORT lffiETSTONE, the Revolutionary War earthen "star fort"; its successor, FORT MCHENRY, a brick-faced, five-bastioned pentagonal fort; and the Fort McHenry SALLY PORT, CASJ!MATES, and GUARD•ROOHS.
11.A.B.S. No, MD-63
'
•
•
•
Pl\RT A. Historical Information
FORT WHETSTONE, Wh~TSIONll POINT, Ef.L7!L10RE, 1776-1797
The Earthen Redoubt or "St~!'." :"ore"
As early as Janunry 20, 1776, tho Me1ryland Congress of Depu-
ties, or Convention as it ''"s populnrl)· calle<J, resol•1ed that "•••
the To\ln of Baltimore (should} be fortified if it bs practicable."1
On January 29, folloWi"lJ this initial rocJlution, the Council of
Safety, administrative body for t!1c Cor.vcnt;.on, rc1uest~:;l of SllIIluel
Purviance, Chairman of ths Co'"-~.ttte<J o:' Ol>sr.rvution in Baltimore
Town that,
said C0Tflmittc2 ''ot·lJ furnish tl'""' :rith " Cll<>rt of the North East E:~'.lch of ?ot~:>s<:o ~,;_,,.,,,_.. ,Oren \·~,1etstone
Point; als" th<o s~unjin<;s '· t""cJ r~:>cli of the Wnter between tho.t Point ~<'-d Go::o,•c': 1 o r~int e.lso a plan of Fortific1tion ,.,,. C!o<lVC<l>e:: [,-,") ~-' ;c-ioc or olhcr Ob· st-ructions to b~ p:c~c~. ;." tile ~-'--,-~r t:i:ccth<lr t-1ith an Estimate of t'.:.o :::clcn3.o.·
- -· ' ·.:-.~; !:cl1 o fortifi·
1Harylnnd Coupcil of Sc:£c\.:' Congress, January 20, '.77&, !'''::.'.>' hereafter as Ars_~. ~!~.
~o r·-. r.··.·<iti.~o '"~ ~Jaryland in ol ::-,·~'-"-''..· :-'.!, lC'. Cited
2Journal of the Coun~il of :~f~ty, ~-'''""'-':: 2J, 1776, Afs!!. !f2,, XI, 120. On the sa:r.c d1y, tC'" ~01~·---·-·_-- Cc-:<0t;,· Cc!""1ittee of Observation unanimously r~colv-'d,
That Messrs. ~--·~~1_1'.;!~'-;3."2'• }---- ~,_f'_·.::~-:, _D~:JEl-..!'_Grif· .ti.El!• WilliGm !Ouch~~'-'' ,,_,,,: '.cJo:~c:_--[;_ ;l~_c_;:~;:,_.,_\, '-"'- "Coiro.1ittee to devise and point out to the CC>c:~c;_;_ oc c.~i~t·r the best modes for fortif}'i<'3 a::1 de~"""i~.:; .:>0,1_::·:--: c_s 'r-o-_,n, ~'1.d to ma::e out an Estimate o~ tlte e::r--o»~ '" of c~-::1:.
Resolution of th!! 1l:i.!tir.•:irn C"unt:' CJ .. r"i:~,-~, Jn-iu~ry 2!1, 1716, American Archive~, Fourth Sari'>~, I\', ~7?>. c:;:t.·:I ''"'rcnfter as Amer. Arch.
J
•
•
•
' two gentlemen, James Alcock, Baltimore schoolmaster, and Felix Louis
~lassenbacn, occ»pation unknown, were to play a significant role in
f '
. 3 designing tll.e de enses at \,'hetstone oint,
On February 2, only two days after the conference, the Council
..ient to \·lhetstone Point, "to inform themselves of the situation thereof,
and consider 0£ tJ>e practicability of fortifying the same."4 lt is
very probable that the Baltimore Committee of Observation, together
with Alcock and ~\assenbach, met the Council at \·ihetstone Point on
that occasion and presented a p.-oposal for land fortifications and
channel obstructions, Such a proposal was submitted to the Council
and approved February 3. The Baltimore Coo.riittee agreed to undertake
tne business and complete tb.e same "with all convenient speed," for
the sum of ' "'6,200. The money was appropriated and worl< was begun
in earnest on February 13, as recorded four days later.
We have tuesday
ab[out] 50 hands
' at Whetstone ••• at ~ork on a battery since
3Journal of the Council of Safety, January 31, 177G, Arch. Md., XI, 127. Alcock's n111lle is sowetimes spelled Allcocl' in the documents, The correct spelling is uncertain. In the 1790 Census, Alcock is used. Hassenbach's name is variously listed as Maussenbaugh, ~lassenback, and Nassenbaugh. Upon resigning his c""""ission, the name is listed as Mr. Felix Louis Baron Massenbach.
4Journal of the Council of Safety, February 2, 1776, Arch. Md., XI, 133. The selection 0£ l/hetstone Point was based primarily on its strategic location. When the Council determined that 1'hetstone Point t•as the most ad.,antageo>is site for BaltiDJore•s defenses, the property was confiscated fraDJ the Principio Company, a British association of ironmasters, which had been engaged in the removal of iron-ore on along the Point. See Appendix I, "Whetstone Point Lands."
5Journal of the Council of Safety, February 3, 1776, Arch. Md., XI, 136.
6 sam>iel Purviance to the Council, February li, 1776, Arch. Hd., XI, 167 •
'
"ll11'-l lnOql~ op lll"" aq ll!'ll ~ ss,.u1snq s1l\ spU,,lS.J<>pun (4:>equ<>sSSJ·!] s.(,,s '9 eS.:zJ11
<ll m;q 'llJ" (:>1SJ tj'i>n.,quasse~t •.:zw. ua>]1'l s.,q "H "UO"'flU<>lU1 aljl .:za,..su" 111" l1 l"'ll pue 'paln"""" 11"" li:.:z:>A l1 S~Ut'll "'-!
'li:.:zall"1! .:zno ""1A Ol uaaq Sl'lj pu., l'!S1u ~""1 a.:zaq lOS ""1 •1ua:i
'
'"""ll"J se '<ill 'IX '"fii:i •;p:;;f '9ll1 'tl 4ol"!~ '11:>uno::i aql Ol l.'1ll"l s,xn1 "11!1111."\ u; punoJ s1 auo:isl"'<Jol :ie h.:zal:ieq <>'ll .:ZOJ uS;s<>p s 1q:>.,qu;isse11 o:i """"-""Ja11
6
"Z!T '!X '"Pl~ "'-!:>lV '9ll1 '61 ~.:z11n.lq3j 'IJ:>UnOJ Ol 110.:z.:z~::i .l<l:)SJ.Il1'1!g
·g'.11 'IX '•p11 ''1:>.llf '9ll1 'ot li:.:zen.:zqa;i 'Al3Jl!S JO 11:>uno::i "'ll ~o t«U.Inor .,".I<><•ui:>lu:;i us ss """1"1"S s;q JoJ pu<> 1-;ouno::i
"l'll pu11 uo;lu<>AUO:J "l"l "'ll 'iJu;pu<>ll<' u1 sasuadx3 s;t1 ;tOJ., 'spunod li:lU""l p;ed """ l]Ot!qu .. SSl!H 'UO"'fSS")'.UlillOO Sl'l Ol U01l1PP"" U!l
JO 4oeo.tddt> a•11 "9ll1 ·~ 'l"""H uo J\"a a>t,,adesa4:i "l p<>.teadde 'l<>llO
"'ll 'doots 4s;ll.1U aq1 ua4~ pa1s1xa llOJ .ln1s " l"'ll aauap;n<> ou ST
aJaq1 se 'A.1a11eq un~ au;1·<>Jo4s e 01 pa11m;t Aru;e1.1ao lS0111te se~
'9ll1 A.ten.1q<>.:J Jo <jlUOm "'ll llu-,.lnp ''loequass,,., s;no1 ><11aj_ l" uo;1oa.1
-TP a41 J.apun l"l"d auOlSl"'ll·I uo pa1oa;i.a uo;l"°'1J1'l:tO;J aqi
6°huo100
l"'ll "l S3SU<>J<>p a41 'Ill~ lSlSSE" 01 e;u;llJ.1A 01 paAOUla.l "'l .1a1e1
s'al<><jl llu;1oaJ.a suo11eo;ol'l"-OJ .lOJ s;1odeuuy l" puemap u; os1e ala~
(u...ou>tun ale 40;4~ ;o l""l><a aq1) s1ua1e1 llu;Jaau;Sua s;4 '1oeJ ur
•••uo;1eo1JTllOJ :t;aq1 llu;1oala u; uiaq1 01 A:less0>o;:>u Alai\ [tj:>squassew] pu;;i w1oi. 0:11n11 JO aall1tirllO:J aq:i }O ""'""ll""3 "'ll l<''ll puels.Iapun !''"
'9lLT '6t hle"-''l".:J:
P"l"'P 'tJOUnO:) Cll\l Ol '.IalS!"'-"9: <>Ill 'tlO.I.11':) S<>ll<'4:J 1llOlJ ia:i:ia'{ ""'
palEllSuo.nap Atdm" s; A<;:>ede~ s;q; 111 ssau1n1asn s,t!~l!quasser.z t'lu;o.:r
aUOl"l"'lll uo pa:i~a.Ia aq 01 S>tlOl"l at]l ]O all.Illt\O u; P"~"ld A1qeqo.Id
pus 'A:ul!dll!O:J A.Iatt••·'V s,p.IOJ1"'1 "T"lde:) JO ·11 pZ paUOJSS}W'JJQ~ Sel"l
qoequasseH '"•'"''-"" JO "'-'-"lJ s1•11 o:i ~o;ld 'oi: "'-""'-'l"J uo
c
~
•
•
•
,---------- - -
•
•
•
4
the Otter not only ca•_1e«'1 eO>sl.:ur;t:lon;; ~" bl' pl--ced in the chanoel
betWll!en Whetstone and Gorsuch 1s 10 l:'oint, but motivated the hasty
erection of another gun battery and a b:reastwork, or lo-lying,
earthen "star fort." 11 Tbough the British sloop turned tail and
wei:i.t "provlin,g" down the bny, the Balti:n~re defenders were detetmined
to "puah" the ne"' wo-,,!<s on the Point as a shew of strength against
tl>e marauders' return. By March 16, the C"""-'ittee re;;>otted,
Our Fort at 1''1ctstoc-. is ready to \llOunt 8 guns, and we shall us<> e.very e·<ec·t;cn tc <-::pedite tc.12 _______ " ___ " _________ _
10,:ha chco:,1cl "DGstructic11~" i ~lo.:1~<! the sinking of small vessels and the il',tallntion of a 'ooc::i. Gc.d iro;, chain between the UICI points, The vessels ~·.o~e raJ.~"d ~ J_/2 no·.itLc: later.
llon y.,._,_..cl1 7, c:ily t~·o d:r:'s "~~~-r the elerm caused by the Ott..-.:, the Counc:il rc<:u'.lst'.l-.i of th:. ~~lt-;"1,l'-'"" Ccll'l!l:ittee, "You will acquaint us as' soor. as yo11 '"'"" 1<'.th "":' M~as1Jres you may think ne<:essary for your Dafe;,ce tl10:: r..a~r l<:> in c··:: Pc·,·2r, ttnd \le will for'lolard them with all expedition," Cccinc!l to :;a:tt..,or~ C~:rt".\Lttee, March 7, 1776, Arch. Md., XI, 20~.
The sar.e Gc.y, .:'.,':! I:'1.'.to c,-,,,~'·;c~ Resolved, "That a Breaat~ "'°rk be illllllCdiatel~· t~'-"-''"' "' ··t t'.1~- !_>-,;: ·_: _ •• ," t:o.l timore Ccnnmittee, March 7, 1776, ~C'::-5 .. ,,_:c.:r.~~· Fo1:r•'1 S~:<.c~, ll, l':l~.
Followi";; t:-~$ d~ci"to,,, o" L:·.oct, I!, the Council sent l:J.000 to the Balt. Co-:an., to -lefr~y roj_l~tl -. ~"-'-''""~"0 o~.casioned b)I the alarm, and also asked for a:o '''-c"'u"t'-~s '>f ":-'."' ~""- ~·::<>.n~.c« on the fottifications at Wlietstone Point," :;.,c C::i:o;>cil \:::> E:il_tiruo1·c C=ittee, JUD.e 5, 1776, Arch,_1:!1~· Xt, 405, .1~>;..:·'l c~ t:''°' C::ii.:::~l.1, l~rch 28, 1776, ~!!!ho XI, 294, Jour:i<'l o!' tl:<! CcL·ncil, Sci':e.o'.;cr 12, 1776, Arch. Md., XII, 266, Council t::i E:::lt•.~~ra Co=itt~~, !:t.'.'Ce':!bar 28, 177f>, Atch. ~ .. _. XII, 308,
12.nalti"~'·e Co=itt'.'-e to Cc-'":~i~, !1'.'-rch 16, 1776, Arch, Hd., XI, 255-56. 'Ih2 pr0>Jle.:> ;orts~s as t" ,,·:c~''c~ ~h'! term "Fort" iB here \lsed interchaugeaJly "it'., the batt<l::ic~, c::- •.;h~tl~ar it actWllly ellllde.B to the "star fort" '-~ c''"''"""J.ly ~::>:~:-i:.c~ 0'1. After mid~March, however, tb.ere are frequent refcre"cc~ ~o the "£ctt" 0:1 \)'.1atston:>- Point, ..tl.ich seeco to distinguish die batteries frc'' t'c:i ":;~'.'.!:" fort," See for ex• 11111pie, Maryland Daleeo.tcs to ll.,,w-.--Yoc·k Ccor·'Ll.tte2 of :;.,f.._t)', Karch 19, 1776, filaer. Arc_.,,_, l'ourth Sc:.'.ie~, :t, 4111, "Fo:·ttfications and batteries are no1• erectin3,,."
------------------ -
•
•
•
5
Not only did they expedite cOlllpletion of the fortifications, but
there was talk of adding buildings at the Point. ln a letter to the
Council, Nathaniel Smith cotr.rnitted to writing, " ••• what wuld be
necessary to have done about the fort." lie proposed the addition
of ", •• a Magazine, Hospital and Laboratory, wh.ich in my opinion no
fort oic garrison ought to be without, •• "13 Later, in May, S1Pith asked,
I should [sic] be glad to have Orders to git [sic] a Flagg {sic] for the Fort, & to know lffiat Device you wou'd {sic] have on it (if aney) {sic],
and pressed for the erection of a maga~ine, "as we Cannot possibly
do well without it,"14
A plan, apparently for the m.agazine, was submitted by Colonel
Francis Ware, then stationed at the fort, Though the Council hesi-
tated to advance any sums for t!i.at purpose, they left the matter to
the discretion of the Baltimore Committee, and that sroup determined
to proceed with the magazine. h'hen Colonel Ware left the fort, he
left the erection of the magazin~ in the hands of Nathaniel Smith
but the powder storage house was not actually built.15
1'N, Smith to Council, March JO, 1776, Arch. Md,, Xl, 300-301.
14Nathanie1 Smitlt to Council, May 20, 1776, Arch, Md., XI,l.o3l.o,
lSFor reference to Ware's plan, see Baltiroore Committee to Council, July 7, 1776, .~rch. Md,, XII, 6. For the Council's rejection of the request for funds, see Council to Baltimore Com:nittee, July 7, 1776, Arch, Md., XII, 7. Regarding the disposition of Ware's design, see Nathaniel Smith to aarrister Carroll, July 18, 1776, Arch, Md., XII, 75. For other documents referring to the planned but unexecuted erection of the magazine, see Council to Baltimore Co!llDittee, December 5, 1776, •\rch, Md., ltll, 508, Council to N, Smith, June 'i, 1777, Arch, Md., Xlll, 278, Nathaniel Smith to Gov. Johnson, June 3, 1777, Maryland State Papers, Brown Books, 62, ~. 60, Geo. P. Ki>eports to Gov. Lee, July 12, 1780, Arch. Md., XLV, 11,
•
•
•
Design of the earthen "sta1· fort," tl1ough not certain, is
attributable to Ja.,,es Alcock. f,!cock designed and erected a "forti·
fication" at \.lhetstorie, but wl1.;it part of the \lotl<s he designed is not
clear. The relative chronological sequence of the supporting evidence
bears out the assumption that while l~assenbach designed the gun bat-
teries, t,lcock designed the eartllen "star fort."
Alcocl<, together "it\1 i'.iassenbach, had conferred with the
Council i11 January 1776, on the subject of fortifications, but he
docs not seem to l>ave had a hand itl the earliest defenses (i.e.,
the gl.ln battery) on 1-ihetstone Point. Massenbach had left for Vir-
ginia shortly after the appearanc" of the ~. and tl1" subsequent
ere<:ticn of tl>e "star fort" was probably put into the hands of
Alcoc)<; •
On July 27, 1176, Cit arlea C<!rroll 'Kote of Alcock,
lle l1as been as I am Informed of great Help to the Gentn of Balt. To~~ in Desi!ning and ErectiOf; their fortification at Whetstone. 6
t.nd on September 6, 1776, F.lcoc!< was paid forty-five pounds out
of the llestern Shore Treasury, "for thirty days' Engineering,"
but ''hethcr this pa}'IDent was for services rendered at Baltimore
o;.- elsel•here is not stated. 17
16aarrister Carroll to Council, July 27, 1776, Arch. ttd., XII, 130-131.
l 7Journal of the Council, September 6, 1776, !1rch, Md., XII, 259 •
•
•
•
7
In late August 1777, the !l;itish made another appearance near
the mouth of the P<>tapsco, but Baltimoi:eans '""'" somewhat better
prep,.red on this occasion, Nathaniel Smith notified ~he Governor
t;int t>e a11d the militia, "shant give up the Fort, ,.,itl1out giving
them smr"' trouble," and tl1at if the British should attempt the fort,
he promised to give ther.1 a warm reception. 18 Tl1e high state of pre-
paredness evoked editorial con-.ment from t!1e l•Jaryland Ga~ette:
The fort, batteries, and boom, at llhetstone Point are in excellent order; an air-furnace is erected on the Point, from which red thun£~rbolts of war will issue to meet our invading foes.
The British war vessels left the Patapsco area without forcing
such a demonstration <>rid local attention turned to more domestic prob-
lems, especially t11e so-called B~ltiir.ore Insui:rection which gre" o<.lt
of the distresses made under the ·'~lilitia La,.."
In 1778, soroe temporary OarracJcs, on the lo>1er slopes of
lihetstone Point, housed "'ounded soldiers but in one doctor's opinion,
"the Fort is a very u;1fit place for an hospital, •• because a Situation Su;.-rounded witl> l·!ater in itself sickly must in Consequence make it more Difficult for People allready [sic] Sicl< to recover.,."20
13 i1. Smith to Gov. Johnson, August 22, 23, 1777, Arch. l.Jd., )&I, 340•42,
19~larylond Gazette (Baltimore), September 9, 1777.
20or, Wiesenthal to Maj. Nathaniel Smitl1, October 22, 1778, l•Iarxland State P<>rers, Brown Books, lb8, V, 114. f.s to the "fitness" of the fort, see Bro"'Il Books, 169, V, 116, 172, v, 115, Red Books, 318, XXI, (i6-l,
•
•
•
However, the fort '·'as maintained during the t;inter of 1778,
equ(pped with an armarne11.r of 38 cannon.21
In t\1e spring of 1779, anothei: British force appeared in t\1e
bay nnd t01c tempo o!: activity at fort ~H1etstone once again increased,
bllt the Ci<pected ottack never materialized. 22 \·1it\L the concentration
of the enemy's effotcts ill Vlrginia, much of tile personnel, supplies,
a\1d effo•-t that had gone to maintuin Fo<:t \·!hetstone was diverted for
tl1c use o;: the Continental l>rmy in Virginia.
During the wint:er of 1779, the barracks "" l!hetstone Point
were considered for hospital llSe of "ounded French c..-oops, then in
Virginia, but the lack of facilities and local reluctance to quarter
the ,;ounded French conspired against the move, and thus saved "a
good deal of t.-o.,ble," in one unofficial view.23
lJy November 1780, tlle active usefulness of the fort at Whet-
stone had passed, and its commander, Capt. George P. ~eeports, was
advised by the Council to remove all but four or five cannon "to some
Place of security in the Cou"try, together "'ith the Arms, Airuiunition,
21 rnventory of C,nnon, etc., November 2, 1778, tlaryland State Papers, Red llooks, 719, IX, .'.lOJ.
" Poi: correspondence pertaining to this, the third threatened attack, see l'iaj. l'lathaniel Smith to Gov. Thomas Jo\lnson, May 16, 1779, '""'''land State Papers, ,led Book~, 403, XXV, 64, Council to A. Buchanall, i-;;.y 22, 1779, E><ecutivc Pape.-s, llsll 0£ Records, t.nnapolis. Council tor,. B<Jct,anan, ~lay 19, 1779, Arch. l1d., llXl, 403. Council to R. Dallam, ~iay 16, 1779, ''•cl1. 1'1d., XX1, 394.
2.'.lJas, C~ll1oun to Gov. Thomas S. Lee, tlovcmber 2~, 1779, ~· l1d., XLIII, 272-73, Jas, Cal'1oun to Gov. Lee, November 30, December 6, 1779, Executive Papers, \iall of Records, Annapolis •
•
•
• I
Accoutriments [sic) and public Stores .. 24 ••• Apparently, the eKecu-
tion of this order was delayed several mont\1s, for in January 1781,
J<eeports ''"-S instructed to repair and remove all except four cannon,
to Ell< ~"!idge Landing. The Council fea1·ed that tile enemy, l1aving
tal<en Richmond, lmuld "visit us as soon as they have accomplished
t:1eir object in Virginia, ''hich ~'" are satisfied 1s to plunder, har
and distress our Peoplc, .• "25 rass
Once again, in April 1781, Baltimoreans believed themselves in
dat1ger because of enen•y action in the Maryland end of i:he Chesapeake,
and took appropriate steps, A warning system was established to pre-
vent a surpr1se attaclc on the city, the militia was posted at \l'het-
otone l>oint and in to'Wn, and gun carriages at the fort were strength-
ened to be serviceable, 26
The withdrawal of the British vessels
fro"' tl1e bay relieved Baltimore of its concern for safety, and the
militia was dismissed, 27
24council to Capt. Geo. P. Keeports, November 9, 1780, ~· Md., XLIII, 356.
2Scouncil to Capt, Ceo. I<eeports, Ja11uary 11, 1781, ~Md., XLV, 270, Council to Gen. Buchanan, January 11, 1781, Arch. Md., XLV, 271. -
2GAndr~w Buchanan to Gov. Lee, Apr1l 4, 1781, Executive Papers, \!all of Records, Annapolis, Council to the Inhabitants of Ilaltirnorc 'J:o""1, .i'pril G, 1781, t\rch. l·!d., XLV, 380·81. w. Smith, g _tl, to Gov. and Council, .~pril 4, 1781, Arch. I•Id., XLV, 160. Jeremiah Jordan, ~ tl, to Col, Richat:d B<>rnes, April 3, 1781, Letters to the Governor and Council, Jan. l - Dec, 31, 17Gl, 160. Council to ,\ndrew Buchanan, April 5, 1731, XLV, 378. Sam. Sciitll to Cov. Lee, April 12, 1781, Letters to the Covernor and Council, Jan. l - Dec. 31, 1781, 183. Council to Ccpt. Keeports, Apt"il 14, 1781, Arel>. lid., XLV, 400,
27 counci1 to /l1>dre'"' Buchanan, A.pril 26, 1781, Arch. Md., XLV, 417 •
•
•
•
• [
\>litl> th.e ent,-enchrnent of tl>e Dritish at Yo;ktown, the enemy's
designs upon Baltimore were 1·e1axed, and the centec of attention
shirted to Virginia, In short, "Maryland is relieved by the Enemy's
establishing themselves in York river."28
During the follo1•ing two months of August and September 1781,
much of the previollsly confiscated British-held land on the 1>eck of
l·lb.etstone Point was sold at public auction, under the direction of
Nathaniel Ramsey, one of the Con:missioners for Confiscated British
Property. The remain(Jer of the lane occupied by the "star fort" and
batteries was not sold until the following year, on July )0, 1782. 29
Just before the SepLember 1781 auction, otl>er events transpired which
occasioned the earliest known drawings of Fort Whetstone~
In the summer of 1781, British forces, under the command of
Lt. General Earl Cornwallis, decided to concentrate their efforts in
Virginia, hoping to divide the colonies, cut off their supply lines,
and thus bring about a more decisive regional conquest. ~!~th the
British well established at Yorl<to;.n by Septembe• 1781, and the
expected attnck Gil Baltimore apparerrtly postponed, tlle importance
of stoutly manned defenses on \1'hetstone Point became secondary to
the impending crisis at Yorkto<m.
28James t1cllenry to Gov, Lee, August 6, 1781, Letters to the Governor and Council, Jan. l • Dec. 31, 1781, 394,
29see Appendix I, "l'hctstone Point Lands."
L
• Consolidatioll of tt1e ,\lli.ecl forces in the 'lorkto<;n - llilliams-
•
•
burr; ao:-ea, necessitated tl•e overland march of the French army from
Ne\rpo>'.t, Rl1ode Island, in tl>e summer of 1701. 1Ju.-in<1 this overland
n;arc:,, the F•-cnch .:irmy under tile leadership oi Count de llochambeau,
passed through Baltimore. f,ssigned to the staff of f:ochambeau tor
ti:is marcl1 was one Captain Louio-Alel<at1dre Bcrt11ier (1753-1315), who
leit ;i. descciptive and graphic account of the marcl,, i;-, t:1e form of
jo,,rnuls and 30
maps, It is £ror.\ tne Barthie.- and Roc1>ambeau p<lpers
ti1at we have the earliest extant grapnic docume11ts pertai.1ing to the
defenses on \Jhetsrone Point. T'1e field nteasurei;ients for t:.e nerthier
mup (see illustration i1o. l) ''"'"" pLesur.iably tal<<'-n du<ini; the Camp
~ Baltimore sojourn, ,cpterober 12-15, 1731.31
l·ieasurernents for
similar but more elaborate 01ap in the Rocfiambc'1u Collectiol1 were prob·
ably made during the same encampment, " 30Papers of Louis-P.lexandre l!crthi.cr, <·<anuscripts Division,
Princeton U11iversit} Library, Princeton, 1-lew Jersey. The w-citer ac· knowled~es the assistance and er1thusiasm of Howurd c. Rica, Jr., Cb.ief, Dept. Rare Books &. Special Collections, in maki11g ;:cadily availuble his knowledge o~ tl1e Berthier Papers.
31"!lada et port de Bultinto1·e," 12-IS Sc[>tember, 1781, Papers of Louis-Alexandre Bi=rthier, GcOUf' 16, Pup 8, Princeton University Lib<acy.
32Map l-lumber 13, Rochambeau Collection, l.773-1730 (?), Library of Congress, It seems probable t>1nt this map was actually drawn in September 1781, during Rochambeau's march from Newport to Yorktown, rati1er t\1an the tcntutive 1779-1780 <lute ascribed to it. It is also conceivable that Be.-thier was the cartographer (oc the mup in the Rocl•ambeau Collection, t:,e map being an improved second copy presented to Roci1ambeau by Bci:tl1ier •
•
•
•
•
t.riother map, published n decade later (1792), of "!lALTI~;ORE
t\ND I!'SEiWIRONS," "as dra>m by c nFrench G"ographc,-," A, 33 P. Folie.
T:1is particular h!ap (see illustration No, 2) is obviously roo.-e de-
tailed in its treatment of Baltimore than with the ;;environs," so that
the port;:-ayal of Fort '.!ltetstone as a r.1ilitary instnllati_on leaves
something to be desired.
However, the three dra"ings accredited to Berth.ier, Roc:1am-
baeu, and Folie, are the only kno>m extant eighteenth century plans
of Fort \lhetstone. l.'ith respect to the earthen "star fort,'' they are
basic<'llly ;_., agreeoent, lhat is, in plan, for rione of them include
sectiorls, details o.- supplerc1entary descI"iptive data.
Since this study docs not deal "itl1 the out<1orl<s, the ea.closed
i'ortification sl>O'Wn on tl1ese th•·ee drao1ings may be described as an
earthen embankment, conforming to a five-pointed stai- in plan, sur-
rounded by a ditch, and built a short distance northl1est of, and on
higher ground r;1an the two rou8hly parallel shoreline gun batteries
on t11e lo1;et tip of l·~>etstone Point, None of the plans show guns
mounted on tbe ''star fort," thougi. there must have been some in that
position prior to 1781. No b"ildings ar" sho"1l within the enclosure.
Such a defensive "'orl< should be classed as a redoubt rather
t:1a11 a fort, since it was secondary to the more important "water
batteries.'' The "sta<: fort" "'as hastily thrown up and rudimentary
in functior:, for none of the chen '1vailable trcat1.<:e$ on fortifications
rccoltD:Ilended the star-plan because of the indefensibility of the
})"Plan of the Town of Baltimore and It's Environs," A. P. Folie, 1792, Gator Collection, Enoch Pr,,tt Free Libl·a,·y, Baltimore •
ERRATA
FOREll'ORD, line 23. "land" to read "and." p. 3, line 18. "Otter" to read "Otter." p. 5, line 7. "should" to read "shoud." p. 12, line 23. "treatices" to read "treatises," p. 27, line 9. "1815" to read "1814" p. 44, line 17. "'star fort'" to read "fort," p. 48, line 22. "only t\Oo months" to read "just." p. 49, line 3. "for" to read "fort." p. 49, fn. 112. "July 13, 1814" to read "lJth 7ber 1814." p. 62, line 18. "has" to read "µas" p. 62, fn, 135. "13 July 1814" to read "13th 7ber 1814," p. 63, line 12, "names" to read "named." p. 75, line 13. "Mai<imilien" to read "Maximilian." p. 101, line 4. "star fort" to read "fort."
•
•
•
•
;:e•et1trant angles between the star-points.34
Following the capitulation of Cornwallis on October 19, 1781,
the defenses at Baltimore lay 1n an unimproved, <tnd indeed neglected,
physical condit1on unt1l tl1e ea•·ly l790's, when interest in coastal
fortifications was revived as a result of difficulties with France.
Plans foe l\ebuildini; 1793·1795
The hostilities with revolutionary France motivated an elab-
orate system of coastal defenses along the Atlantic Coast states.
The enabling Congressional legislation entitled "An Act to provide
for the defence of certain ports and ti.arbors in the United States,"
was approved March 20, 1794, and granted authority to tlle President
to direct the task of building fortifications and to receive land
from "any state" for that purpose,3 5
Pri.or to this approval, a llouse cmr.mittee reported on such
harbors " •• ,as require to be put in a state of defence, '"-ti> an
estimate of the expense thereof,,." B<lltimore's share of the
fortification program was limited to $4225.44, intended to cover
all P"'"pets, embrasures, battery platforl:ls, redoubt, tlvo magazines
and barracks. 36 This sum was not intended to provide for struc•
tures of a permanent nature, but rather of earth, sod, and timber.
34J ,J,U, Rivardi, military et>gineer, late•· criticized the design as follows: ",,.that redoubt is of a very bad defense; all the fires being oblique and all the intrant [sic] angles indefensible," RivardL to Gov. Thomas s. Lee, April 13, 1794, Jolaryland Historical Magaz1ne, VIII (1913), 286-290.
35u.s., Congress, The Debates and Proceedings in the Con-8ress qf the United States ••. , 3rd Cong., 1834, IV, pp. 1423·24. Cited hereafter <is Annals of Congress, IV,
30u.s., Congress, American State Papers, ~ocuraents, Legis· lative and Executive of the Conures" of the United States, 1832 [XVl], pp. 61, 63. Cited hereafter as American State Papers, XVI,
•
•
•
Selecting a site for the new fortifications at Baltimore was
not a problem. Tl1e old fort at \1hetstone Point was still the most
strategically advantageous location for defense of the harbor. It
ioay be recalled that the !~evolutionary ~Jar fort had been built on
land confiscated from British i~terests. By 1782, all that land had
been sold by the Maryland Council. Although several private indi-
viduals owned that end of the Point occupied by the "star fort" and
batteries, nothing had been done in the way of improving the site
for speculative enterprises. In fact, the Point had been badly dis-
turbed by people digging for "red ochre," i.e., iron ore.
To make this land available to the federal government in-
volved not only '1n act of the ~l"ryland Legislature, but consent of
the property owners as well. 37 Title transfers did not take place
until after construction had been started •
While the initial planning 'Which predicated the general ex•
tent of B"ltimore's defenses lay in the hands of General Samuel
Smith of the l-laryland Militia, the actual execution of those defenses
;ms entrusted to John Jacob Ulrich Rivardi, a French artillerist and
military engineer, who was appointed by the President shortly after
the enabling act "'as approved. Rivardi's corr<nission included the de-
sign of fortifications fo;: the cities of Baltimore, Alexandria and
Norfolk. 38 His instructions front the Secretary of !•!ar, dated
37see Appendix I, footnote 119.
38/\lthough Rivardi is usually regarded as a Frenchman, or a Frencl1 speaking Swiss, it is ir>teresting to oote that Moreau de St. Mfry, in his Norfolk sojourn, Clay, 1794, described the fortifications erecting thei;e as being built "undei; direction of !1, de Rivai;d [sic), an Italian engineer.·' ~Joreau de St. ~1i'.:ry 1 s American Journey, [1793-1793], tr. and ed. by l"'nneth and Anna M. Roberts (Garden City, N.Y.: 1947), 58.
•
•
•
l•larcl1 28, 1794, cover the scope 3nd intent of suc;1 defenses, 39 The
~nstructions also provided fo;; a,~ agent or assistant to carry out
the engineer's plans. Such a inan was Sam<Jel Dodge, selected by
l•"3jor O. ll. l·lilliams (Md., 1st Cavalry) as a "very ,,·ell informed,
active, ~calous Citizen."40
Unfortunately, Riv11.1·di's plans have disappeared, but the
covering documents arc ei<L.lnt, ''hich reveul his professional criti-
cism of the earthen "stct;;- fort" as origin'1lly designed, perhaps by
schoolmastci· ~!cock.
T11e Star foci; never""" fi'11sh'd intii·ely [sic] 6. the ditches are partly !itled l·11tr1 the Eo.<:ti1 of tile bi:eastworks, thJt [!\ind of] cedoubt is of a very bad defence; all the fires being oblique and all the intrant [sic] angles indefensible ••• 1
Rivardi proposed to correct these defects by constructing two
formal bastions to replace points on t;,e ""-"tern side of the earthen
"sta>'. fo.:t." This llas lntco1dcd to accon1plis:1 two objectives: 1) hel~o
prevent an enemy landing 011 t:>at side, and, 2) .i.llo'' the important
entrant angles to be covered by a fire at right angles.
39"lnstructions to John Jacob Ulrick [sic] ;1.ivardi, acting ns te01porary Engineer in th<:?- scrv1cd oi: the United States," from H, Knox, Sec. of \lar, March 28, 179:,, ~~ican~t_ate Pape;.-s, XVI, 87-88,
400.H, \lilliams to Gov. Tl1os. fi. Lee, April 7, 1794, Otho !lolland \lilliams Papf'rs, ~Jnry~·11:-.; Hi~torical $ociety, Baltimore, Cited hereafter as O.li. \·l'c1Lia"1'' Papers. Se\'<>ral other men were considered for the position o{ superintending the 1<010ks and disbursing the rooney. 011c of these'""" ,·as Louts '\enry '.louteiller, Chief of Brigade cf t.rtillery in the il1·my of !',-ance. t\ppdrentl)· he declined. Also considered <oas Francoio G-rdy, a "prc.ctical" Frenc:t enginec1·, recommended by ;1.i-vard1; but l·)illiams selected DoJg<- i_nstcad,
4 lsupra, footnote 34 •
•
•
• l
Upon one of these bastions, he planned a battery to cover the
land app.-oac\1es, said battery to be cor:iplcmcnted ~1ith a po~1der maga-
zine on t;1e terreplain of thut bastion, 1-le (urthet intended to face
the b<lstion with "1230 feel of stcong timber at" shilling a foot,"
Tnc appropriation '"'" not sufficier;t to alto'' for converting
the othec star points to ba~tions, To con>pensute io• tltis, f-ivardi
sug~ested that the undefended flanks of i:l>c breast"'ork (star fort)
be protected witll chevaux-de-frise, "l1ich he esti.n1ated ,,,.,uld require
about 1200 p<llisades. Tl1e bulk o[ Rivardi's covei-ing letter for his
plans deals t•ith improvement£ to the t<'o lower gun batteries.
To i:;et the >.'ark underway, Rivard1 "drc''·•·the lines on tl1e
ground, and prepared dra,,ings and sections on a large scale," fol:
the use of Superintendent Somuel Dodge. lie directed Dodge to beg1r.
witl> the lower battery improvements, since that battery \>'Ould be most
important in th.e event of an attack.42
f,fter l:ivard1's departure for i..•oi:-folk, S=uel Dodge pursued
the wol:k, but various delays prevented h1r.i from finishing the "lower
worl< of the fo.-tifi.cation" until the middle of 43
September 1794.
Octobe.- 30, when Dodge's services ceased, he had used all the then
available funds,
W"nen Rivard1 returned to Bc.ltimorc in January 1795, he was
obviously disturbed that Samuel Dod~e had 3pent <ill 0£ the appropri<i~
tion upon the low~r >."Orks, and uport "additional barraclcs &c. which
" J. J. U. !'ivardi to Sec, of >1.,r, A.pril 20, 1794, Amctican State Papers, XVl, 89.
43 s muel Dodge to Get>. Knox, Sec, of \l«r, September 14, 1794, Am..rican State Papers, ;:.,'l, 92~93. See also S. Dodge to Otho H. l.1illia1ns, <1ay 19, 1794, 0, l\, >l~•liams l'apei:s. s. Dodge to Sec, of \.J,,r, July 8, 10, 1794, t\m~>:>can Slate Papers, XVI, 92,
•
•
•
were not in [Rivardi'sl plan, •• " Furthermore the "star fort" improve-
ments had not been started, thus requiring a "further Supply of 4000
Dollars to proceed in that business as soon as the Season will allow
' .,44 ". It is clear that Rivardi did not intend to rebuild the old
earthen "star fort,'' oi: breast,.'Ork as he called it, but merely to
reshape two of the points into bastions, fac~d with wood, to be used
for batteries, This was intended to protect the Ior.-er ,,,o.-ks fI"om a
land attack, since the fort could not be e~pected to contribute de-
fensively in any other capacity. However there is no evidence that
Rivardi's limited proposal was carried out, and the oft-seated as-
sertion that Rivardi designed the brick-(aced pentagonal fort,
actually built later, is wit/1out basis in fact. Tl1e government did
not even acquire the land occupied by the old "star fort" until
179[l and later.
Even though Rivardi's plans foi- developing the "star fort"
"'ere abandonEd, the outer '"orks '"ere to be the objects of additional
expense. Since Rivardi's obligat.Lons kept him busy elsewhere,
another man 1•as appointed to fill the position vacated by Samuel
Dodge. 45
44Rivardi to Gov. Jolin Stone, J<1nuary 15, 1795, ~!aryland Historical Magazine, V (1910), 291-292.
45 rn addition to designing other fortifications, Rivatdi w<1s a field office.- in the regiment of 1\i-tillerists and Engineers, a school established ~i.ly 9, 1794, at l•est Point. James Ripley Jacobs, The Bc&innirt)( of the U. s. Army, 1783-1812 (Ptinceton: 1947), 289 •
•
•
•
Alexis De Leyi:it~ 1•as appointed as civilian assistant engin··
eer on t!ay 3, 1795, and continued in that capacity for three and otic
l1alf years until his services ceased," on :\ovember 15, 1798, The
extent of De Leyritz's sei:vices (or his background) are not kno~o1,
The small sums expended durin(l the first three year~ of his appoint··
ment (less than $3,000), 'lCre applied to improving the outer works
rather than the "'star foi:t,"
THE B1JILDI«G OF :00RT i'lcHEiiRY 1798-1800
The last t''O years of tnc eighteenth century uere most int~
portant, arcl1itectucc"lly, o.t ' .. 'hetotone Point, fo<: it '"'S during
tb.at short period that the first significa11t cbange~ took place
upon Snd \;ithin the "star fort"··
The quasi-wai: "'itl1 ic11>1ce stimulated the augmcnt'1tion of all
coastal fortifications, and frO«\ 1798 t:o 1800 ovec $80,000 of feder-
funds were expended to bring tl1e fort to an effective defensive stu-
" tus, About five months prior to Ale~is De Leyritz's termination,
another engincc;;, '.1ajc'· Louis Touserd •.o::s apr'>Lnted ~o furnish an,·,
plan for improving the. fot·tifications at \·,'he ts tone Poi11t, On July 7 -
1798, Jame.s McHenry, S<>crctary of \Jar, ordered Tousard to repair to
46Report of the Secretary of War, Pebrua~y 13, 1806, Americ~n Seate Po:pe.:s, XVI_ !~'.'·
,- -
•
•
•
Baltimore for the purpose of vie>1ing the existing <•'Orks t.tith De
Ley.-itz, still temporary enginee..-, and to "lay do"m a plan."47
The u?:gency of the order reflected the widespread criticism
of BaltLmore's defensive works, that is, they "'ere not capable of
resisting a land attack, hence the need for a ~ore adequate enclosed
fort to supplement the >1ater batteries- Twenty thousand dollars was
appropriated for this purpose,
Major Tousard repaired to Baltimore, viewed the existing
"'arks ''ith resident engineer De Leyritz, and proceeded to lay do""1
a plan for additions designed for th"- "protection of the City and
Harbour, against any sudden attack from enemy's Ships of War, or
Coup de main froir. a sn>all land force,, ... 48
By August 8, 1798, 7ousard had finished the plans, eleva-
tions, profiles and an estimate of costs for an enlarged fort al-
ready known as Fort J1cHcnry. Ile then deli'Jered them to James 01cHenry
for approval and disposition. Tousard's estimate for the new "orl<s
totaled $30,963.44. Despite the fact that only $20,000 of govern-
ment funds were appropriated, the Baltimore City i'1aval Comrnittco
47Jamcs !•lcHenry to Maj. Louis Tousard, July 7, 1793, McHenry Papers, Library of co~gress. Cited hereafter as ~icHenry Papers. McHenry hired Tou~&rd despite President. ,\dams' <>bjections and feelings regarding the use of '1 fi·cnclnnan, because "I could find no other person qualified,.,,·' OlcHenry to Alex. Hamilton, November 19, 1800. McHenry Papers. Prior to this, Tou~ard had been a field officer "1itl1 Rivardi in the regiment oC J\x:tillerists and Engineers, !-lest Point. J"cobs, .!'?£_._cj_!.
Tousard's r"1larkable career began ''ith his admission to the School of Artillery at Strassburg, in 1765. Among his other accomplishments, he laid do"n a plan for the rebuilding of Fort ~lifflin, near Philadelphia, 1798. See Tous,.rd to Hamilton, August 7, 1798, The Intimate Life of Alexander Ham~, Allan Hcl..3ne Hamilton, ed. (New Y<>rk: 1911), 32&. Sec also the Tousard-Stacl<er Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania.
48lbid.
•
•
•
accepted the plan, thinking t\\ey could engage the "patriotism and
cooperation" of the citizens to make up the diffecence, either in
labol'. or cash, 49 S<0cretary of \\1ar McHenry thcreforc transferred
the power to execute and complete the new defensive works, to the
Baltill'.DI"C N·aval Couu~ittee, binding them to purchase the necessary
additional land, and to follow Iousard's plarl, l'IcHenry subjected
to their orders the $20,000, until Sflerit, after which time the bal·
ance should be raised by local subscription.
f,s of September 21, 1798, the Naval Committee adopted ~1ajor
Tousard's 50
plan. One of its first acts was to obtain options for
the property occupied by the old earthen "star fo.-c." To build upon
that site required the purchase of lots numbered 68-72. One of the
proposed bastions projected into lot number 66, so part of that lot
was also bought by the Coirmittee. 51
During property negotiations, construction was pushed on
additional improvements to the lot"er battery under the supervision
of Alexis De Leyritz, still retained as temporary engineer and com-
pensated at the rate of tt"o dollars per day. ll'ork continued until
the rigors of winter forced cessation, and De Leyritz was released
November 15. 52
49McHenry to Jeremiah Zollett, ~ ~. August "· l 798, PlcHenry Papers.
50Robe.-t Gilmo.-e et al to McHenry, September '" 1798, --
11ci-lenry Papers.
51A part of lot 66 ""s transferred from \'illiam Goodwin, O'-"'llet, to the United States, on Novembet: 6, 1798. Title to lots 68-72 "'"s not transferred from \,'m. Goodwin, owner, to the United States, until t.ugust 26, 1800. The delay in transferring tMt allirnportant 11 acres has not yet been explained •
1799. 1799.
52t;eneral Accounting Office, Register of 1-larrants, 1795 to Accountant's Office, Indian ·tribal Claims Section, April 27,
Cited hereafter as G, A. O.
•
•
•
2l
ln February 1799, the Co!l:lllittee reminded Secretary McHenry
that the season was approaching when the work ought to be recowmenced,
but that nothing could be done until another engineer was appointed
to carry out Tousard's plan. The Committee wisely thought it unsafe
to permit any work unless an engineer was present lest the workmen
"diviate from the plan adopted,"53
McHenry had some difficulty in locating another engineer,
but on March 28, 1799, he appointed i1essr. John (or Jean) Foncin,
French artillerist and mili_tary engineer, to the position of "tempora.-y
engineer," at two dollars pee diem plus travel expenses. 54
Foncin's appI"aisal of the problem at l/hetstone Point ,,.as
quite diffe.-ent from that of l·lajor Tousard, On April lZ, Foncin dis·
patched to McHenry a letter critical of Tousard's plan, declaring it
"insufficient," outlining certain "imperfections," together With sug-
gestions for a "new plan.'' Foncin felt that he could not carry Tousard's
plan into e){ecution without '·hazarding his [own] professional characte;.,·•
McHenry agreed in principle to Foncin's plan provided that, 1) it meet
53Robt. GilIItOre to McHenry, February 11, 1799, McHenry Papers.
S~cHenry to Gilmore, March 22, 1799, McHenry Papers. l'lcHenry requested the Corunanding Officer at the fort to furnish quarters for Poncin, Mcl!enry to Cd;.>t. s. 1-lDrris, !-larch 28, 1799, McHenry Papers. See also t-lcH.enry to Gilr.ore, McHenry to Fonci.n, March 28, 1799, McHenry Papers, regarding the appointment. Poncin was ordered to devote any spare time to giving 1<0ssons to officers of the garrison in "gunnery drawings and fortifications , "
Foncin first came to the United States in 1797. Upon his arrival, Moreau de St. Mi'!ry noted in his journal fot January 20, 1797, "l received M. Foncin, the engineer, arriving [in Philadelphia} from Cayenne," Moreau de St. Hili:y, _2.P.cit., 277 •
•
•
•
With the COllJ!littee's approval, and 2) th.et no further appropriation
be required, 55
The Baltimore CoD1Dittee, having previously accepted Tousard
as an officer of "great professional skill," was naturally embarrassed
and confused at Foncin pronouncing Tousard's plan as "impracticable,"
"defective," and "insufficient," To aggravate the delicate situation,
Foncin's "new plan" exceeded the cost estimate of Tousard's proposal. 56
Apparently Foncin'1.1 ability, together with his '"lllodest" and
"uoas6uming" character, was however, the dEcisive factor, for the Com-
mittee admitted to McHenry a willingness to change plans, as follows,
Mr. Foncin has sul>Ulitted to us the plan of the works 'Which ,!!! deems indispensible to our protection; we have great confidence in his judgment, and should with pleasure cooperate with him in the execution.,,57
The Colllllittee'a willingness to "cooperate" lilith Font.in was
contingent upon the government not. obligating the citizens of Balti-
more for a larger &Dount than origi<18.lly pledged, Secretary of War
Mt.Henry resolved the difficulties by increasing the appropriation to
$30,000, and by thus yielding on the point, he urged the Baltimore
Naval Cmmnittee to diacard Tousard's plan and proceed lilith the work
55Mc:Henry to Foni:in, April 17, 1799, McHenry Papers. See also extracts from Gilmore to McHenry, Hay 6, 1799, McHenry Papers.
56Gilmore to McHenry, May 6, 1799, McHenry Papers. This important letter outlines the lilhole problem in great detail, with background material and an honest presentation of the Comnittee's a\ilklilll.td situation, Foncin's estimate for.!!!£ plan totaled $39,938.34. This estimate \il8S enclosed to McHenry with the above letter, For the estimate in its entirety, see Appendix II. Unfortunately neither Tousard's or Foncin'e plan have been locai;ed, if they are extant,
•
•
•
lest the "public good" sustain a loss by an inadequate defense.
I run strongly inclined to give the preference to Mr. Foncin's plan as lllOre effective for defence ••• 58
By late July 1799, Foncin's plan for the brick-faced, five-
bastioned pentagonal fort enclosing a powder magazine and barracks,
was begun in earnest. The new masonry works were built over the
crumbling remains of the Revolutionary l'ar ea.-then "star fort." It
was, therefore, John Foncin, rather than Rivard!, De Leyritz or Tou-
sard, who designed the fort and its inner buildings, the architectural
appearance of which remained substantially unchanged until after the
fateful battle of September 13-14, 1814.
Co111"1ensurate with his new responsibility, Foncin was pro-
moted from temporary to full engineer, with a corresponding increase
in compensation for his services.59 ~ith considerable application to
the tas\< at hand, Foncin pushed tile ,.-ork during the balance of 1799
and throughout most of 1800, and thus completed the fort previous to
his departure in the fnll of 1800. Additional sums were needed in 1801
S~cHenry to Gilmore, i1ay 10, 1799, McHenry Papers. For other letters dealing with this temporary impasse, see, Gilmore to Mcllcnry,May 18, 1799, McHenry to Foncin, May 25, 1799, and for Mcl!enry's approval, Mc!lenry to Gilmore, July 15, 1799, l!icHenry Papers • .:Ven afl:er the settlement, Samuel Smith wrote to John ;1dams, complaining that inadequate funds had been alloted for defending a "City Kno;.11 to be of the Cc!lllllereial Consequence of Baltimoru." '1.dams transmitted Smith's request to ~kHenry on l•ugust 5, 1799, adding that "I wish that Justice may be done to that City, and that it may have its proportion of Aid in th.e fortification of it," Bernard C. Steiner, ed., The Life and Correspondence of James McHenrx, •• (Cleveland: 1907), 406-407.
59c.A.o., 1800 to 1802, January 6, 1800 •
• '' to complete the buildings, bringing the total government eKpenditures
{since 6C
1794) to $93,664.36.
The earliest surviving graphic document to show the com-
pleted brick-faced, pentagonal fort with bastions, is the plan of Fort
~lcHenry (see Illustration No. 3) dated "9th November, 1803."61 The
draftsman has not been identified. 11owever, it was dra"n using a
scale of toises, a French measure in coir.n:on use at tl1at time by French
cartographers, It seems likely that the draftsman probably copied
Foncin's plan, otl1er;iise the measured pl<1n "'tluld probably have used
feet or yards as a scale. By conversion of toises to feet, the accur-
acy of the map con " be detr.onstrated.
~ The tKteriot sloping walls between the bastions are sho1o1n
•
on this map to be 120 feet in length, the side ~alls of the bastions
40 feet long, and the front or leading edges of the bastions scale 75
feet. \\lhile it is not possible to accurately weasure the base of the
fort today, because the ditch has been filled in, field measurements
indicate that the plan is accurate to plus or minus three feet,
6°For Foncin's appointment and termination as Engineer, see G. A, O,, 1800-1802, Harch 1, 1800, October 16, 1800, After leaving Baltimore, Foncin went to Boston to .:ork on Fort Independence (See Appendix 111). For a yearly listing of expenditures for Fort McHenry, see Report <>f the Secretary of \.lat, February 13, 1806, American State Pape~s, XVI, 194.
61 National Archives, Cartographic Section, Drawer 51, Sheet 1 [H.h.R.P, map no, l]. Later endorsed and reused by Richard Delafield, Capt. of Engineers, and Gen. Charles Gratiot, Chief Engineer of the Army, September 27, 1836,
62Like many early measures, a !2lli does not have a fixed equivalent in English measures. It is variously equal to six feet, or sometimes 6.4 feet. By comparing cer""in physical features on the 1303 plan with existing conditions, a toise in this case is known to have been equal to six feet. This pla~ carefully measured with a rule divided into 64 parts per inch, each 64th beine converted to a decimal fraction of a foot, thus making it possible to convert the scaled features to feet and inches,
•
•
•
The 1803 pl3n sho,,s n "ell-defined ditch nround th"- land sides
of the fort, but none along the southeast side, facing the h.arbor.
This defect wu~ l3ter co;;rected, The ''idth of the <litch varied from
35 feet at the bastions to 55 feet, froir. the brickft1ced walls midway
be.tween bastions. The ditch ,,,,.s also drained at two points by "water
conduits," "\1ic\1 have c•ncc been obscured or oblite.-ated. A conduit
also opened through t\,e rampart, CGtlt~Lecl along the southeast wall.
The fort as ocig1nal!y built, :irobnbiy had ~aster drainage system,
similar to but less exccnsiv., than th" on~ at Fort \J,_shington, Mary
land, but th<: c,·ide!lca of s<ich u ~ystem is ''ot yet available.
1'he 1:30J '·'~f' i~ int..;~cs'=inr: nlso in that it sh.ows trees planted
upon bastio11$, tc•.-~Flci">, .:-,c th~ ~cr:ode grollnd level. The plan sho"'
36 trees upo1> the teri:--o~lein level, 3C or thL! b'1stions (6 on .-nch), an<~
38 around the p'1tajc ~ro:Hld, Tli<> functivn of such eJ<tensivc planting
and as a readv r.<.~ply c.< othc-;<1~oc e,.~cn,;ivc £irc~·ood in the event of
a siege, Old vic1-'s o[ Fort. J>:c!l"nry ::ccc to sho>' Lombardy popl<lta, a
tree l•idely pl.;nL"'I i - icr,e- ;~-- -~" noted for L':S higl1 absot"ption of
ground ~·ater,
Sir.cc tl.<' :_,rL ·t~•.o~ t,, l1cvL! 1J-''°'' ~esigned primarily to defend
against a 1'1r,<l ct:::c', i.t <_:.. '.,1•trrc;~t~11~ :o note that the only gun em-
brssuros s~o<>r, o.> t~~ rCc:r> "( 1Cll~ "~re locat"d in tl1e basCions, two
on each side, but r.one <lion'; ti1c: 1-~~din;; e<'i:eo, since that area <.·as
to fire against ~hipo, b·;t to co•~~ the curt:iin walls and entrant
angles of tho fort -"S·'-Ln<t a ~c~~~r,g··ic:ddc1 '-'~'>ration. It is obvious
th'1t the shore Oar.tctiec • .. -~"'- ~~.:;-0 rdoJ ~s t<>e r:.ai1> line of defense,
•
•
• '
and the fort as a defense against a land attack from the rear, and as
a protective enclosure for the needs of the garrison.
Buildings for the garrison included five structures arranged
around the periphery of the parade ground, The functions of these
five buildings "·ere as follows {listed by location, right to left upon
entering the sally port): 1) Corunanding Officer's8and Quarters,
2) Powder Jolagazine, 3) Officers' Quarters, 4) No, l Soldiers' Barr"cks,
and 5) No. 2 Soldiers' Barracks.
The sally port or e11trance to the fort, furnished access at a
point midway on the escarpment wall facing the harbor branch of the
Patapsco River. The possible eKposure of the gateway to enemy fire
from the harbor, later led to the building of a rav~lin. The sally
port was at first approached by a fixed bridge across the ditch, with
a short, removable span at the 6ateway. As originally built, the sally
pott was not roofed, but was only an opening through the ramparcs.&3
The inside faces of the sally port <Jere vertical, probably brick faced,
about 13 feet apart, While the length through the opening '"as ~hout
33 feet. It thus only approxiPates its size 00 rebuilt in 1814 (nine
feet <0ide and 35 feet long). Otherwise, tl1ere are no architectural
features on the 1803 map which indicate anything but a simple opening
in the ramparts.
The 1803 map is the only early graphic document to sho<O the
flag pole location, It was situated along one side of the parade
63The sally port opening must have looked very similar to that at Fort PLtt, Pennsylv"nia, erected 1759-61, according to a drawtng by Charles M. Stotz. Alfred Procter James and Charles Morse Stotz, Drums in the Forest (Pittsburg: 1958), 171.
\\·
"
•
•
•
ground, and would have been encountered to the near right upon enter
ing the parade ground frorn the sally port. 64
Another map of Fort McHenry, dra"<l ca. 1806 by Captain John
B. Walbach, is similar in most respects to the 1803 lll8P e~cept for
certain discrepancies, such as the number of trees indicated. Other
differences reflect improve~ents and changes to the buildings ~ithin
and outside the fort,
1he fort remained virtually unchanged, in fact became some~h.at ,, neglected, until the defensive preparations preceding the 1815' bom-
bardment.
THE WAR OF 1812
Although the fortifications at Whetstone Point had never been
the objective of enemy action, its presence and strategic location
had been an imporcant deterrent to hostile designs upon the Baltimore
harbor since Revolutionary War tiIDes. With the War of 1812, the forti-
fications once again became the object of improvements calculeted to
deter the British navy.
Beginning in March 1813, preparations were many months in the
making. Certain defects "'ere corrected and se11eral modifications "1ere
intended to up-date the defensive preparedness of Fort McHenry.
64T"" hewn-oak braces for this flagpole were found during the 1958 archeological ei<p-~orations, by G. Hubert Smith, archeologist. Since the flagpole was replaced and moved on several occasions, its el<llct location during the writing of the "Star-Spangled Banner," in 1814, is not certain. However, 'Ol<>st of the evidence ~eemi; to substantiate the 1814 location as unchanged frorn its position as sho~-n on the 1803 map.
-------- -
•s1adaa q1;ms •s "£l81 '6l qol"W '\luoi1sm.iv ·ua~ 01 q1;ms •s!9
"£181 'Li qo1sw '11sag pA011 •few O'.l 111ns •to'.) •s.iadea 111ns "J ·r 'hlll<>psov h1alJI1H ·s •n
99
"Sladsa q1;ms 'S '£181 '91 qo1ew '\luo11sou1;1 O'.l l!llUIS os1e ""S •s1ad!!d l\lTlllS ·s se .>a11sa.laq pa11J "£181 'st qo1ew '(lSM JO ·oas)\luo11souv uqor ·uaJ O'.l q11ms •s
's;iaded ll'.llms l"""'"S 'uo;s;J\;G 1d;.iosnI11'J1 'ssa.1\IUO'.) JO li:1s1q11:~g
popU""'"1ooa1 pus 'h1uaBOH 1.io~ lS aouasa1d s,.iaau;\lua us JOJ paau aq1
\lu;u;r:ino •A.1nsea11 ""l.\l JO .<1e1aioas 'u;l"ll"n ll<>ql\' a10"" ':t301JJO
.\1a1111:is P""lhl"tol 'h:tawo'il:t1JOJ1 uqor u;u1de'.) "S.1c.1:ienb 1"1"""" mO.lJ
pa1.ia><a """' a.inssa.id pus 'alS.ladsap aq 01 pamaas uo;1sn1;s "'ll
£g"'>!lO." ;:.q1 JJO h1't., 01 .IUaS <>q .iaau1\lua us 1;1un aoU<>llrJIO:> lOU p1noo 1.Iod
A11es "'l.l O;t0J3q UOJlOn.llSUOO l"lll .lE)1 JO A.lela.lO"S 3\J.l Ol P"UJ!!Td
-moo qllUIS 13nw~s u1uSe aouo '.laauJSua AlelllTW " JO s3uatEl "4.l lOJ
P"ll"" AtsnoJAqo ""1""P ""ll""lold lJ.lns Aue ""UJS 'JaAaMO\J. 'ltJnq lOU
s"" u'"s""""ll., .10 '1I'3l'\ >!Ol;tq SJ'll. 99"'•'q'il1q """J 9 aq Ol Ael'\3lF~
3'1.l JO lUO.lJ u1· •• " 11"" '!lJ.lq " 'll1"' ""''"""\l l.lod-A11es "'ll l03lO.ld
Ol P3lOn.llSUJ OSJF SF/'\ "H '3ll3q.leq ua Pa.lJJ aq Ol uouuel "4.l 1'1011" Ol
lj\lJq A]lU3JOJJ}nS SUOJlSFq 3'll .,p,,Ul.lOJle1d., put' 'SU01lStl'q "lll UJ sa:in
-se.lqUJ<> aql patt1J ll""g ·aoe1d lE'll ol paqllEdSJp aq p1nol Jaau1Sua
ue TllUn 'Slll"""""O.ldWJ .lOUJUI amos lnO A.l.lt'O Ol pa.lap.10 sa~ 'A.:iUaHO~
l.lO;t l" SUOJll!llJ1llO;t JO lUallv \lUJll\' 'tl""li pA011 lOr"eJ'I .,"sUOJltl'OJJ
-ll.lO} "'ll l""tdwoo,, Ol lUas aq ;ioau1Sua Utl' l"'ll P"lsanba;i os1e 'lllWS
pa~OOU'! aq llJ.\lJW ~g·axe UC }O sa>10.llS ~a~ A.laA u Aq U>\.Op ~U!'ll I pu~ 'aufd }O SJ f~OOp] 3lF8 aql
';ie~ JO A~"l""~as aql Ol .lallal u u1 qllms 1anmes
ru.laua~ Aq paz1seqd~a s~~ s~oop alu3 3'll JO AlTlJq;sua1apu1 aqr.
"
•
•
•
•
•
•
}!aximilian Godefroy as a "tian [of] Science, abilities, &. an able en
gineer who might [be] most usefully fsic] at this place."&B
The War Department finally ordered Captain Samuel Babcock of
the U. s. Engineers, to Fort ~kl!enry, but not until April 26, 1813. In
the meantime, Colonel Decius Wadsworth (formerly of the Artillerists
and Engineers) visited the fort, described its defects, and suggested
at least one important change for the defense of the unprotected sally
port entrance. For this Wadsli'Qrth planned a brick-faced ravelin, and
its completion ~as apparently left in the hands of Captain Babcock,
his arrival in early Hay. 69 upon
Babcock's orders also included completion of those changes be
gun under the direction of }!ajar Beall.70
On December 1, 1813, engineer
681. Montgomery to A. Gallatin, April 1, 1813. Albert Gallatin Papers, New York Historical Society. Godefroy's services as military engineer were utili?-ed in the defense of Baltimore, but not at Fort ~lcHenry until after the battle, when he desii;ncd two powder magazines for the out,<orks (see note 76 for biof_;raphical reference to Gnrl<>f•vy).
69nccius Wadsworth to John Acmstrong, April 13, 1813, National Archives, Records of the War Dcpartc.:ent, Record Group 156, Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Selected Paies, Letters and Endorsements Sent to the Secretary of War, 1812-1817, \\;ads""Orth described Fort McHenry as a ", •• reriular Pentagon, without Ditch oi: Covert"1ay, too reduced in its Dimensions to be Capable of a long Defence against a regular attack, but abundantly Secure agninst an /l.ss(lu1t & "'Cll enough adopted to protect I'. cover tl1c detached l·.'ater Battery in "hich the principal Defence against sl>ippinr, rr.ust ,est.'' See also \.Jads"'orth to Annstrong, l\.pril 26, i'!ay 3, 1813, Nationol Archives, Records of tl1e War Department, Record Group 107, Secretary of l'ar, Letters Received. Wads.,,,rth believed that a ravelin probably constituted a part of the original design for the fort.
70col, J. G. S"ift to C11pt, s. Babcoc\<, May 26, 1813, National
Archives, Records of the War Department, Recoro Croup 77, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Selected Pages frolll Letters to Officers of Engineers, July 4, 1812 - Februnry 20, 1869. Cited hereafter as NA RG 77 OGE SPLOE 1812-69.
•
•
•
Babcock w:i:ote General John llnostrong th,~t his work at Fort }!cHenry
was complete, including not only the mounting of 21 cannon on the
fort, but apparently the " construction of the ravelin as well.
Similar in design to cigl1teenth century French ravelins, it
was triangular in plan, erected in front of, but not connected to
the entra"1:c which it protected. The ravelin <ias brick faced, about
eight feet high with battered walls, and measured about 132 feet
along each of the leading eOges. A ditch 28 feet wide, complete
with banquette, f~anked the t~"O leading edges, and was made a part
of the main ditch around the fort, Since the ravelin blocked ac~
cess to the sally port bridge, an opening was left in the north wall
of the ravelin, and a bridge across the ditch at that point completed
" the passageway.
The fort did not undergo any further modification until after
the historic bombardment of September 13-14, 1814. The physical ap-
pearance during that draw-<ttic ~isode of t\1e war, "hile not very dif-
ferent from that sho~n on the 1803 and ca. 1806 maps, can thus be
briefly described as follows:
FORT McHENRY in 1814
At the time of the bombardt:,ent (see Illustration No. 4), Fort McHenry was a regular pentagonal fortification, faced with masonry walls of brick about 12 feet high, ba~~cred, Cjpped with dressed coping stones and quoining at the salient_ points. The fort was surrounded by a "ell-d~finc<l, dry dirch varying in width (bet\o'ecn the bastions and curtain ~alls) and about five feet deep,
71capt, Babcock to Sec. of Wur, !lccembec 1, 1$13. National Archives, Records of the \?"r Dcpartrr.ent, Rec<>rd Group 107, Office of the Secretary of War, Selected pages from Registers of Letters Received, January 1813 - August, 1821.
7 2Access tllrough the side wall of the ravclin "as not a unique feature of Fort !·1cHcncy. ti ~~toilar .orrangc:nent '-'aS used at Fort Pitt, Pennsylvania, built l759-61. ~~~ James ond Stotz, op.ci_t_., 171.
•
•
•
The parapets were sodded earth, planted with trees, and designed to accolIIIIOdate cannon fired en barbette. The terrcplein level was separated from the par<>de ground level by another sloped earthen bank, also sodded, With an open drainage line at that je ctu.-e. The five bastions were platformed witl1 ""od; the embrusures had been filled. The ravelin ""S an earthen mound, faced with brick, with stone quoining at t:he three corners of its triangular plan. lt also was platformed behind tl1c front corner. The ditch serving the ravelin was crossed with u "'ooden trestle bridge, giving access to an opening in the ravelin watt. Having passed tltrough the ravetin, one approached the Protected bridge over the main ditch before the sally port en· trance. That bridge was also ""Oodcn, resting on brick piers, with a wooden railing. Just before gaining entrance to the main doors, "'lls a short, removable span, apparent!)' not a dra«• bridge.
The sally port ''"s an untoofed P"scugewsy cut through the ramparts. Passing througl1 the sally port,, tl:e parade ground was in:medi· ateLy at hand, on t\1e >Ot?.e level" Acce~s to the terrepLein was by earthen ramps situated to the ,-ight and left of the inner sally port opening.
Seven buildings "'ere distribute~- ->round tl1e purtide ground, listed by fu1\ction, he(>inning just north of the sally port l) a SOJall Guard·Jlouse, about 18 1 by 20', ;;ippnrcntly one &tory high, 2) Cotr\Dlanding Office.r's Quarters an<1 ll(ficc, 18 1 by 48' ,c•:c c.nda!,nlf stories high, with gable toof nod dormers, servants' garrets in the attic space, a cellar l<itchen bcl_o·-1, 3) Po•:der ~iogozine, 20' by 31 1, 4) Officers' Q11arters, 18 1 by 51', one •. :1t a •1al~ stori.e~, '''itl1 a small cellar kitchen, 5) No. l SoldiLrs' llar,nckc, 22' by 91', one and a half stories, gable roof with three dc-rmei· 1;indows, and e_ cellar kitchen under the north room, 6) u omall cister" hous" 17 1 by 30', one story, hip roof, ''lt\1 o small porch, 7) No, 2 Soldiers' Bar,acks 22' by 98 1, me 2:11da 1<:l£S:C:Ories, ~\"Ole roof, ''ith ~hre0 J.--.rmcr tlindows, and cellar kitchen under th~- ~acr roo:.\,
The all~irn~orta'l" {lng;:iole t;i::s ap~arently situated bet«'een the G11ardRHouse and Sally Po:ct, on th~ para':" ground. There was also a well in the. courty;;i,;J. "·''' ~r~es in fron~ of tl·~ buildings.
hfter the Septec"ber l"J-14 bombardt:1ent, Lt. Colonel George A=i··
stead Cowrnantlinjl Officer of the fo,", es~irnated that bct»een 1500 and
1800 bor.ibs ...-ere fired by the enepy, ~nd that 3bout 400 of these
lnnde.d within tl1e '"orks. lt has been c<=!!:ronl)· believed that he
meant within the enclosed fort, but !J:e pro!>,,bly lll<lant \.fith1_n the pre-
<:incts of the fort ~nd outlying gun b~ct"ries. ;,.t 2:00 a.m., flednes·
day 1110rning, Sep:embc'; 11•, a 24-pounder 0<1 the< southwest bastion of
•
•
•
32
the fort, was blo"n .>sunc'~i:: by " sh"il, \1l1ich l<;illed one officer and
"'ounded sever;;il t:1en in G;::ipt;;iin Jos. Nicilolso11's COIDpany of volunteers.
,\:rtnistc<ld's report mentio'1S th.,t tt<O of the buildings """re
mate:rially du,,,aged, but doe~ not state w;iich buildings. 73
The P"''der
magaz~ne is l<no"Tl to hD.vc sustained" direct hit. The wnlls of the
fort apparcntl)' su{f~r"J cxtcnsi~·c dJm:ig" from bomb fragments, and
one observer, visiting th~ fo,.t in ~8i8, carr.rr . .cnted at that date, that
"the old walls still cxhibi.~ tlic ~c~r~ of the attack,"74
1herc '"'snot c. si1~~'-c bo .. bprc>o".' •,uil'!JC'.g ~n the gnrrison, nor
proof s\1clter. ;.~t~.- tl1c bon1:1cirdrna<lt, tl1l_s d.,fect was the object of
ings, and outer \<o-.:k::.-
Following t'.>O! ci~s'.lult, tl«'.O B~ltiroure C:lty Cor:r,>ittec of Vigi-
lance and s.,fety, to~c•the-r '.oith the ;-.ii~itici, coopet·ated in an atteropt
leased its "roechanics·' f,-J,_: r.1i~it«<Y dut}' foe tile "O:orl< of "bombproof··
ing" the po~·der !'1<1ga~ine, t\1" ;;c!.I, u11<1 t!Lc sally port. The attack
-----------------·---------73Rcpor: of at~uc~< on Fort McOlenry, by Lt. Col. George A=i
stead, Septei:iber 21.., 151:,, Ja!\n L".annc•n, Official Letters of the Military nnd Nn·Jal Offic~rs of the Unit·cC S~o.tcs, during the "'ar with Great Br~tian, _in_ thc-Y~;:r:-IBIT, D_._!1,, «n<l l:> (washing ton; 11l2J), 43,,,-44!.
71..John l·l. •Jun~""-• ;,,,:,.f.1J' __ ::C.'2'.'i;h Pnr-_E_Ltl1c United State"c and Cnnadn_jn __ lGlG '~''l_lil~~ \'>'c.: Yvric: Lil23), vol. 1, 225-26.
- -------------
•
•
•
Almost i!Ullediately a great Iorce of laborers and carpenters
began o:ork on underground cascmates, to be located under the ram-
parts, on each side oi the sally porL. Ho"·ever, the obvious haste
and poor supervision of the project forced the ccs6ation of activity,
As a result, on September 29, 1814, Cenerul S~ith reported to James
Monroe, Secretary of ~ar, ~s follows:
The Bombproof for the preservation of the Men within the fort ho.d been completed under the di.-ection of Capt<>in Babcock, and ti•1ber had been prepared at a great expense. He has ch"nged his plan <'> the digging & timher is an expense lost to the public.75
Smith further stated that both c~ptain Babcock and Colonel
Armistead '"ere too ill to properly ~up~.rintend the "-nrk, ~nd that
he, Smith, l<ncw notl>ing '1bout military engine.ering, ".,,nor have I
any person that even pretends to kno1,led3e. l therefore pray you to
send me an Engineer." SrJ1th corr·~laL1H=ci tl1at ,,·ork ~·as being done witil
such purposeless ha~t~, that rr.ucn of : t ;;ollld :1ave to be redone.
Apparently as a r"~ult of tl1i'; plco., t;enoral Smith received
the necessary profcssiona~ assista1.cc :Ori the person of ~1aximilian
Godefroy, '1 French n~ch;_<;ect ;·n<l enginec,r, th~n residing in Balti
more, 76
Godef~oy plu.,,.,_ed i.,-.,rovc;i;"nt~ fol'. th~- outer "orks includ-
ing t"o small pot<<lcr mag.,~ines, anc\ »~no designed bcmb-proofs for
us built, are the result of Godef,·oy's p1o.n and ~upcrvision, but one
·------------7Ss. Smith :o James l1onroe, Scpt~111be.c 29, 1814, S. Smith
Papers •
76 For " brief biographical acco<Cnt, sec Fiske Kimball, "Godefroy, 1·laximilian," ~ictts"'3ry of AI:1erica" Bio!';raphy, ed. by 11-llen Johnson and [)umas }13lone {Ne" Yo;·k: 1931), vol. 7, 343.
•
•
•
document mentions the fortb.comi11g return of Godcfroy after an ab-
scnce " ••• when he will finish tho design of the bomb-proofs for this
place," 77
The bomb-proofs 1'hich were previously designed for timber con-
struction ~o be covered with earth, ''~re thus cl1angcd (probably by
Godefroy) to underground i:-ooms 1,·ith thicl< >1alls <>nd vaCtlts of brick.
This addition to the existing d"-fenscs '"-'""' begun about a '"onth after
the British bombardment o< Scrtember 1814.
These underground casemntcs (each measuring about 18 by 50
feet), one on each side of the gatc'""Y• '.,·ere built ''ith ventilators
through the terreplein, but not lig\,tcd. Th.e sally port 1'ith its
brick vaulting and <ldjoining casemates as we see the!!l today are sub-
stantially a product of the pos~-bomb<1~drrient repair and construction
1;ork, although some change~ ;,•ere made in 18JS and 1357.
The 1819 Plan of i'ort l·!cl!cni:y (se~ lllustratiCP.S Nos. 5-7) is
the first graphic representation oi tl>C [ort in it" improved post-
bombardment condition. Dra<"n by !lillio01 tell Poussin, Captain of
Topograpl1ical Engineers, it is the first accurate measured drawing
of tlle fort. 78
In !IK'st instances the li"1it of erroi: is less th.an
one foot. As ~uch, th.i~ pla" is a vit.:iJly io:portant document. From
it can be deduced the physicn) changes t.:i tile fort following the a.ttac!;.
77 capt. Frederick Ev;lnS to S. S<:Jith, October 10 [?] 1814, S. Smith Papers.
78Nutional t.rchivcs, Cr:ftogr"pl>ic Secti'ln, 1-!ashington, Drawer 51, She.et 2. "Rcconnoitrin['; of C~cscpcnl'~- Bay, STJ\TE OF MllRYUND, Plan and Pi:ofilcs of Foi:t i"lcHcnry, 1819," dra;,-n hy l>'illiam Tell Poussin, Captain Topogr'-'phical EngillC'-'l:~ [ll./l..ll.P. map no. 4]. Poussin (a Frenchr.oan) wrote and published extensively on bis impressions <1nd er;periencce. in the llllitcd States. For an important autobiogi;aphical t-<ork, sec Cuillaun;e tell Poussi1> [1794-1876], Les EtatsUnis D'AmCi:ique ••• (PariG: 1271,),
•
•
•
1'he major changes that took place were the "bombproofing"
of the sally port with a brick-vaulted roof, the addition of
casemates under tile ramparts on each side of the sally port,
the strengthening of the main pow,:er magazine, the "bombprooflng"
of t\,e well (with a brick '/ault), the addition of a boundary wall
and sea wall, the addition of two powder magazines in the out
''orks, 79 exteIJsion of the lower gun batte,-y, and the addition
of a pastern through the ;:am!>arts. Strangely, the 1819 plan
does not indicate the e~istence of trees on the fort, though
they ,,ere not re"'o'tcd until the 1830's,
The war had dra•<n to a close in December 1814, without
p..-oducing any further o.ttacks cipon the defenses of Baltimore,
\·11th the fort thus improved, the gari:ison tool< on a more peace-
ful aspect, An 1822 inspection repott commented that,
• , .One half the flo,;cr gardenc of being piled,
Parade (ground ''as] taken up in a A considerable number of sij3t instead form tlte borders of walks,
79Th~~e tt'o po,:der magazines were mentioned in an advertise~ent. September 25, 1815. They are show" Poussin map.
,,•ere designed by Godefroy, and See Federal Gazette (Baltimore),
in the outworks of the 1819
80unsigned Inspection Report of Fort McHenry, September 22, 1822, National Archives, Records Group 159, Office of the Inspector General, S~lectcd pages from Inspection Reports, 1814-1842 •
•
•
•
A foreign visitor to tile ctormant fort, ca. 1825, described
it rather disdainfu!ly, as follows:
The fort itself is very ~mall, and ill-shaped; a pentaco" ''ith five little bastions, l<here at !llOSt but three l<l>:ge guns can be .nou:ilcd; in front of the entrance is ~ li.ttl.o ravclin "-'hich defends nothing. There i~ no counter,;,carp; lhe :r:~mparts are sodded. The fort is scpar.~tc:l fi:-om ~he land by a [boundary) wall, which mi~l1t r.~t-l1cr pr.:i'"" injurious than advant~geous. Cl1c foct is in a decayed condition, and is tu be 1b-,'1<lored "'· '1cccunt of its unimportant situi<ti.on ·~11e engince1s intend to construct new foi-tificat_,_o\ls seve:c,o~ milee farther off in the Chesapenl<r E'.l.y. ~foI"eove.-, the situation of this fort is so v01h~<Iltl1y •_haL the garrison !"ave it during the sornn:er, Sl
Fort McHenry ''-~S n<':; ::C~ndoncd, but retained as a second
barrier or accessory to the system of coa~tal fo,,-tifications
contemplated in the '.820'" '>y the iJoa::.-d of Engineers •
LATER 1_i1Pll0ViillEtTJ:S J3i'?-1S57
In 1821, the U.S. llous" of R'·rce~entntiv.,s had requested
the Secretary of ~Jar to <Lpor: to tfie Hou~e on the progress made
toward determining ne1.- sii:0.; ancl plans of fortifications for the
eastern coast of tile Uni:;eJ Stata~, with an eye tot•,;r<l pnssibl ..
reduction in the expe:1S"- of dcfendln~ t)1e "Atlantic frontier."
The Board of Engineers sul;:-.>tted " repo:-t •,;hich in part, mentioned
the projected site~ far •;or!<s f.--,~tl1cr out in the harbor approaches
to Baltimore. These ne·,, sit<!s 1<ere intended to turn the enemy
8lr{url Bernhurd, DuJc-c of Sa:<<l~~'efmar Eioenach, Travels Through North An,~ric<I~:P:o..J:.l""~"-"" 1825 0-Hd 1826; (Philadelphia: 1828), 164. ln l~tcr year~, "n~w fort""'" built several miles farther out in th,:, !'atapuco Rivto~. Thal defensive <-."Ork, designed by Lt. Robert E. L,;~, "'"~ n.::une<i 1''ort Carroll, after Charles Carroll, distinguished 1'laryl«1.C:er nr.·l sig_,er of ~h.,_ Declaration of Independence.
•
•
•
before gaining such close proximity to the harbor, since Fort
McHenry, they claimed, "has no influence whatever over an attack
by land, and cannot even secure the city and harbor from born-
bardment."82 That .-eport was modified in 1826, when the engineers
decided to retain Fort Mcllen.-y as a "second barrier" to the
proposed outlying defen&c~.83
From an artillery:nan'o point of view, Fort HcHenry by the
1820's was essentially obsolete in every respect, being neither
strategically situated nor equipped to match the improved naval
armament of th,~t period. l:o '"'"~ o'.or, der,i~ion to keep the fort
forced a program of up-dating to compcnsat~ for its defects. The
years of neglect cr<'-3~e<l a 01aint~:iance p~oblem and it was necessary
to stabili~e and re,. >r th" post before nc•; works could be started •
t·n1ile "preservation of the nen" had been the prilllary purpose
behind o;uch of the post-a,;·".c)· 0.mproveme~ts, e~pecially the sally-
port vaulting and the vaulted hornb-prco:' casernates, the brick
vaulting remained ~xposed to the weather. lt was soon apparent
that "preservation of the n\<lsonry" frotu the cl<0rnents ~"ould entail
counter-protective measures. A11 1829 e:<amin~t\r>n r>f the fort
revealed that,
The bornbpro<>f~ undel'. tl1e rat:ipart, on each side of th<> gate1.•ay, leak very much, in consequence, •• of ther" becng .10 roofs over thmn. '.rhe repairs necessary
82"Fortific11tions," Department of l·lar. February 12, 1821, U.S. Congress American State Papers, Documents, Lc~islative and E>\ecutive, of the Co11gress of th<0 United States (Washington: 1834), vol. XVII, 304, 306 •
BJ"Rcvised Report of the Board of Engineers on the Defense of t\1e Seaboard," »1arcl> 7.4, 1826, U.S., Congress, American State Papers, Doc!;'_ment~. Lecislnti"'.~'l'.L_Il~9uti,·,;.. of the Congress of the United States '.~lDshington: 1860), vol. XVIII, 283, 291.
•
•
•
(o; thcci <:c:-~~1 ~e il th.i.n ccc:t of p!:ister o:i; <-<lter ce"1'-'nt or. t<1c .. tsid1> of the arches and a wash of C'-''·"'''" on t:-i·. -.~11.; of the int,,rior.84
11'"' b,-:.c'< v~nltin~ ov..,r tl1e sally port nloo leaked, and it
"'as prop.>ned tc cov~o it :•ith a >:oorlL'1 rouf. This same report noted
that much '"Jf th" ncarp '-::>.l~n of ti'~ tort ne.od~d rcpointing, and that
to protect tll'>- brick '-'"son<"y fro.n >.'st~~ a<id frost dni::age woulu
>\•Ou•--C ;,i;.o ~,,~d,,-~"
'''' ~hL>·,,~. · ~ ·.
' ---- -·. - "' t .s:.!; $105 ' 2 00 " 2 60 " " cents 00
25
$250
"J'\1,_, bricks ove-.: th.e case·
m~nded c. covci;i_nc; o" >.·oc.~. :.~ ~'ein", th' "c'nc~pcst and most effcctlllll
means of S5 c.,,, ~·0 "'.t"-~l - "
----------
G~ncral Gratiot,
Sii(.;.'l~t. Jc:r I,,_nd S:o~~il, "n«,inc0r~, to Gen. Gr'1tiot, ,\pril 17, 18?9, l'':'l•:iot-.~-l .\.:<:hi•·c", '.".~co,::I~ .;f the~';:.::- ilep'1rtment, Office of 'c'.•: C:l\ief ,-,-. 1'·1c.i:,n-r.::, S3lc:~t~c' Corr~~ 11~ndr.'1:~ Rc.lati<ig to Fort !1~1:en:-y, ;;ci,:yl~n~, l'J!.l-'.17- Cit<>~ hei:<.cif~er n~ N,\ I:G 107 OCE SC FL''" 18LI-37.
NA RG ssc"p~. 1
107 0~~ SC: :-_;_rl-~j to ('c '· Grot<_s~, lt!ly 25, 1829,
~'--:~~ J.?.Jl--37.
•
•
•
jJ
Chief Engin~e,- of tr.,, .\~rr.f, tC'"" propo~"tl that Ripley use sheet
lead insteo1d of «<ooJ, and 3llthocizcd \,ire 1:0 proc1Jre the lead, 86
The cost of thi£ r< :_>.cir '""s esti:r~L~d u~ :i.bout $500, but it is
soldiers' h"rr.~c:,~ :'i~hin tl1e fci:-t ''etc r<1i~ed in height to two full
stories, Tll'lsc i1'.li'~;_-,g,- '"'''' ~iso equi,>p<'<l coith t"•o-story, full-
length piaz"as ,-1l<0ng t~c f_·o'lt of cnch ~u;Cl-''_ng. Ot\\er buildings
..-equisitioned tht"~"- hc;,10.i:ed c'.ollo•~ ~or t.h" purreo~e. 88
level, hod b·-·e1i a ccr.,t."\.1t sou~ce of ~-o,-0.t"cion l.Jith respect to tllr>
86ccn. Gc~.tiot :c C"'.'L, ;,i?l·.•:·, July Z~, 13'-9, National Archive~, lWu0rCs of thco lo'"' 1'01··'·-_r_•_n~, P.'>~c:>r<:l Group 77, Office of th" Chic:£ 0f ::.n."irec·~o, r;;,~~cl_l, r.2u"s Lu~ter~ Ser.t, Volcmes :L•l5, 1812-1872. Git.c.i ;,~~uuft·~ "" :: .. i:C'.77 GCE ~.s 1812--72,
87Llaj, l'n;n~ c,_, Crn. G:--,t1:0t, ~-~~ecb'°' 17, 1830, NII RG107 Q:;,; SC FT-1'\C ),S'_l -31
'~ Get:. r;,-c • .:i,,t NA RG77 GCL ~J 13l~-72.
•
•
•
health of the ga.-rison. The sloped bani< discllarged rain,,ater
around the foundations aEld into the cellars of the barracks build-
ings, contributing to the dampness of the cellars, and consequently
to rotting of the W{)Oden floors above,
Brevet Colonel John B. i.1alb<1ch (author of the map of c!l. 1806),
Co([,!Ilanding Officer at Fort McHenry 1832-33, proposed to replace the
sodded slope with a bric\< w11ll, "to ensur« a better circulation of
air aru,,,nd th.e quartcrs."89 Though the idea was approved, stone was
substituted for brick. On ~eptember JO, 1833, General Gratiot charged
his ncphe'-', Lt. Henry A. Thompson with th~ direction of the work,
Gratiot believed the stone to be "cheaper for a '"all of this magni-
tude," and he suggested tl1at Port Deposit {~laryland) stone be secured
for th.e job.90
Tlte 519 feet of stone wall, 7'-6" hish, to be laid without
batter, complete with foundation and coping, was estimated to cost
" $q,219.44. It was subsequently built under the supervision of
Lt. Thompson, and has beell nn irnportallt fnctor in eliminating the
water runoff into the fort.
In 1835, guard-rooms were added to each side of the sally
port, but the story of those ndditions Boes back to 1831, when
various officers at the post agitated for removal of the temporary
guard-house {built ca. 1815), which was hidden behind the l>ombproof
89col. ~albach to Col. J~nes, September 21, 1833, National Archives, Records of the ~at Department, Record Group 77, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Letters Received, 1820-1837. Cited hereafter as N~ RG77 OGE LR 1826-37 •
90Gen. GratioL to Lt. Thompson, September 30, 1833, NA RG77 OCE LS 1812-72.
9lsee drawing and detailed estimnte for this Yell, National Archives, CartoBrapl>ic Section, Record !iroup 77, dtaYer 51, sheet q, n.d.
•
•
•
'' "ell, into the sally port area to improve tl1e functional use of that
stotion.9 2 ~hile this was a logical position for the guard-house,
the suggestion was countered with inertia and parsimony from the
Chief Engineer of tl1e f..rrny, Scve..-al proposals to build new guard-
roC11Ds ndjacent to or in front of th<' sally port were deniect.93
In an 1834 repoI:t by Lt. Tho1nus J. L<lc, llrtillcry, to General
Thomas S. Jesup, Quartermaster General, the guard-house was described
as a "source of grent inconvenicnco," being located between the Men's
Barracks and behind the «ell. This fact, together "'ith the poor con-
dition of its roof and floor, broug\1t some action upon the mattei:,94
On July 9, 1835, Lt. Lee prepared an estimate for adapting th~
sally port vicinity to accc~modate guard-house and prison facilLties •
He proposed to build a room on each side of the sally port and over
the bomb-proofs. These rooms were to be accessible only from tl1e
courtyard, A maJor concern was that the new guard-house should not
appear from the exterior of the fort. 'fo ;cork within this limitation,
Lt. Lee proposed cutting a•:ay fifteen feet (in length) of the bomb•
proof rooms on each uide oi the sally port. A smaller bomb-proof
room could then be built in its place, thus reducing the one large
bomb-proof casemate (.:ippi·oxim<lt~ly 18' by SO') to t"'O rooms of dif·
9211o1j. Payne to Gen. Jesup; April 20, 1831. National Archives, Record Group 92, Records of the War Department, Office of the Quarterrnnster Cc.neral, Selected Pages frot:l Registers of Letters Received, 1818-57. Cf. Capt. ~ipley to Gen. Gratiot, April 22, 1831. NA RG107 OGE SC FT-Mc 1811-37.
93Gen. Gratiot to Capt. Ripley, <\prtl 30, 1831. NA RG77 OGE LS 1812-12 •
94Lt. Lee to Gen. Jesup, November 19, 183Q, ~ational Arch1ves, Record Group 92, Records of the liar Department, Office of the Quarter·· master General, Consolidated Correspondence File, 1794-1915, For~ i'lcHenry. Cited hereafter as NA RG!l2 OQ~! CCF 1794-1915,
•
•
• I
'' ferent size, connected by a doorway. The untrance arches to the
bomb-proofs from the sally port were to be preserved. This altera-
tion accounts for the present constricted passageway into the case·-
mates. Lee planned to cut away about 1700 cubic feet of brick on
each side, and build a new arch 15 feet long, eight feet wide, seven
feet high and 18 inches thick.95 This •.;ork, as executed, followed
his proposal quite closely. His estif"<.te for labor and materials
totaled $2034.00. The plans, which he ~ubmitted ''ith the estimate,
show that the top of the sally port at that time was surrounded by
a railing with flanking staircases on eacl1 aide givin~ acces~ from
the ramparts to the roo~. There was also a railing along the top of
the parapet of tlte ramparts. Wh-;le tP.cs,;, !>lements no longer exist .
they •;ere used "" an observation platforw ~or guard purposes, since
the roof of the sally port ''as a good vantage point for a tour of
The t'-'o new guard~rooms (wit'1 <: p:.icon in the rear of each)
were begun about l•ugust 15, 1835 and ;;~nished that same year.96
On November 25, 1835, Lt, llenry ''· Thotupson, toho had stayed""
at the fort to dir<'~t other improveir.en.:o, notified General Gratiot
that he had corrmnnced cutting do""ll the tr~es grotoi11g in the fort
(planted ca. 1800) unci on the ravelin., He promised that this 1nili
tary logging operation ,,·ould be dispntchc,d in short order.97
During the fol,lo'-"ini> S~pten1ber 1C36, General Gratiot and
Captain Richard Delafield of tha Engin~ers, inspected Fort McHenry
95,Lt. Thomas Lee's "Estimate [and Plans] of Materials a.nd Cost of Building a Guard~ &.c. at!!!!.!: C!c\ienrv, Md.," .iuly 9, 1835, NA RG92 OQC CCF 179!.··1915.
9 6Report on tl>c Condition of l'ublic Quarters at Fort !1cH<':nry, by l,t, Thomas L:zc, ~~i't-ber 30, 1835, l<A RG92 OQG CCF 1794-1915,
97H.A. Tb.ompsott to Gan, Crutiot, November 25, 1835, Ni\ w:;77 OCE LR 1825··37.
•
•
•
'' with an eye to improving its artillery emplacernents.98 As a result of
this t!'.eeting, Capi:ain Dcl<ifield prepared elaborate plans for an
extensive outer gun battery to replnce the abandoned shore-line bat-
teries. tie a.lso proposed that the bas~ions of the fort be "restored"
with its gun embrasures as per the 180J plan.99 Both Delafield and
Cratiot endorsed the 1803 plan on September 27, 1836, l•ith that purpose
in mind. There is no evidence however that the embrasures were
"restored."
Delafield also detailed a breust-height wall of brick to sepa,-,;t·.,
the ea.-then parapets fro01 tl>c terreplein, thlls .-cplacing the short,
sloped ba11k ''hich had formerly served that purpose. This three foot
high bric\< revetment ''all was built by ·rhompson and finished by the
end of October 1837.lOO Its appearance is practically unchanged to
the present time. Thompson also repaired the sca•p W'1ll, by replacing
defoctive bricks and repainting the entire wall. He removed all the
coping stone and replaced it with Patapsco granite, a local stone.
During this same period 1836·40, Thompson supervised the erection of
a new outer battery, and a new sea '-''111; nnd he acquired additional
property for the government. Some of Thompson's improveme11ts are
shot..-n on a plan dra"'<l by him in 1837.101 This plan shows the intend~c'
98Gen. Gratiot to Capt. Delafield, September 12, 1836, NA RG77 OCE SPLOE 1812-&9.
99National A•chivc~, Cartographic Sectio!l, Record Group 77, dt'1\.Jer 51, sheet 8, drawn by Richnrd Del<lfield, Captain of Engineers, September 27, 1836, endorsed by Gen. Gratiot [H.A.R.P. map no. 6].
IOOH.1\. Il1ompson, agent of fortifications, to Gen. Gratiot, October 24, 1837, NA RG107 OCE SC F'f-MC 1811~37.
101Fort McHenry, Md., 1837, by It. A. Thoo>pson, Superintendent, National Archives, Cartogrnphic Section, Record Group 77, dra,,.·cr 51, sheet 9 {H.11.R.P. map no. 24].
----
•
•
•
44
inclusion of two gun platforms in each bastion, but apparently they
were not installed.
'Jhompson also directed the closi11g of the gateway through the
ravelin and the elimination of the bridges, in 1838. Access to the
sally port was effected by means of a ramp from the ditch, much as
we see it today.
Thompson's Annual Report submitted October 17, 1839, noted that
the breast-height wall had been raised 18 inches, covered "1th zinc
and coped with sandstone, the scarp wall coated with a thick cement
wash {traces of which are still visible), a breast-height wall built
on the raveltn and traverses ~aid for seven guns on the ravelin.102
On Dece:mber 4, 1839, after a t:hree year period of extensive
additions and alterations, the u. S. Engineers pronounced the wrl<
cOlllplete and tutned the fort back to the Army, The appropriations,
expenditures, and compensation of agents at Fort Mcllenry for the yeats
1836-1839 totaled $136,062.06. Ai though var.ious 01inor alterations antl
repairs to the "star fort" have b<'en m~<lc ~i.nr<> l~1,o. "" ~111:.,1F;r•~t
changes are evident" 103
The last major change in the sally port vicinity was the result
of the proceedings of a board of officers ''hich convened st Fort
10211, A. ThO!Ilpson to Col, Totten, Chief Engineer, October 17, 1839, National Archives, Rccorda of the War Deparonent, Record Group 77, Office Of the Chief of Engineers, Letter~ Received, 1838-1866. Cited hereafter as NA RG77 OCE LR 1838-66.
lOJFor a full narrative of wrk done during those years, see "An account of such Repairs to Fort 1".cHenry as appears on the books of the Engineer Department," by Capt, Frederick A. Smith, Engineers, May 5, 18lo0, NA RG.77 OCE !JI. 1838·66. See also a map of Fort McHenry, drawn by Capt. Frederick Ao Smith, May, 1840, National Archives, Cartographic Section, Recor<l Group 77. dra~er 51, sheet 14 [H.A.R.P. map no. SJ.
•
•
•
McHenry on May 21, 1857.104
The purpose of this meeting was to dia-
cuss the crowded prison conditions '1nd to sealc " remedy. the p!'o-
ceedings outlined the problem as follo"s'
The prisoner& from thi~ pust acd from other stations are from 1:i.;elve to thi•ty men and are s" crowded and depriv<od of proper ::e~thi_n_g,_ e~r o.- sleeping space as to be detrimenctll to h.,a!.th.
The report f1.<rt\1er me11tioncd th<•t "casual ' prisoners were forced to
be confined with "confirmcld dclin~.uints," resul~ing ln a "constant
deterioration of morals.·'
The board conclu<l3d 'h~t the prison roomz located in the guard-
rooma over the bomb-proofs to b' no~ only contracted but unsafe, and
"entirely inado0qoate to mai.ntniring the d~sci?line of a post expose6_
as is tliis to the temptations oZ a la-.-ge city ••. "
This -.-eport, ,>lus th~- fact th.at four prisoners had dug their
way through the tocli~, was responuihl~ tor the construction of ne~
prison facilities. This l-'as to t~ e<:compliGh"-d by building an addi-
tional roora on each. end of th<' exi~tinr, !',l'ar<l-rooms, to he plRce<.I
over the bomb•p-.-oofs as bcfor.i, but ''ithout any alterution to the
arch below. The room ~o b£ .~'ldcd .:o thco north end ""ould simply
serve as a guard•r<Jol'I, toher'""~ th"- scutb.,,rr. addition w;,uld be divt<'.e~
into a pL.ssagcway with th:o~" s~1ail r~~non cellr, "ventilated hy iron
doors," the whole tLJ cost ~~ouL $1400 0 l05
l04u Proceed ir.gs of :: Board of Officers convened at Fort McHrnry, Md., " May 21, 185/' 1ll\ RG77 OCli Ll' 1838-66.
lOS,.Estimate of cost of hoi"dine Guard House at Fort McHenry, Md., " by Maj< L L Lonn~ds""• "unc 13, 1857, llA RG77 OCE LR 1838-66"
•
•
•
Plans and covering letters for these extensions were trans-
mitted July 27, 1857, and included details for holloµ walls to ren
der the space more habitable ",.,by freein& it from drunp. lOb Ap-
proval for the work was issued August 10, 1857, and work began al
most ittmediately.l07 Theoe additions were completed in October,
and represent the last substantial changes to the sally port complex.
Small Windows and vent holes were bricked up but no structural
changes have taken place since 1857. The three small prison cells
added at that time "ere used during the Civil l./ar, and one Confederate
officer has left a vivid account of hie e~perienccs in the smallest
of the three cells, describing the dampness and filth in that place. 108
In the late nineteenth century, such damp places were subject
to medical criticism. This criticism ~as especially aimed at the
106"Fort McHenry, Sketch of proposed changes in prisons ••• ," received >'ith Maj. Bre"·erton's letter of July 27, 1857 [H,A.R.P, Map no. 21]. National Archives, Record Group 77, Records of the \J,,r Deparm.ent, Office of the Chief of En&~neers, Map File.
'" '" 1857. Maj. Bre,.,.,rton to Gen. Totten,
N'1. RWD RG77 OCE LR 1838-66, Chief of Engineers, July
107Gen. Totten to Maj, Brewetton, August to, 1857. National Archives, Record Group 17, Records of the War Department, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Selected Pages from Letters to Officers of Eugineers, July 4, 1812-February 20, 1869.
l08"Henry Hall Brogden -~ An ALcount of His Experiences During the [Civil) lilar," /I personal narrative written by H. H. Brogden lolhich includes his imprisonment at Fort McHenry, 1863~64. Original ~!S owned by Mrs. Charles K. Lennig, Jr., 45 Woodale Rd., Philadelphia 18, Pennsylvania (copy at Fort ~fcHenry) •
•
•
•
unhealthy use of c'1se:.'a'eP er "bo;nbproofa'' for habitation. Since
the Engineers ''ere being taken to task for d'l~igninr; sn-oh uninhabitat-!"
spai:es, Lt. Colonel W, C', Craighill of tl1e :>ngineers, felt constraine<l
to state that the cri::tcir,~ ·.>'~s '"'just, ~s fo!lo\!s:
Thr:. case::>.-~~- 1.·.;ce ""e·;e::o ~nt£:>o'.~1 ~-~~EngineerE to be occu;;-i.~·~ .'0'>.,,_)~·f. -~~ti,r~_.9.cf .. l~O:. ,-,,,_d it ia probaL!a that •. , thco "''c'.ic .1 off~c~r~ '-~ulJ cot. h~ unwilling to s\1elter the:;~.~.J.veo l.:1 t"-c~.: •;!!o:c ah~li'.l ,<~. frc>r' a fleet were fly-in[;.,100:
<~c::cI.USIO:;;
Fort McHenry ~a no~ ~lte d~sic;n o~ any one ancin3e!'. or architect.
Felix Louis Mn~a'°nh~<o'1 a<:d Ja!:lC~ lllcoc!< ,,~~igne<l tl1e Revolutionary
had been so co':lpletel;r nl~--:-ed thato t\-,,,ir ito~lt·~n<><• upon the desigc:
of Fort Mc'.!enry itseJ~ •:as ncgli~iblc, Jo'._,;,,~,,.::, Ulrich Rivardi,
French artilleriat. an:! l'lili<:"-ry '"gin~~.-, '_ti usua!ly credited with
the architcctt•re of :?crt ::c•:e:it)-', !it•: c:•i-; '-~ a ~ross error and cte:Ds
from the "idely \<.no'"' publl.c:ition o~ !l~s !e'c~Cr3 pertai:i.ing to t'1e
1794-95 i1Jprove'.'Jc'1.ts at Whetstone Poi<1'. Sa-:ue1 Llo~~e. fortifications
responsible for ~011ti•_uin:; """'"of Iliv.:.,,,l!'c. Gc~i[:ns, but neither of
thl!lll made any con~ribut!o:'l to tl1" fDrt ~t~clf, b'Jt rather to the
lo""'r gun batteries.
l09Lt.··Col, Cro!.e;:,111 tJ Con, i'.::y; Bclti!llor"• April 30, 1885. National Archives, P.ccorJ Group 77, R~cor:'r. of the War Department, O:;~J.c<J ('If tiie Chief C( E"girrcers, Letter~ ~~><t Baltimore District Office, Pebru"-"J 4, 18!8 - fel::~uary 20, i;·.0.
•
•
•
Major Louis Tousard, French artillerist and military engineer,
was commissioned in 1796 to desir,n a foct ,,;1ich could 'lfford defense
against a land attnck from the rear.llO ,\lthough his plan was
approved, no work in that direction wns ncccmplishcd, Only With the
appointment of John (or J,,_,1) Foncin, another French gunnery office.-
and military engineer, did a i>lon for tl'a masonry-faced, pentagonal
fort materialize fro:o a crumbling earth''" atur reJoubt. Furthenoore,
Foncin personally carried his pl<1:1 into :ccality. Except for the
later addition of u ravel in (•,1loicl1 t:1<\y have beea in his original
design) and ch~".lges in th;:, ~mbrusures, :1i:> d'>sign of the fort arid
inner buildin3s c·~n,ained ~n~l1ange<.! until n£t~r the Suttle of Balti111ore
in 1814. F~<-·~h Ge11tlenaa," wus p!"aised by James
thnt ev~dc\lcc of abil ltj in his profession by correcc:iP.[; ,,-:,:c,r~ of !Ouch co1'-iequcnce, in tile origin'-'l pl~n vf the w~r!<:o, as ·-·011 as assiduity in Su~c .. _\,1:.Jn~;_.,;; d:i.d C'_r·.~tins their progress •••
McHenry
McHnn•Y con~id~•ed hi: .• "·.,~:·t.l1y r-~ ~-r~c~, ccrcp"-tcnt to what he has
he spent laying cut ,-_,,_i c:~,-~ctin;-: ~he "''-'cti"n of Fort McHenry, arn
ably expresse<" t~- "- ie<:~e~ ~-- ;-ici!~ni:y, ·.,t'-_tt~n only two months pre-
vious to th~ bo1\l;:icd.o~nt:
-----·----------- ----· llOFor Tousarc.'s th"t>t'eci~--1 •·ritin,>,s on fortification, see
Louis De Tousard [1749·1~2J.], .'.\!.\oS.O.f.S-:i_£1_::_t_i_l_lcr1s_t's Companion or Elements cf !l~·c.llei:-y._,_,_ (Philud€~>'i\ta, lS·'~), vol, 1, chap. 25, "On Fottifi'>ation;" ch~p. 26, "Sur·.;.1~i:y Jl,;say on :·-'ortification;" chap. 27, "Of Pi:-cctical i"ort~ficatic,r;."
'" Ja.,,,,s McHe1ry tc- Saro· i ;Jexter, Sec. 0£ \/ar, May 29, 1800. McHenry Parc:cs.
•
•
•
• •• and I still keep alive the flattering remembrance of the Satisfaction of the citizens of Baltimore, "'hile I was Wilding for McHen..-y.,. lt is a painful idea to me, that the beautiful city of 8altiroore [should] be exposed to the disasters of War; but my mind will be a little solaced, if Fort McHenry does answer the purpose for which it was established, and affords me the Satisfaction of having contributed to your defencc.112
112"Col. John Fancier {sic] to Ja(tles McHen..-y," July 13, 1814, Harrland Historical Ma,;;azine, V (1910), 182-83.
•
•
•
APPElIDIX I
l"hetstone Point Lands
The land comprised by l-/hl!t$tone Point was apparently first
patented by one Charles Gorsuch, on February 24, 1661, ll) but if so,
i>e abandoned it, for on June 2, 1702, a patent for the land was granted
to James Carroll, who naroed it "Whetetonc," perhaps because of its
shape or its mineral deposits.
The Point was considered a favorable location for a town, and
an Act of April 19, 1706, made it a Port of Entry. Any such commercial
favor was not forthcoming, and in 1725 Carroll sold it to John Giles,
who relinquished control of the land to the Principia Company, in 1727.
That company, an association of Dritish ironrnasters and merchants,
purchased of Giles all the iron ore upon "'' under his property. This
colonial con:mercial enterprise intended to mine tl1e iron deposits for
the manufacture of pig and bar iron.114
When the })aryland Conventio11 ordered defenses built on the site
in 1776, all the property \';as confLscated from the Principia Company.
In 1780, ~hile the fort continued to serve the defense of
-----------------ll3corsuch's name was later appticd to the Point across the
channel from \Jhetstone. Gorsuch's Po!nt ,,·as the site of the Lazaretto sun battery ''hicl• pl.~,-~d c. minor role in the defense of September 13~11,,
1814. ~hether or not Gorsuch actually patented the peninsula of land later kno'WTI as Whetstone, is a problem requiring additional research. In fact, the entire histo"y of title transfers for ~hetstone Point needs more precise study from primary sources. This appendi~ should be considered a brief preliminary attempt.
114Henry Whitely, "The Principia Company," ~nsylvania ~lagazinc. of History and Bibli9graohv, XI (1887) •
•
•
•
" Baltimore, the land was surveyedllS and platted into 76 lots, with
the intention of auctioning it off to raise badly needed money for
the Continental Army,116 The first such auction took place on
t.ugust 14-15, 1781, at '"hich time about 16 lots were sold, mostly
those on the upper end of tlle p~ninsula, Twenty-six additional lots
were sold at the second auction held September 24-25, 1781.117 ihe
lots \ohich were occ\lpied by the "star fort," gun batteries, and out-
buildings were not sold until July 30, 1782,118
l15samuel Chase's instruction re sale of Whetstone Point, n.d., Executive Papers, Nov,-Dec,, 1780, Hall of Records, Annapolis.
ll6The Council insisted that the lots on \·lhetstone Point be sold for specie, that is, h<ird money, for the "Purposes of the Officers and Soldiers of our Line in the Southern Army, •• ," Council to Nathaniel Ramsey, August 6, 1781, Arch. ~Id., XLV, 547 •
117"Acco, Sales of Sundry Lotts [sic] situated on Whetstone Point sold at Public Auction Septem. 24th & 25th, 1781, by Ordet & Direction of Nath'. Ramsey Esqr, One of the Commissioners for ConfisM cate<l British Property," September 26, 1781, signed by T[homasi Yat .. s, Auctioneer, Maryland State Papers, Red Books, 1767, XX, 3. See also N. Ramsey to Gov. Le.e, October 7, 1781, Red Books, 1768, XX, 2. M. Gist to Gov. Lee, October 2, 1781, Brown Books, 532, III, 64, T. Yates to Gov. Lee, October 8, 1781, Letters to the Governor and Council, Arch. Md., XLVIl, 517, Council to Thomas Yates, October 8, 1781, Arch. Md., XLV, 636, Nathaniel Ramsey to Gov. Lee, [August 31?, 1781], Letters to the Governor and Council, Jan. l•Dec, 31, 1781, Arch. l'ld , XI.VII, 464,
118Map of l<hetstone Point showing boundar~es of lots 60-76 super· imposed on Fort McHenry, August 1907, in Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore (ll,A,R,P. map no. 292], See also 2 maps of platted lots adjoining Fort McHenry Lands, December 29, 1817, National Archives, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, drawer 51, sheet l~. See also list of title transfers for lots 1-76, Maryland Land Office, filed in H.A,R.P. archives, Fort McHenry in August, 1781 chronological notebooks. These consist of brief abstracts, without adequate documenta• ti.on to determine the ultimate disposition of each lot, especially those lots which were deeded to the United States government from 1795 to 1800. See also B. Dickeson to Nath' Ramsey, July 31, 1782, Executive Papers, COIT.missioners of Confiscated Property, 1781 - 1784, Hall of Records, Annapolis.
•
•
•
52
After that date, the entire ownership of \·n1etstone Point was
vested privately witil a number of individuals, ln the early l790's
when the federal government planned an ove..-al! system of co'1stal
fortifications, the interest in Fort Whetstone was revived. The Mary.
land Legislature in December, 1793, granted permission to the War
Department, upon application to the Governor of ~.iaryland, to build
additional fortificatio"s upon 1-lbetstone Point, "with the consent of
thc o>mer of the soil,"1 19 1','hcthe.- this consent was granted willingly
or by condemnation with recompense, is not clear, 120 At any rate,
those lots numbared 73 through 7G, which comprised tile outer works,
were not deeded to the U.S. until July 20, 1795. The lots (numbered
6S, 68-72) which had been occupied by the old earthen "star fort" did
not pass into government hands until November 6, 1798 and August 26,
1800.121
119 "\olhereas the United States <:Jay think lt necessary to erect a fort, arsenal, or other military '"'rks or buildings on Whitestone [sic] Point, for the public defence: Therefore, Resolved, That, upon the application of the President of the U1tited States to the Governor, for permission to erect a fort, arsenal, or other military works on the said point, for the purpose aforesaid, the Governor shall, and may, grant the same, with the consent of the ownei- of the soil,'' By the House of Delegates, Decernbei· 25, 1793, American State P~pers, XVI, 71.
James McHenry "voted in favor of the resolution to grant the federal goverP.ment, with consent of the o....,er of the land, permission to build a fort or arsenal on 1-lhetstone Point ••• " Bernard C, Steiner, The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry ••• (Cleveland: 1907), 144.
l20"The collector at Baltimore has been directed to take measures foi; ascertaining tl1e value of the land at \.lhetsto"c Point, near Baltimore, whereon the fortifications are erecting," December 17, 1794, American State Papers, XVI, 106.
121 sec unsigned, undated manuscript history of Fort McHenry, ca. 1887, sheet 15, H.t •• R,P. chronological notebook for 1887, July 20, 1795, from Alex. Furnival, 7 acres plus, under ~ct of Congress, June 9, 1794. November 6, 1798, ftom Wm. Goodwin, 2 acres, same act. ~"gust 26, 1800, from h'm. Goodwin, 11 acres plus, same act.
•
•
•
Additional property (24 acres) was acquired in 1836.122
l22"An account of such Repairs to Fort McHenry as appear on the b"ooks of the Engineer Depa..-tlllent," Sheet 7, submitted by Capt, Fred. A. Smith, May 5, 1840. N-tional Archives, Records of the \Jar Department, Record Group 77, Office Chief o[ Engineers, Letters Received, Sl028,
See also "PLAT of TUE LOTTS [sic] OF UND Belonging to the GENERAL GOVERNMENT on "hich Fort McHenry is Erected,'' surveyed June, 1840 by A. J. Bouldin. National Archives, Cartographic Section, Rceord Group 77, dra•:er 51, sheet 13 [H.A.R.P. map no. 109). This plat also has a list of title conveyances for all the lots involved.
•
•
•
54
APPENDIX II
Foncin 1 s EstiUIAtel23
An Estimate of the Expense for the construction of a Fort to be erected at Whetstone Point near Baltimore.
Stone Perches
'°' '"' foundations. • • • . . • • • ""' '°' '"' \~all of the Ramparts . • • .2300 3700
'" the counterforts or buttresses 000 at 20 shill p. perch . • • • • • 9866.67
7400 •• ,.bushels of lime@ 2/b. • • • • • 2466.67 Sand • . • . . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 925. -Masons work ., '"' rate of $1 p. perch • • • • • • 3700. -
Bricks 600,000 Bricks '°' the well @ $6.I; • 3900.-
1,800 bushels of lime, • • • • • • 600.-
Sand • • . • . . • • • • • • • • • JOO. -Masons work at "' rate of $3 ''· thousand bricks. ieoo.-
Earth by the cubical toise Solid of the Parapet • • • . 560 Solid under the Parapet. • .1600 Solid of the Banquette • • • • '20 4140 Solid of the Terreplein. .1560
from the foundations . • • • 300 at $2 per cubic toise • • • • • • •
Powder Mags~ine. • • • • • • • • • • •
Cistern. . . . . • • • • • • • •
16958.34
6600.-
8280,-
1600.-
soo.-
All the buildings for the avenue. off. sold. & [rest unreadable] 6000.-
$ 39938.34
123Enclosed in a letter from Robert Gilmore to James McHenry, Hay 6, 1799, McHenry Papers.
•
•
•
SS
APPENDIX Ill
Foncin and Fort Independence, 124 Boston, 1800-1802
During May of 1800, James McHenry resigned as Secretary of War.
The fortifications at Baltimore were as yet incomplete. Foncin was
still in charge of the works but being a McHenry appointee, his posi-
tion was certainly less than secure. McHenry was well aware of the
delay and waste that might result should the fortifications be subject
to yet another engineer's ideas and opinions, To assist a smooth
change of administration, McHenry prepared a lengthy report (for his
successor) "1hich outlined the state of affairs in the War Department.
In that report McHenry not only identified Foncin with the works at
Baltimore, but gave him an unreserved professional and personal rec0<11-
mendation that may have assisted in retaining Foncin and furthering
his career as military engineer, as follows
vill it be permitted to mention, that l have employed on the Fortifications erecting at Baltimore, in the capacity of Engineer, a French Gentleman of the name of Foncin, and that evidence of ability in his profession by correcting errors of much consequence, in the original plan of the works, as well as of assiduity in Superintending and directing their progress, induced me to raise the compensation he was first engaged at--ihia Gentleman I vould recOllllllend to be continued in employ as heretofore••bein& much mistaken, if he will aot be found, llDtthy of trust, competent to "1hat he has undertaken, upright and unassuming in his conducc.125
124This material on Fort IndeFendence is not intended to be a physical history. It is a preliminary effort to collate two sepatate works of fortification l'hich ate related chronologically and architecturally. Fort Independence further interests us because it shares a ccU\lllon authorisbip with Fort McHenry,
l 25A report frorn McHenry to his successor as Sec. of War, Article 12, May 29, 1800, McHenry Papers, Clements Library.
•
•
• '
McHenry's vote of confidence was probably responsible for the contin-
ued employment of Foncin by the War Department, despite the anti-
French feelings so prevalent at the time. At any rate, Foncin stayed
on at Baltimore until his work was substantially completed. He was
then transferred to Boston where he was charged with laying down a
plan for strengthening the old defenses on Castle Island. The ell.Act
date of Foncin's removal to Boston is not known, but he was probably
on the site by Occohet l, 1800.126
By November 24, 1800, Foncin had 1) appraised the existing
fortification as an "old and useless incloaure," and 2) laid do"" a
plan for a completely new fort to be erected over the old works (See
tllustration No. 9). 7his plan, fortunately preserved, 127 is inter-
esting for its marginal co1111Dents by a Frenchlllan e~perienced in Olili-
tary engineering. Foncin 1s notations interest us not only for the
reference to Fort McHenry, but also because they include his justi-
fication for the new plan.
126on October 16, 1800, John Foncin, was paid $287.72 as engineer for August and September, 1800, including his travel ~penses from Baltimore to Boston. Register of Warrants, 1800-1802, October 16, 1800, General Accounting Office. This could mean that Foncin rell)Sined in B,:ltimore through the month of September and then moved to BQston, or was already in BQston during the t~"O !IIOnths mentioned in the warrant,
127p1an of "to be erected," signed by Foncin, 20, sheet 1 0
Old Fort Independence and a new Fort Independan.c1<, (Superimposed in two colors), November 2,, 1800, National Archives, Record Group Ho. 77, drawer
•
•
•
The fort of Boston having been drawn on the Same Scale as that of B~ltimGre,128 their respective Size may be compared together, it "'ill appeal'. from this e1<mnen that the irregular pentagone of Boscon is somewhat larger. Rut the Site r>f cactLe i.~land has not permitted 1t to be smaller, and conside~iHg tl>e length, narrowness, and irregularities of this i~la,,i.;, th.ere is no possibility to have a good woi::!<. occupyir.3 only the top of the hill, as does the old i"closure, Such "'ork '·>ould have no capacity, no defense; """ the cc1·:oying of earth to form so high a rnir.i>Ci-t, wottld become too expensive, Th.ua considering the public utj_lity, Th" 1ooney of the Government Shall not be entplc,yed in buiJ.c:ing a very defective and impotent fni:tific.1ti',n. 'les~tles the port of Boston is to be att.'.\cked by lergt '~quo.d,,on~ of men of war, and fort independctlC<' ~s us<'d ec .; ~trong p!<>cc for prisoners of .,,.r, Those consitl;orcc;_c>ns giv'' to the last an unquestionable imµ:irt;ince, <.:'' r·:n'.: l~ \o:th tl1e positions !oihich ought to t~ ~t~<.>r~ly ~or :iiyed. 'i:l1erefore great care has beer. u~ed to have the whol~- inclosure "ell flanked. When the (>rotind will be ,;ispo~<'-d, th<>ro Sliall be no landing place ·"i~ho1,:~ bein<: discoverc:d f~oi;• ticc works •
Accordine to this p'_~,.,, '''"} <;erk& have been ascertained as inrlisp2n£a;,1.o, Eut t.h,-- h~no~o.ble Secretary of war will consider th"t "'' e;>gine'i:!r "'''o is desirous to discharge the duties of his StCttioa, ITust al'""YS c~call in his lllind, Thia fundomcntai rtil:.'-, \Ii~, That fortifications ••orks being thG Socuri.i:y o( ~h~ ~r.~ion~, ovght to be not only Strong, but cr.,ctcd 0.1 Soli<~ .\'C<l prrrr.anent Basis.
In 1801, Foncin vrep-L~GJ "''d Sllb,.,;cc~<l ~ ro0re detailed plan or
the proposed fortifications (~e~ Illvnt,·c.ticn t!o. 10). This plan,
also preserved, includcO: nJ_u•1utions, ~ection8, cannon size and place~
J 2'1 building location~, ct~ ·
-------- ------------l28Foncin's plr.11 of '.'"rt I-'.~l~,-,,,=~· ;-,er~i1t ~lluded to, has not
been loceted, which :nnl<os t:s rort Ind"-l'~·-'-"1'~~ drnwings of special interest to our ntudy of tl>e Bc.ltit:'.ot~ i1ar;,o;o defenses.
l29"Fort Independence," '.8'.li, Gig~-~d by Fon~in, National Archives, Record Group No. 77, c:!ra1•er 2C, slice" 2" T!1c si10ilarity to Fort McHenry (designed by Fc.nc'.n ir! _1_:·~~) is ~onS[iCitous, that is, a brickfaced, five bastioned, pentagonal fort, i·'i<' out in the classical French tradition, O•.,tng to site "'oble.n;, Foncin used an irregular pentagon on Castle IsJand, Pl1:•&icnlly, F0,;t I~.<'~pe<Icence waa deBigned to be about twenty fiv~- p'>:r cent lnrga~ (_'_n area) than Fort McHenry, The escarpment walls of Fort Incl~ro.,tlencc -,·~re to be 22 feet high co111psred to about 12 feet "t p.,rt ;.;c1:oni:_y.
Architecturally, ;•'o,,ci<i'~ Jcsi!;n~ for Fort Independence (note the main-gateway) are si.:tgul·::rly u;idi~tiJ>~uishcd, Pcrh,,ps he was atte111pt!"ng to avoid any show n;; "eAt:~.-:Pp,ance" ,.,hich might defeat his proposa •
- - - - - - - -----------~
•
I e r
•
The first called for grouping the buildings in a quadrangle. Of
this plan, Foncin noted that
The distribution of the Buildings ••• is siWl!letrical and agreeabl"· But tbe Place d'armes is smaller tl>an in the 21 Fi(;. Bes~tbe houses of the commandant and of tl1e e>fficers, are confined on each Side by The Barracks.130
11te alternate plan callee for placing the buildings against the
inner periphery of the irregular pentagon, similar to the arrangement
at Fort Hcllenry. Foncin appat"ently ft:vored this plan for he corrntented
as follows:
The distributio:i of t'he b.iildinga, .. is plain and convenient, J.11" _place C:'.>i:~ is large.- than in the 1s~ Fig, the houses of the Com=ndant and of the officers are less confi11ed. ~esides the ground will be earlier ready to admit those buildings,, 131
From other notations Oll this 1801 dJCa·,;i:ig, it would seem that "'Ork
had not begun on Foncin'c plon, for he i_ndicoted existing buildings
upon the grounds "to be successively P'illed down."
As yet we do not kno1·1 the pr<>cise extoent to which Foncin's
plans were carried out, e><cept tha•. i•e remained in Boston until the
fort.,aa completed. Apparently it~~ c<,romission not only included the
design of Fort Independer,ce, U11t also a layout for the general
defense of the city and ~ort of Bo£ton. A misunderstanding over
this latter area of responsibility developed between Foncin and the
War Department, An 1803 lett<.>r £row. Foncin to President Jefferson
brings this misunderstanding into sharper focus. The letter, included
here in its entoirety, requires a prefatory rcsum.i,
130~.
131~.
•
• r
•
As resident engineer at Fort Independence, Foncin completed
his work in December, 1802. At tl1at time he asl<ed pemiission to
remove to Philadelphia (as a personal convenience), there intending
to finish his drawings of the Boston defenses. The Secretary of War
granted the request, possibly t\1inking that Foncin "'anted leave 'With-
out pay. Unknown to Foncin, his pay was terminated "hen he moved to
Philadelphia, where he continued to devote his attention to the
problems of Boston. On February 12, 1603, Foncin was amazed to learn
that he had been laboring without recompense,
Earnestly, but naively, he appealed for his "back" pay, but
Without success. Finally he laid the problem before President
Jefferson with t\1e hope that the President "ould -rectify the e-rror •
Perhaps thinking he coula take advantage of the pressing need for
engineers, he announced his departure for France. What follows is
a translation of the letter to Joffer~on.132
Philadelphia 14 April, 1803
Sir:
The i;'restdent of t\10 United States having hono-red rne with che co~.mission, encloseci herein, to erect the fortifications necessary for the defense of the port of Boston, I have built Fort Independence to the satisfaction of the citizens of that city. This 1;orl< having been achieved, and afte>· four years of steady labor, as rnuch
132Foncin to Jefferson, Philadelphia, 14 April 1803, Jefferson Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania.
The '-'titer is indebted to ~\eir a>ld Ruth Sofair, Philadelphia, for the translation of this letter from the F~ench to EngliBh. Although proficient in English, Foncin wrote in his native language to avoid any "improper expressiou~," knowing that Jefferson was competent eo understand his plight. t~e efficacy of the letter is not presently known.
•
' • I
r
•
in Baltie,or~ _;:'.,-o yc·,r'l] a~ ;_n ?,uston [t"o years]. I had requ.,,,ted rc<.oisa~cn t_,., c<;>t.1c to Plliladclphia, and this favor ha~ .>Cc01 f,ran~c<" '1\P. according to the enclosed lert:e;_· fro.1 tho SecrP.ro:i:_y of IVai: ~ated August 5th [1802].
Having ~i,ua c~.-,~·.nucd _;n th<' Scrvic<', I achieved during the ;7int.•;, ~,,, __ ,:,,,, (<'r t\1e d"fense of the port of Boston, I oe,1t to t;l~ S•.o.:ctur;• of\.;;.;; various observ(lti_onG r"'-ativc to t'i" '>e,-vicrl, ""d I have been paid withoat :u1y d1CficLi.tv, i)ut ''h~lc I ·n<1s using in good faith c;,,-_ o·.,,,.,J,ts c: ;,iy ~·:pBl"~CHcc in the art of fortificati.ons in o-rd.~L- to !:~ t.o~~ Dnd more useful to a country •.1h;c11 I ;:oul~ h~ve '''"'t~d to serve all my life, how S'"'~·>:-i~3cl 1 -.. \"S, ,_,\,~n ··J~thout any prior notice I J;uve heer. <l":>--"~·1c.l of .,;- ~.110,·y ~,_nee the first of December ll30Z] ~,,rs•1uu: t" :>i.-, Sirr,mon,;' l"tter enclosed. herein. I 1i:•:1:• ~-~r.c~ stor.·o._d ''.Y C:utiQs as e"l_"ineer in the Ser;·ic~ 0£ t'1,o !.'n;_:;,.,! 3;_,,te>;. I i,ave c 1o;imed in vain what.;;~~ <'c.~ ." i:CC··l ~-,~ ;;~~')': _•f D"~<'rJb<>r [!802.] to the twelfth o{ ""b'.''''' [l.203], -:hi.; _1_.10 1
: dn.1· b•,ing the one "tier I r~~e<_,, . .,,,, <-•<.· cf.O"t.:, i1>rli::~ctly, tl-.e first notice of the ~1iJ i o~ :h s-, ~, ~"- >': 1 .. 'c·::. ;;ould ~t be possible that I, ';hv 1.u:::c.•.J ''itC1 ·''-'~h '-'"-'3;·a.1t ur.~rl':Y to build "ithoctt i,,._..,,, :· ,.,r;-:_<' · t.nc tct·te o -- ~ul~iw.o;:~ and Boston, I "1\0 ha~3 ;· __ --,,,-._,,;· .. •,.,I'>,,;,, .. ,; t?.s~i[llvny <:rou1 the citi2en~ <'~ --[,r,;o ~-'"' .l:-: '-• ,,, .,.,_ rr,n see from the article oi t.l;~ ~ . .-<..:;eucl~-,~ ;!!;o•ic'."' <Or-.Cl<'Sdd herein, and frcr.\ t:a .. :."•>h<';_ cf ti•,.- 1:01~·.-_,,c --,i,,-, ho.vc vL~i1. .. ..i my work, -.,ci·'--' t '-.- J.'--:'hJ be depci''~ --_ r.,- •:l,c s·· ~:-
'. '•';''''"~' that I 1<0uld .. c:·,c:,. ""d l:i. days?
'L·:u!.y, !. ;,,,,. ''~ ~-,:
Secreta>:;' 8' '·'er .,,,.,. ~<
Pres!.dun:: 'f t' L.:· S -be infl'rti: .1, .. ;· ''"
;:.•C :;/ c,r,.:_~ssion from the
emplo;e<'. .. .-« ~c;- ,_-
nat!v~ la:. L.
·, ,.: ~l·o~l<l st least ·' ( ;·--.c no longer
···~"' _, ; •. ,.,., returned to my
'.:-:.";..le~, .-,.1 entiie ,-,,-::c ---.,"'·c-"
-•-"'"t ·cl '_:_ ~:ia: T have finished the __ , ~· ~ 11 .. cc,.,iission ·.;~th
"hic;1 c r-._ .. ;·; 'c.:· !"·'''·"-'-' •c_·.-.. _,, .. cf rl1~ s~n,,,:ral defense of tioc ,,,,,,;_ ~ --h, ,;t-· :.'"le--"''" F.~r~ Independe11ce is only u re.-: - o. :I,' ,,]__ ·.,,, .\•:cc·r·;;_;,g to the opinion of the gc,oc·~c.c ·-''~ ~t'1.<'r c;.{tc<•ec: ";'" :,1ve visited this place, it !.s cc,.•,: .u~"'~ "::~_",o-,.;,_-_c; ~o i>u;_lcJ a fort, oT at le«si .1 -.o">J ":. , ,;_,, """' r·i---.· ~[ t1'e ~~~retary of l<ar for G<>v._,~.,-:o~ ---.,,. • . 2'' ·ac: J
Tile "~"'-"3~<.' ·"·-··,:c (.'.-_·,_,, 1_;,e LGth of 1't1rch [1803) by "'hie~ t'1e S'cc-,·c-· o". \.or • .. i,,,~,~~ t<> re·employ me, but in con~i<'2rjr« ~u:: ''' ~cc·:<_c,, 3ince my ,~ri:ival in Pltiladelp~;•_c., -~-~ ,.-,,. ._,,,·--' t"'' ;i~=ission "hich
,------- -
•
•
•
he had giv<.:!l me. But, ~::.as. o''" shi·,ld suppose that it has a retro- "ctive e:Cfe '"' <.'.~i~\; is not possible, I could not if'lag!.1"'.c •!i~:10J: i~.tc'''" feeling this severe interruption o~ my :;ervic-~r, 3t <> .uoc1ent "'1en I had reason to ei<pect a recom~c"~"o
'fherefore, sir, by """'l'stcCn.; "1)1self en~irely to your impartial jc•~ti~<:, : ~.1k.:> lib6rty to write you, requesting that you rctur11 to -.ue the original doc=ents on which I 1'~s<.: 0 .1y c•.n:.--,~, ~o tfi.~t YO'-' do not doubt my good faith, and if yo~c J,, 0 _; _ _,;_,,,, is favorable, I would like very nu.Jc!. to rece'"" ._.,,,,., is d·~e rr.'.'. before TtlY departure for }'rune~, lo:..v'.~s bo~k,_~ my passage on the S.S. "New Je::~ey" (~.cl?n'.j~c:, :o ~'•, o>lu"1"-stade) which will le .. ve fo~ -~r:,:er.: -,_, 1_:; ""''''·
Fo::give :"~, s;··. ;i ~ ,-~,, lOJ ncti.'-'" '-anguage. It is a respect 1 D·.•~t ,,;:,.-e·,,_.~ t~c·'·ird$ ,-,,,~, to avoid the use of any irn;orop,-,:- ,, :'·0°,,',~''
ch• ••m th"-" 258 dol)_a··,o
p .s. ,, i"
c-,~;,-
P,<i ·--- --iC~
''C'."i,I ~,,, -
w'_tl. ''.'tc c-ost ,,.·ofound
~""t'"~t, v:::.;• ;.u-,,;;l"
ra my spirit that t1'~ President of uiy secvic"~ J1<.'Jlc:,
the Unitn~ Sta~~~ f·:uu, ·.-.1~11 ;_ c''"' 11,•>i the honor of recei>•int ~,.,~ <:c __ - ·s~~c"', ~ · .. ,~~ ~h" last letter dated 27th cf j"u~_;: "'"'·c .. )". -'-''~::_,.,i ~n Boston, to say nothin'.l of th" cce~~;· i: c-r.t.·. •:s by ,,;,1c:1 t:1c Sccrt.:ary of War ga1•c rr-~ ·:~~t.'.m:",; ,_;_ .t'_-· >st '.jenuine satisfaction,
Since it is ''ot our p,,,._,,_,._ lhc ,,;-,_y;,i"al history of
Fort Independence, this "'"-~C~i:::l
c.• ,Jo··r, (or Jean)
Foncin.
•
•
•
APPENDIX lV
Foncin and Fort llamilton, Philadelphia, 1814
With the completion of Fort Independence, Foncin was
apparently discharged from the service of the War Department. It
appears that he m~ved to Philadelphia shor~ly after his Boston
aojourn,133 and perhaps he remained in Philadelphia until 1814, "hen
he returned to Pra,1ce. lio<Jever, his naoc does not appear in Philadel
phia directories until 1811.134 For.tin's activities for the period
1803-1814 are still unkno~~•, It seems that he was idle lllUCh of that
time, for in 1814 he l<rote of hls "displeasure of not being employed
since many years,,,," but he we:it on to say th;:.t he waa currently
assisting in 1;he design nr.~- erection of fortifications for the defense
of Philadelphia,135
Ihe system of defenses around Philadelphia during the War of
1812 was bolstered 1l:>d S'l(-;>lcmc;tted ur.dei: c~e aegis of the Philadel
phia Con:mittee of Defence. !he Cor.-~ittee 1 n efforts were prilPBrily
directed tow.~rd developing th2 defenses along the Delaware River,
but it has also d~etned adviseable to provide some measure nf
l33sce letter from Foncin to l'l:es. Jefferson, 14 April 1803, translated fr= th:;: :··ranc'i and inc!ud-od in Appendix III.
134"Foncin, John 0,, 191 south Second," The Philadelphia D!,rectnry for 1811, 121, no occup-~tion g~·1<:n.
135"Col. John iioncier !,!!p_I to James McHenry," Phila,, 13 July 1814, M&l~,!'_Ed llistorical Magazine, V (1910), 182-183, The full text is given later in this apDendix,
During this period, Foncin's name often appears with the rank "Colonel," He is not listed in Frcncis B. Heitman, Ristorisal Register and Dictto~sry of the Unite~ States Army ••• Waahin&ton, 1903. Perhaps he earned the rank in France"
•
•
•
protection aloll8 the Schuylkill River.136
On August 29, 1814, the Sub-Committee reported their
i!!llllediate intention to erect field fortifications an the heights and
most important entrances to the city, to wit,
from the west side of Schuylkill, com:nencing at such places as General Willia!ll5, and the United States en!ineers under his command, shall deem proper ••• 37
The Sub-Committee was authorized to call to their assistance such
"topographical engineers and men of science" necessary for the de!ii&n
and layout of the field defensea.136
Two days later, the volunteer "appointees" were names as
follow:
Military Engineers Chief - General Williams Second - Colonel Foncin
For the Topographical Department Dr. Patterson
Mr. [William} Strickland Mr. John Biddlel39
Under the leadership of this group, a corps of volunteer
laborers constructed a redoubt on a hill above the Schuylkill, (see
Illustration No. ll) near "Woodlands," the country house of Willia111
Hamilton. It is difficult to particularize on the division of
responsibility for constructing this 111inor defensive work. However,
136For a more complete discussion of Philadelphia's participation in the War of 1812, see Scharf and Westcott, History of Philadelphia, 1884, I, 573-75,
l37"Minutes of the Co!Lillittee of Defenci;,_ of t'hiladelphia,1814-1815," Memoirs of the Historical Societv of Pennsylvania, 1867, VIII, 35 •
l 3 8 .!E.!!! •
139~ •• 49.
•
•
•
Foncin's response to this special resolution was read into
the committee minutes on September 22, 1814, His letter acknowledged
that
The testi1'll?ny of satisfaction \ihich the General Co1111Dittee of Defence have been pleased to give hiw, is, to his mind, the most flattering recompense for his services, and feeling himself happy in finding an opportunity of showing to the citizens of Philadelphia how grateful he is for the kind protection and friendship that this city hath afforded him during so lllo!lny years,143
Fort Hamilton was Foncin's last work as military engineer in
America, and he shortly thereafter departed for his native France,
Several months prior to his departure, Foncin in a letter to
James McHenry, summarized his l\merican career in oloquent terms which
are especially appropriate to the main subject of this study - Fort
McHenry.
Sir144
The gratitude which I constantly preserve of your kindness towards me, permit me not to go to France, without letting you Know my feelings on this account, You not only have supported me while YQU was secretary of war; but your satisfaction towards my conduct, has been a great encouragement for the exerting of all my facultiea in the service of the United States; and I still keep alive the flattering rememberance of the Satisfaction of the citi ... ens of Baltimore, while I was building fort McHenry. l always have done all that was in my power to show my zeal; and in this very moment notwithstanding my displeasure of not being employed since many years, 1 am happy to answer tile desire of the Citi;t.ens of Philadelphia, who have applyed to me, in order to help thi'm in the projecting and erecting some fortifications for the defence of their city. I do it with the greatest pleasure,
143"Minutes of the COIIilliittee ••• , " op.cit, 172.
144supra, note 135,
r
•
•
•
being extremely thankful for the protection I have enjoyed there during many years. But our French Government being returned to our old beloved sovereigns, it is my duty to go back to my country, and I request ft<llD you Sir, the favor of an ans~er, which might be wuodered as an evidence of the approbation of the U. s. for my services, while you ~as secretary of ~ar. Your letter ~ill be a record ~hich may be some day useful to my son; and I muat not neglect to procure him such an honorable title. Besides I ~ish to retire from the United States in the most convenient manner. I shall be ve1-y thankful for your kindness, and beg your pardon for the trouble I give you.
I am ~ith great respect Sir
Your lllOSt humble and obedient Servant
Joltn Fancie>; [sicl
P,S.-It is a painful idea to me, that the beautiful city of Baltimore be exposed to the disasters of War; but my mind will be a little solaced, if Fort McHenry does sns""r the purpose for '-'bich it was established, and affords me the Satisfaction of having contributed to your defence.
Col. John Foncier !sic] at Francis Breuil's Esq~ Philadelphia
The Honorable James McHenry Esq.r
•
•
•
67
PAll.! B. Architectutal Information
A. General Statl!!Ilent. The brick~faced fort is a unique, surviving American exalllple of a late eo_ghteenth century pentagonal fortification. The sally port is typicai of early nineteenth ~entury gateways built to control acceas to the inner garrison, ;,s such it can be compared to the sally ports at Fort Mifflin, Pennsylvania, and Fort Washington, Maryland,
1, Architectural Character. The massive expanse of brickwork in the scarp walls, bastions and ravelin of the fort, architecturally expresses the protective function of a military instailation such as Fort McHenry. Although the brick walls give the impression of solid masonry, they are only a facing for the earth and sod ramparts. 'ttle sally port ..tiich functions as the gateway through those ramparts, ia a block of masonry, penetrated by a vaulted pa.s&age;iay. 'Ihe top surface of the vault is concealed by brick parapet walls. The under~ ground casemates, on each side of the sally port were installed in 1814 as an integral part of the sally por~. and their architectural character is limited to the brick vaulted ceiling, since these rooms cannot be seen from the outside. The guard rooms were built later, and their inclusion in the sally port vicinity was for convenient control of the gateway. 'ttley are quite ordinary architecturally, small in si~e, and do not reveal another important function, i.e., that of confining prisoners. Atchitectu~al embellishments on the sally port are limit:ed t<' ~l:e l'"'o arched openings with their keystones and impost blocks, executed in sandstone. There are no carvings or inscriptions. 'Ihe only relief in tl1e brick wall surfaces is provided by 3 recessed panels, fr;;.r.ied 1;ith -.·ood ti:im, which are situated over the arched openings of the 5ally po·,-t.
2. Condition of Fabric. Good.
B. Exterior,
l. Overall di;ne11sio11s, F'lrt:: Ove::all ci~cumference approximately 17.55 feet, \>eight avecages 12 feet:, llaveiin: The two leading faces of the ravelin are about 132 feet long. The two bacl< faces of the ravelin are about 67.-8" long. Th" mai<imc·m present height is about 11 1-6". Sally port: 18 fe.:.L ·.«ide, 18 feet :1igh, 35 feet de.:.p. Guard ro<1111s: first rooms north and south o[ saily port, 16 1-1" "'ide, 13 feet high, 26 1-6" deep. Outer roOli!S north and S.outh of sally port, 14'-S" wide, 13 feet high, 16'~0" deep.
2, Foundations, not l<no-;;n.
3. Wall construction. For~: Sloped bri~k masonry wall$, laid up in English bond, that is, illternate rows of headers, with a stone coping, and stone quoining at all three ol!ter corners of each bastion • Ravel in: Sloped brick masonry, laid in cou:mon bond with headers every fourth course, with stone coping and ston<O quoiniog at the three main torners. Sally port: Brick masonry, throughout, Flemish bond on the
•
•
•
e~terior face, coir.mon bond on inner face and sides. Guard rooms: first room north and sout\1 of sally port, are bri<:k masonry, laid up in tcnt!!lOTI bond. Outer rooms north and south of sally port, brick masonry with air space (hollow wall construction).
4, Chimnevs. A chimney projects 4 1-6" througl1 the terreplein from each of the outer casemates. Apparently they were built to serve fireplaces on the end '<alls of the outer casemates. The fireplaces have been removed, but the chimneys remain, They measure 2'-11" each way, are capped "ith a dressed block of granite. S&oke passage is provided by small rectangular vent holes on each face of the chimney. Each of the outer gua.-d rooms were also built with a small chi11111ey to accoir.modate iron stoves for heating the cells. Chimney on southernmost guard room has been reir.oved above roof line, but chiwney on northernmost guard room remains and is capped with sheet metal.
5. Openings,
a. Doorways and doors. Sally port: Sally port openings are 9'0" \ilide and 10'5" high, Each sally port doorway is arched with especially moulded, tapered voussoir bricks, black in color. The projecting keystones and impost blocks are of cut sandstone, Sally port doors are 4!_<" thick, divided doors, separately hinged, heavily constructed with three layers of planks riveted together, Doors are shaped to fit arched openings, Each door is about 4'-6" \.Tide and 10'-4" high, hinged from the sides. One of the d<luble doors at each end of the sally port is fitted with an iriner door so that individual entrance can be gained without opening the main doors. Construction date of these elaborate doors is not known, but they pre-date the 1930 restoration by the War Department, under the direction of L. M. Leisenring. Casemates: Similar but smaller doors control access to the underground casemates. They are 2 5/8" thick, triple thickness of w.:iod, riveted construction, divided at the middle, curved to fit the arched opening, and supported from the sides by long strap hinges. Doors leading to the northern casemates are 1930 replacements, and patterned after the opposite set of doors, date unknown. Goard rooms: Goard room door openings are distinguished from all other doorway openin<;s in the fort by their arched brick lintels, Openings and doors seem to be original, thut is, pre~Civil liar, except for the northernmost door wl1ic\1 is a 1930 replacement. The dressed granite steps leading to the 3 guard room doors are apparently original with the construction of these rooms. On the courtyard elevation of the southernmost room ts a recessed panel, treated like a door opening with an arched lintel, but filled with brick. This is sn original construction, deliberately introduced to balance the symmetry of the overall design.
b. Window openings and windows, The adjacent guard rooms flanking the sally port also have arched lintels of brick similar to the door openings. Those Windows are double-\1ung, four over four in their arrangement of panes. The frames, including sash bars, muntins, etc. seem to be original, that is 1835, in their details, The dressed granite sills are also original. The single window on the north end
•
•
•
of the guard rooms is a replacement, apparently dating from the 1930 restoration. That window opening was originally furnished with iron bars. A small casement window located on the parade ground elevation of the southernmost guard room, lights a narrow corridor leading to the three prison cells. This window is divided into three panes, and appears to be original in its details, that is, 1857. The opening is near the roofline and guarded by iron bars. Below the window is a narrow, rectangular air-vent which serves to ventilate the hollow walls. On the end wall of the cell block are evidences of 3 small vent holes, one for each cell, but these have been bricked up. On the front wall (facing outside the fort) of the two inner guard rooms are evidences of larger windows, but those too, have been bricked up.
6. Roof,
a. Shape, coverir,g. Sally port: flat, covered with sheet metal, wrapped ovet edge of roof, With lapped soldered joints. Application date of present roof not kno-.n, but probably 1930 or later. Guard rooms: shed-roofs, covered with sheet metal, wrapped over edge of roof, similar to sally port.
b. Cornice, eaves, Cornice around sally port and guard rooms, moulded wood cornice, painted white, date unknown. Wood cornice on south guard room replaced in 1930, Cornice applied to brick walls, joint protected by overlapping roof covering. Cutters and do"'IISpouts date from 1930 restoration.
c. Interiors,
l. Floor Plans. Cascmates: small casemate rooms adjacent to sally port measure about 9'-0" by 15 1 -0", Access is by temporary wooden stairs from the sally port passageway. At the ends of the small caseinates are open doorways leading into the outer casemates, each measuring about 18'-0" by 33'-0", Cuard rooms adjacent to sally port measure about 14 1 ·6" by 22'-0". Southernmost room or cell block: consists of a passage 21-10" by 13'-S", whose only access is gained by t·wo steps up from inside tf\e guard room. The passage itself steps up twice to accotr.modate the rise of the underground casemate vaulting. Off the passage are tl1ree prison cells, each measuring about four feet by nine feet. Northernmost guard roam: measures 11'-9" by 13'-0", and presently serves as an electric transformer room, but was originally a gusrd room and prison cell, access from either the adjacent guard roOlll or from its own e><terior door.
2. Flooring_ Casemates: asphaltic concrete of recent origin, brick gutters around edges, with drain holes in the outside corners. Original floor surface unknown, probably wood. Sally port: asphaltic concrete, original surface probably graveled, Guard rooms adjacent to sally port: woad, narrow, tongue and groove, recently installed, e><act date not kno>m. Outer guard rooms and cells: brick floors. Cells have thin asphaltic concrete surface over brick, gutters around edges.
r
•
•
•
70
3. ~all and ceiling finish. Casemates: whitewashed brick. Sally port: exposed bric!<, evidences of previous white washing or thin coating of cement was\\, Guard room i=ediately south of sally port: whitewashed brick walls, exposed wooden rafters in ceiling, unpainted. Guard room i'""1ediately north of sally port: exposed brick, evidence that bricks are reused, some with whitewashing, exposed rafters in ceiling, unpainted. North guard and cell room: exposed brick walls, exposed rafters in ceiling, un~ainted. Cell block: whitewashed brick walls, brick vaulted ceiling also whitewashed.
4. Doorways and doors. Casemates: door openings between case~ mate rooms are unframed, s~uare~headed, with rectangular iron bar lintels supporting masonry above. South guard room and cell block: door opening between guaid room and cell passage bas no door, is unframed, has flat-arch brick lintel. Cell rooms: arched brick openings, heavy iron doors, Wlde up of l" by 21:" and l" by 2" rectangular iron bar fraroes, with 1-l;" diameter vertical bars on approximately 2~,'' spacing, complete with pintle type hinges set in wasonry, <1nd iron hasps, with keepers set in masonry. North guard rooms: doorway between two northern guard rooms is framed with ;,•ood. Frame and door apparently date from the 1930 restoration. Door opening includes one wooden step into northernmost guard room. Opening has brick flat arch lintel.
S. Trim. Very little trim used in any of these rooms, Guard room south of sally port is the only room with baseboards, which appears to be original since they are notched into the door frame,
6. Hardware, is limited to that found on sally port doors, caaemate doors, and guard room doors,
7. Lighting, electric, installed 1930 and later.
8. Heatina_ Caseinates: apparently had fireplaces at one time, but if so, have been removed at some undetermined time. Guard rooms: north and south guard rooms original!~ had stoves, now gone, and stovepipe holes in chimneys have been plugged.
D. Site. Sally port, casemates and guard rooms are built into the earthen ramparts of the fort, protected from the outside by the brick walls, The roofs, ho;,•ever, ptoject above the ramparts, and thus are visible from the front. The outside face of the sally port faces northeast •
•
? '
•
•
_P-.ADT._,
Illustration flo. l
Portion of "Rade et port de Ba.ltl.more," 12-15 September 1781, Papers of Louie-Alexandre Berthier, group 16, map 8, Prin~eton University Library. Map of Whetstone Point shoving "&tar fort," shore-li"e batteries, and buildings,
•
'
• l~· II
•
-- -.. •.
- "'"' E-, ~- - ,;_-'•"--it-,.
- ' "· -·4t.
- " --~
·,i, ; ,If . ~-~--
_[~ ' •
llluatration No. 2
Copied fr1>111 a portion of 11 "Plan of the To11111 of Bal tl..more and ite Environs," b)' A.. P. Folie, French Geographer, 1792. Peale Kuse,,..., Ba.lt:Uaare. Map of \lhetetone Point shawtna "star fort" and ahore-lin11- batteries •
•
•
•
• • • , .
• •
• •
•• ~ -----' _•_j
Illustration No. 3
'·' ,,.·~.,, .,,,,. ·---
•I
'' . _ _,_,,,,
Copy of plan of Fort McHenry, November 9, 1803, authorship un~nown. National Archives, Records of the War De.part:Dl!nt, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, drawer 51, sheet l •
"" -·' -., ..
-
•
' ,
,.,,_ '
'--·
•
•
•
'''· '. •'"'i:'"'"""'"'''"l''"--,-·-'<i! __ ;,._·:./. _:.: .... , ~ r :;.'·'-
. .. _ ... -~-..
' ' ' ' :t..-)lk.
' ' ·-~ ;,
Illustration No, 4
Pottion of an anonymous watercolor palntiP,S of the Fort McHenry bombardment of 1814, Paale Muse....., 8altill>Dre, View of aoutheast ba&tion and sally port,
•
•
•
~ . •. .
•'·--··
--'>-'-'- •.
t: • . _ --..,, ....... ·-··· -
Illustration Mo, 5
Plan of Fort McK Rational A•chiuo',"',',• by William Tell p c • , cords f OU&8in, 1819. artograpbic Secti 0 the War Department
aheet 2. oo, Record Grou.p 77, drawer s1' •
. ·~· .. "'~~ _' •
•
•
•
~.cc-···
. . ' - :--· ..._ ' ' ·' - \ ' ' -,. . . :
..
. I
--Illustration No, 6
Portion of a plan of Port McHenry, by William Tell Poussin, 1819, National archives, Records of the ~ar Ile.partment, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, drawer 51, sheet 2. Plan of fort and enelosed build· ings,
·•
•
•
•
- . : ' .. ,..,_,_, .. -...
'
P ... r1r. "M 11y_
, .
Illustration No. 7
Portion of a plan of Fort Ko:Henry, by William Tell Poueain, 1819. Hational Archive&, Records of the War Department, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, drawer 51, sheet 2. Sections through r11mparts {top), sally port and ravelin {middle), and pastern (bottom),
----""
•
•
•
Illustration No, 8
Portion of a lithograph of Fort Mc~enry, by E. Sachae, 1862, Peale Muaeum., Bdltlow:>re,
• •
•
•
Illuatratioo !lo. 9
• ' ! .. -.=:... •• -.-: c;;-~~
"Port independence w be erected," ll'o'1ember 24, 1800,
.~....__ ......... zo-1 _.$.,.
by John Foncin. National Archives, Cartographic Section, Record Group No. 27, dra""'r 20, sheet 1. Marginal notes on this plan !'efel: to the fortifications at llaltimore, see Appendix III •
,---------- -
•
•
•
,_,- ' .. J_,.1~
'
~· "' ._·. :·j , .
I "-" ,T~ -
I 11 J. -·
- ; ~ _I ' ' - , ,,
I ~-·
.. ,
Illustration No, 10
"Fort independence," 1801, by .John Fonein, French artillerist and ~ilitary •118inear, Thia plan lncludea alternate arran&81116nts £or groupin& of the inner buildill8•• See Appendix III for COIU.parison with Fort Mclleary,
•
I
.. '
•
• _.JI-
--
•
•
~~~·7~ :lir=·&'#,_., --r= :./'.~~ • •• 7 :'·, :------~ __ y ___ "=-~--sr.--•. /11 ,, ' ' ' - ~~- ' ' \'· ' -";.'~: ; \ ; J ('>. , \ I f ! '
J}-< .~ (~ f '-'' 2/ _)'i \(-. -
Ill• ,---
- i :·L __ •--
Illuatratiop He, 11
Plan. of the Parapet of Fort ltam.ilton, 1814, Dr&vir18 in the Villias 6trick• land account book, State Record• Office, Harti•burg, Pa,
• 1
•
'
•
•
•
So,,.th-st Soldiers'
llluatratioo Ho, 12
bastion from south bastion. Rear of Ho. l Rarracks (Building D) at right, Photographer:
Jack E, Boucher, October 1958 •
•
•
•
Illustration No. 13
Detail of typical stone ~uoining at an outside corner of a bastion. Photographer: Jae~ E. Boucher, July 1958 •
•
•
•
',.
;
' ':;,' '
" '
-...
-_ 1, :;-·
---'~·~~;"~1 ~-'._-~ -~~-
, '
Entr,..,,ce to poBtern, Jack E. Bouch~r, July
Photographer: 1958.
' : .,
•
•
•
. .
-- .;-'"°""·;~t.~'tl!,'.;;_
View of sally Photographer:
Illustration No. 15
port and Jack E.
guai:d rooma fraoi parade ground, Boucher, July 195B.
•
•
•
Illuatrat1an Ho, 16
loterior ele~ation of sally port, "1.th doors closed. Photographer: Jack K. Boucher, July 1958 •
•
•
•
Illustration No, 17
Arched entrance to S111all from inside sally port, July 1958 •
cs&emate room ~togrspher:
looking south Jack 8, Boucher,
•
•
•
•
, ,
View from cas...,..te. (at left),
\ ------
Illustration No. 18
southernmost casemate Note brick vaultin&,
Photographer: Jack
lookiug into adjoining and ventilator holes !, Boucher, July 1958,
• ::;;:~~~""~ :· ' -
c-l
'i 1-M•
L.~ ' I
::;:~. -~:.~·;:;;"::..: . ··~'" ..• ,_, --·~ ~~-·~"~"'"~··---
-.. '
/,_-" ' \:
- '>I' - ,.,_,.4'.<- ,. , •. J~1 ··.,- '"~-'1-'1'- ,._. T ' I , w I i
' '
• I
r' ,~I' , ',, '
"' '
do~! .,.w, '"'t""
"' !
'"I """-1--·
' l, ,.-~J.'J, +'•'<
(;ITTJNll Ll'V[L I~~. ;{.~.LY I-Oil (Q\PltX
" ·I'
,,. '
-,,..._ ' '
" '"
"'"'""' ... '
_,
I " 1--_J !l _;-_ I ·•"~-
.,_I
~~•n~-•> ~~·'"
~ .... ~~··~·=· ... 10,.~C> -~'"'~
-~---
I
1 I
-~-- ~·- -~·"•> - ,,. ,:,•
,,. ,,. -
' ' ' ... , ... , " ..... """"' """" "'"""'c "''"'""" ""'""""" """""' ·~ "10 ""'"
•
• •
=--l '
1 l.
'' -~"-
'<-•···--· -···-·-'-~
. --
. j
tAST :::t l"VATlON '"-"-"' J'-1'0'
1-::r_ S11.Lt1 r.D!.!1-"'''°"'" _.,,.,,,,. ""-'"'°'"o
_,_~··--.- ,, .
•
-=~·-=· ~ ... ·-·--~
::, ·""·~;·'.':~ ~:~-~" .. -~ ···--·-, ·-"" --·"· .. -·~·-· "~-~·' _,,~~-·-· - . . . , . . _...,..,--..-~~-.. ~f'.""iORC
,..,..,.,_ ..... """ ,.,, ... -"" ....... ~·~ "''"~
•
II
,,;• .. ,,,,,..,, .. ,,; /·i.!<•O',i'.>',,t', _1e
'\L~J ;Cl'! t,-1, ,.-,,, :
~----,._
•
,,rt-' , I 1--, er '
~+ '
' ·;1,1 '
, '
--~ ~ l~r ,-,. 'I! LY PO::!T
"' , •'
"'f •.. ' ! ,;'I ' '
·~ ' i -,: '
- I
,,,,,' ,,,,, ..... , ........ . &W U!,."12'r""'-...._ WWW : ' ''
"'""""" ..... """ ..,,.,.,_....,._, r U<f ««::"OY ""' r~""1 ";ro_w OIT >lID """'.>OlC. '""'"" • ""11'"'= COJttT;- l"'-' """"' M!<Yl1'l!D
·~) .. ,~...,..
•
• • I
:.1·cr'.'· ---~ ~,,,:-1 ... , -\' . ___ ,_:.I\'.,,~,,','<
"" '· -.. . i, '
' ' qi
~ "
·1·-- ,, ----·1' ,.
-_,_ '"' '
T' -~--~-,,-[F[_~_~-~---~-... =:5_:__ Bl L
l -~ j \
I I ] :
"
-- ... '
-,,,..
- . ' I.
' ·-,-"I ' l ' -~ -l ! I
' ' ,, . -~ "'""'"~ ""''"""" ""'"''"'" ..,,.., .. ""~-~-''"'~
•
• ·' I
'' . ,_<, : ~1-r---~-----:------, '
,.lf_ ! i -11n\lUITl/f_ -I· "I T
:.~ ~ rf ., c ~~I j -L I ' " I •.111
+, ' .
:~· [- • '
'
••-•-··-•• "'~u•o•-~••--•-••••-• ····-"" -------·-
.:,,, -- ·o . '
" - ,, ,,, ..
' . ' '
• T +
'
. ,. +
- .,___
•-'-'' --·' "'
' ,., ,,
' ' ' . ' ,,
~----'
· . I
r-·~ -• •lo'' o~ .,_,
_._, ·--. ..,, '·" o• '' ,•,
•
' ' I
,, - '
r
,,.,.,,,. "···· ·. '"'"' ,_. .,
~-.-~ .. "-~ ".!)'.~ ''::.,::, --~, ..
"'°"'"'" ""'"°"' ""'"''""' ..,~·· -o •, ~·c,.....
•
' -
'
' -. -1· - T ,'0''1
'S'/'c!p•, ;;;··
.. - " --- ------=--~--~-'--::'.. "
"·
,. •-' -·~
-,
-= ..._L~-'·
' "
'
- ·-· ·'
'" ' u
'
•
'·
·~·~ "~~
-- '" ' , .. - __ ., __ ... , ,._,,_ ,,. 0 _.,.
. ' . ' ----
_., -'· "
-t '
: (
,_ '
I i ' '
,-
-·
"
' '
rf5i ,. I
I ' '- L .
L--=' '1 r. ,, '
--1,-~
--j :J ,I·.' --'----'-
,,
.-«
·- c: ·=:i ' '"I --~-_-;, '· ,,_'
"'"'°~" "'"'""''" ""'"''""' ...,.....,. '"'" ,_ ~ >~=
•
'•
'
• ,-
•• '
"!
.~
i ' ~ j ,
L '
-J'...._ ,, '
~ • , I
··-· " --" -\ '
,. " '
~~ nr< : 11.._·,r . :.i_;nc;Lo:i ~ 0 1 (c~-.:,c ;\f;1 L) ,c_,.,,, i',,'
• -,.
::JI ·1 -
'
' <
-~--.1••-""""$+""$"''•·=·,~-··,··*'"""-'1•_,,,..,J.,.._- -- ·~ ,. '•
c1 u r· 1 ' ,. <
-• ( ·- A_'-, r.;
-~:-'' ·',!;':i\ A -,- C: )
• --- ---- - ___ - ,,
0--- D ----·------~-
' '
0- -
i ,.
r ~)f,J'' ~-:.-~ - --- ----r-- - - - -- - +---&~-- ---o--- ~
I
" - .·:) • '.:'}1'.",L' --~'
0'.;., "O ,•,
0 ~-~' "' -·
" -~ ~:~ lL
• • •
• ~-,,
-·~~~"-.'.,~' ',"_)",_ -. .-.a<L;r ,,- ' " !-JiO - ' 0 '1'0<" - '.:'l'1'''' • ,'<IU ·•'-'C(, CC•" , " • ',',LT' .",:•or - .~"1":,~' ;)
"'=>"'0 ""ER>=< """"'"°' """"" ~" ~'''"~
•
• +
I -~
•
' ·'.l
' ' ' ' •
' ' ) '
' ' ' ' -·;
,. "'- ' ',_,,'_,;< .1: ' ...
'' ' ' '"
.
.
• - ,_ .. ___ .,__-,_ •_}'
" :j(:.1i .. J",_,1 -,:,DJl~r!-
1
, - ' • ' I 1 I o:,
' ' : : :1" ' ' 1 I
1 ,I
J ' ! I ~ : JI i_ ,-11rr
1- .11
1 I 1 I, I
I '' ' I'·, , I, I
I ,''I' 1 '1 )_ ,1_1 1 I; 1 1 ~)
.,-,-,_ 11 -:~
''-· ,,
- _,
' -_,
'
-~-,. ''
' _J . ,._ "-·-,, ........... .
. " _, • I
,_
~·-'. : ~-""-- _U , I I
: I I
-j 1_. I I
' I j ... ·--- ... ---~-~~-
_.,,, ...
--· ---, .. ·--··~ """ ""·•·
' -~----~
-~ -·c1 _:____:__~~:-· 1·:.
.,_, : "'sro"c '""''"'" "'"' "'"'" .,,,.....,,, •... ·' ~ -'~
• l
__ ,
• I
l __ ,_
I
...
J
•
"C''.""'OOf" -,~~, ..
- . ·'
._ '
•
- -~~ ~ ,,._ ""-~-· ~"-
• • -,
' '
' ' ' ' '
' ~ ' I '
- .•. ' ' '
'
~i I
"'N" • "''" ""•'•
',.,,._., ,,,, , .. ,_
. -__ ,' '
'
'·''
I ·~ ' "
' ' :. ' -~
•
, ..
-----
•
•
•
CHAPTER II
COMMANDIHG OFFICER'S OFFICE AND l:(UAR'rE'.RS
(no~ kno1JJI as Building A)
H.A.B.s. No. MD·l96 •
Illustrations Only
•
•
•
tllu•tratioo lfo. 19
c.....,.nding Officer'• Office Facade and nortbeaat end-val~nd Quarters (Buildi"8 A). ln 1814, thia ...,
8 t • Powder Kagaaine at left.
"" ( "" separate bu1ldi u1,1e at tha right) and C "8•, i,a,, a Guard (at the left), Thay "8r """:"ndiOi Officer'• Quartera 1819 and before
1829 r:: jo oad together •-ti- afta
July 1958, ' otographer' Jac:k E, lkNcbar, r
•
•
•
- ;. : .
"""~ --111111111
.. !!II - .· -,_ .
- -_. -.. ' - ·" .-._:- -
-.-.
Illustration No. 20
Coomi.andina Officer's Office and Quartera (Buildi11g A). Rear wall and vest end•vall. Phot~srapher: ~ack B. Boucher, October 1958 •
-
•
'
•
• •
•
~:~-
Illustration No. 21
COlllDllnding Officer's Office and Quartera (Building A). Fireplace in eastern....oat roOlll. This fireplace ~sa sealed off sometime iu th& nineteenth century, and reopened during
. .
the War Depar[IJMl!nt restoration of 1929-30. At that ti.Ille, the old cook-1118 .:rane was diacovered. Photographer: ~ack E. Boucher, October 1958,
I
I
• r~· - - .
.... _
•
•
""' ··'). ..
' "·-f" ' -----· ''(':"-.:,~ .. -
' -"'"'"'1~·~~-. - -~ -"'..'. ,_.' .
Illustration No, 22
CQllllliandill,8. Officer's Office and Quarters (Building A}. View of excavation of bricked~up cellar window on front wall, Cellar was filled with earth and openinga were filled with brick ca, 1837, Photographer: Jack I>, Boucher, October 1958,
•
I
1. I
•
CHll.P'J:ER Ill
TIIE POWDER MAGAZINE
H.A.B.S. No. MD-197
•
•
•
" CHAPTER Ill, THE POWDER MAGAZINE
PART A. Historical Information
Ihe powder magazine is one of the buildings within Fort
He.Henry, built 1799-1800, from a plan by John (or Jean) Foncin,
French artillerist and military engineer, Ihe first graphic docuinent
that in any way indicates a magazine inside the fort is s plan of
November 9, 1803.l This plan, curious in several respects, is drawn
to a scale of toiaes, a French measure. in this case equivalent to
six feet. At any rate, a magazine was shown and it occupied its
present position. It was a rectangular structure, drawn only in out-
line, and (by converting toises to feet) measured 20 1-0" by Jl'-6".,
There is no interior arrangement shown, This is the earliest me.asur•
able plan of that building and is corroborated by a slmilar plan of
the fort "hich was dra"t1 ca. 1806, by Captain John B. Walbach of the
Artillery for the U. s. Military Philosophical Society.2 Ibis plan
is also drawn. to a s~ale of toises, and the w.agazine similarly scales
abo1,1t 20 1 -0" by Jl'-6". 'Ihe ca. 1806 plan shows a wall around the
magazine, which might have served either as a low retaining wall to
provide better drainage, or more likely, as s means of isolating the
magazine from the garrison, a cO!li!llon military device. Excavation of
1"Fort McHenry, 9th November, 1803" {H.A.R,P. map no. 1], National Archives, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, dra>1er 51, sheet 1. O>i~inal authorship of this plan i5 unknown, lt was later endorsed by Capt. Richard Delafield, Engineers, and Gen, Charles Gratiot, Chief Engineer of the Army, September 27, 1836.
'Ihe writer ackno~lcdgcs the assi9tance extended by Dr. S. Sydney &radford and Franklin R, Mullaly, National Park Service Historians, doring the architectural evaluation of the historical docU111ents, \lhich they collected and arranged for the Fort McHenry research library.
2"Plan of Fort McHenry by Captain Walbach of the Artillery for the U.S. Mil: Philo: Soc: No. 1" {H,A,R,P. map no. 2], ca. 1806, Jllev York Historical Society, United States Military Philosophical Papers. See H.A,R.P. index card for reference to documenta that establish the approximate date of this map.
•
•
•
the magazine foundations during the 1958 archeological program has
revealed the original building size to be 20'-0" by 31'-6", and thus
confirms the accuracy of the 1803 and 1806 plans, The existence of
the powder house was first officially recognized in a report of the
S(>cretary of l~ar, dated February 13, 1806. 3 Not until 1809 is there
a document which refers to the structure as a brick magazine,4 Finally
in 1811, a War Department report on coastal defenses, describes Fort
McHenry in more pre.cise terms, noting that there was a " ••• Brick
Magazine that "ill contain 300 Barr .. Ls of Powder,,."S
With the mounting tension between England and Altll!rica, the
necessity of improving for~lfications coir.11:anded considerable attention.
By 1811, repai·cs were necessary at '.'ort McHenry; and the buildings
were generally refurbished. By spring of 1813, the t"11lpo of improve-
ments hsd increased. General Samuel Smith, Maryland Militia, in
March 1813, asked the Secretary of War ior " ••• An Engioeer to c0111ple11t
[sic] the forttficatione ••• "6 As a result, on March 27, 1813, J. G.
Swift, Colonel of the U. s. Engineers directed Major Lloyd Beall
(U.S. Artillery, at Fort McHenry, March and ~pril 1813) to carry out
certain improvements at Fort McHenry.
]Report of the Secretary of War, Febroary 13, 1806, U. s. Congress, American State Paper~Do~£!l..tS, Legislative and Executive of the Congress of the United States, 1832 [KVIJ, 194c Cited here• after as American State Papers, XVI.
"'Report of the Secretary of War, December 19, 1809, Ao:IO!~ican State Papers, XVI, 246.
5Report of the Secretary of ~ar, Deccmbe< 10, 1811, American ''"'"'"'"'~'c•,p,•,<~s, XVI, 310 •
1813. Cited
6sam. Smith to Gen. John Armstrong, Sec. of Wa~; March 16, 16, Library of Congress, i'lnnuscript Division, Samuel Smith Papers.
hereafter as s. Smith Papers.
•
•
•
Amcng other things he was ordered to:
Erect a Traverse inside the Fort, •• of Brick ••• in front of the Magazine Door, 12 feet long & 8 feet thick at the Base, sloping two inches to each foot in height ••• as high as tho top of the window over the Door,7
However, nothing was done illl!lediately. Smith again asked for an
Engineer. A month later Colonel Swift ordered Captain Babcock to
erect the traverse which had not yet been built.8 Another m<JOth
passed and the order was repeated. ln spite of the urgent need for
improving the magazine, there is no evidence that the work was executed
until after the bombardment,
The vulnerability of the structure was dramatically emphasized
during the bombardment September 13·1~, 1814:
While men were outside [the] star fort ••• a shell struck the powder magazine where there were many barrels of this explosive. Wben the shell struck lt was deemed necessary to roll out the barrels of powder as the magazine was not bomb•proof,9
Another account relates that, "A sho:.11 struck the corner of the
7col. Swift to Maj. Beall; March 27, 1813. u. s. Military Academy, J. G. Swift Papers. A traverse for a magazine of this period, is a block of brick masonry placed in front of the magazine door. Its function was to protect the entrance from cannonfire. Such a traverse was usually incorporated into the fabric of the building above the door level, and contained a sefer~te entrance or entrances, leading into the powder storage room, While the traverse served as a protective device, it had the disadvantage of blocking light from the interior. Typical e:o:tant examples are che traverses at Fort WashiT111ton, Maryland, built 1815·24.
8col. Swift to Capt. Babcock; April 26, 181). National Archives, Record Group 77, War Depattment, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Buell's Collection, Engineer Historical Papers, 1800·1819.
9Baro..,ay, Aaron, "The Cohens of Maryland," Maryland Historical Magazine, XVlll (1923), 373 "Rerniniscences of the Bombardment of Fort Mcllenry, '1he Star Fort,' in Sept., 1814." Narrated by Col. M. I, Cohen,
•
•
•
" magazine in a slanting direction, and shattered the "all; had it
penetrated, the cn.pture of the fort would have been inevitable ... 10
The fact that there were no bomb-proof buildings within Fort McHenry
and the apprehension that the British would shortly return, prompted
immediate efforts to put the fort in a better defensive condition.
Within four days after the attack, Brig. General Winder directed
Major General Samuel Smith's attention to the work as follows:
There will be required to render the magazine [at Fort McHenry] bombproof, ["1ith] 192000 Bricks lio 40 Brick layers (thickJ.11
From the above quantity of brick, 12 and frcm the existing arehi-
tectural evidence, it appears that "to render the magazine bombproof,"
three improvements were made ii::mediately after the attack of September
13-14, 1814. l) The walls of the magazine were thickened to their
present dimensions; 2) a massive brick vault was built over the
powder storage room, and; 3) a traverse was erected in front of the
newly thickened walls, thus prote<'ting the entrance.
The foundation of the traverse, as excavated during the 1958
archcological work, agrees quite closely with 1813 directive; that
is, tb.e traverse is 12'-2" long and nearly eight feet wide (the full
"1idth being dist>:l"bed by a later utility line). Hot•ever, the location
lOounean, John M., Travels Throueh Part of the United States and Canada in 1818 and 1819 (New York: 1823), v. 1, Letter VIII, 225-26,
11Gen. Winder to Gen. s. Smith; September 18, 1814. Baltimore City Archives, Baltimore City Hall, 1814, Box 23, no. 496.
12The WI:iter has calculated that approximately 90,000 of the bricks "ere used in the construction of the "bombproof" vault, with the balance being employed in the thickening of the walls, etc. The term "40 brick layers" refers to the vault. 40 layers of brick at 2 1/4" per brick gives a vault thickness of 7'-6". The actual thickness varies from 7'-0" to 7'-4", remarkably close to Gen. Winder's order.
•
•
•
of the t..-averse, together with visible evidence in the brick 111asonry,
tend to support the Writer's opinion that the traverse was added
to the newly thickened front walls ~ the bombardment, rather than
to the smaller pre~bombardment magazine.
The haste with which the magazine was strengthened is impressive.
By September 29, 1814, t""<> weeks after the bombardment, Samuel Smith
reported that "The Bombproof for the magazine at Fort McHenry will
be compleat [sic] this day."13
While the powder house was now adequate from a military point
of view, it still lacked a roof to protect the exposed brick vault
from the elements. With respect to this problem, some of the post·
attack improvements at Fort McHenry we..-e carried out from plans by
~la><im1lien Godefroy, Baltimore architect and professor of civil and
military architecture at St. Mary's College. Shortly after completion
of the magazine vault, Godefroy intended to cover the vault with earth
and sod roof, The earth was intended to act both as a roof and as
further protection against concussion, Godefroy's scheme, however,
met considerable opposition from C~ptain Frederick Evans, Con:rnanding
Officer of regular artillery at Fort McHenry. Evans feared that an
earthen roof ..-ould prevent the freshly-laid masonry from curing, as
follows:
Should [covering the magazine with earth] take place, I believe it will not be possible to save our powder, as the arch when put up was done in a rainy time o the absorbent qualities of the brick destroyed ••• (Itl now requires all the air that can be had both within & without to dry the ~alls.14
lls. Smith to James Monroe, Sec. of War; September 29, 1814, S. Smith Papers.
14capt. Evans to Gen. S. Smith; October 9, 1814, S. Smith P<lpers.
•
•
•
Apparently the matter was settled by merely plastering the
vault,15 but the problem was not resolved, Tl1c following year, in
November 1815, an estimate for rafters, plank, nails and shingles,
totaliag $592.60, was transmitted to Lt. Colonel Bomford with the
statement that construction of a roof should be expedited due tO the
impossibility of keeping a1t111unition dry during the winter, and that
"Slates tho' preferable to shingles are not to be procured."16
Apparently the slates were located n.o,,.·ever, since the appropriation
was increased to allow for installation of a slate roof instead of
shingles, and the repair -.;ork included several lightening rods.17
The first professionally competent plan of Fort M.::Henry i6 that
done in 181~ by William Tell Poussin, Captain of the Topographical
Engineers, This plan sho'<s the fort in its ~rnproved post•«ar condition,
is accurately dral"n and includes some rather significant details and
sections,18 The po~det magazine, as sho'WO on this plan, had reached
15The heavy coat of plaster is still intact on the upper SCltface of the brick vault, although there is no docu~entary evidence as to the date of its application.
16Lt. Bache to Lt. Col. Bamford; November 24, 1815. National Archives, Records of the War Department, [Record Croup 156], Office of the Chief of Ordnance, Selected Letters Received 1801, 1806 and 1812·20, Cited hereafter as NA. RWD RG156 OCO SLR 1801·20.
17Lt. Baden to Cilpt. Morton; November 4, 1817. N•\ RWD RG1S6 OCO SLR 1801·20,
18"Reconnoitring of Chesapeake Bay, STATE OP MilRYLAND, Plan and Profiles of Fort McHenry, 1819." Drawn by 1'1ill~am Tell Poussin, Captain Topographical Engineers, H.A.R.P., Map no. 4. National Archives, Cartographic Section, Washington, Drawer 51, Sheet 2,
•
•
•
77
its present physical size. ~iost helpful is the fact that the traverse
is also shown projecting from the front end of the structure, So
accurately is the !!lBgaztne <lra~n that it agrees in dimensions with the
present measured building.
Although the magazine at this time was protected by a brick
traverse, a "bombproof" brick vaCtlt, arid a slate roof to shed rain,
apparently it fell into disuse after the cessation of hostilities.
An inspection report of 1822 notes that the "J1agazine contains only
boxes of fixed awnunition and Cartridges,"19
During an active I"enovation period of Fort t!cHenry in 1829, the
magazine under....,nt sorne changes, Captain J. ~. Ripley, in charge of
repairs, reported to General Grotiot, Chief Engineer of the A.rmy, as
follows:
The Magazine (within the Fort) is entirely useless as such, having two others that are perfectly dry, and in good repair. l request percission to remove a small Traverse from the door .•. in order to admit the light, as I wish to occupy it as an office or Store Room. The T[raverse] is quite small, but so situated as to exclude the light from the door and a window once in use if necessary could be readily replaced.20
Permission for this change "'as granted two days later by Gratiot, on
July 27, 1829. The traverse of course ~as not as small as Ripley
represented it to be. It '"'s a block of brick masonry 12 feet wide,
8 feet deep and 18 feet high. Tlwugh the traverse was removed, its
location was determined in the 1958 /lrcheological program, The
19unsigned Inspection Report, dated September 22, 1822. National Arcl1ives, Record Gro<Jp 159, Office of the Inspector General, Selected Pages ftorn Inspcc~ion Rep"rts 1814-1842 •
20capt. Ripley to Gen. Gratiot; July 25, 1829. National Archives, [Record Group 107], Office of til<' Chief of Engineers, Selected Correspondence Relating to fort McHenry, ~laryland, 1811-1837. Cited hereafter as NA RG107 OCE SC FT-KC 1811-37.
•
•
•
existence of the traverse was shorthlived, only 15 years, but that
was sufficient time to indicate its outline on the front wall of the
magazine, due to the lime action in the brickwork around the traverse.Zl
When l~aj, General Gratiot inspected the fort in 1835, the
magazine was still not a fit receptacle for powder. He noted:
as the present magazine is too damp for the preservation of po"der, <>s ;..·ell as unsafe from its projecting several feet above the ramparts, a new one ts required,22
During the last half of the 1830's, considerable repair of the fort
was carried out under the direction of H, A. Thompson, nephew of Gen.
Gratiot, Thompson seems to have had a free hand in determining the
extent and el<ecutlon of this <•ork.
Among the many repairs and additions made by Captain Thompson
was a new floor in the magazine, as well as a linin,g to the interior
walls.23 The main concern \.las to once again make the magazine dry
enough to store powder, and put an end to the irritating problem of
continual dampness. Thompson's proposed changes were approved by
Gratiot January 8, 1836. From the excavations conducted under the
magazine floor during the 1958 Historical and llrcheological Resear-ch
Program (MISSION 66), it would appear that the magazine had a cellar
space for- circulation of air under a wooden floor. The interior side
2lsee photograph by L. M. Leisenring, O.Q.M.G. Photo of powder magazine and building A, taken February 2, 1927, H,A.R.P. Photo no. 1358,
22Gen. Gratiot to Sec. of War, Nove~ber 20, 1835. National Archives, Record Group 77, \lar Department, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Letters Received 1826-1837. Cited hereafter as NA RWD RG77 OCE lR 1826-37,
23capt. Thompson to Gen. Gratiot, January 9, 1836, NA RWD RG77 OGE Ll1 1826-37.
•
•
•
19
foundation walls have a ledge suitable for accommodating wooden
joists and floor planking, These interior footings extend below
the Ledge for a distance of 5'-8", "'ore than ample for ventilation,
but also so deep as to be constantly damp due to ground water, A
similar flo"r construction \las used in the pO\ldCr magazines at Fort
\.lashington, ~la..-yland, constructed 1815·182~. ln fact, all the
remaini11g service magazines outside the "'alls of Fort McHenry have
wooden floors over a cellar space,
Apparently Thompson filled the magazine cellar with earth, and
laid a brick floor over the fill, just as he had filled the cellars
of the barracks to eliminate decaying of joists and floorins due to
ground water. The barracks cellars were filled about the same time
(1836-37).
Special order No, 70 was issued on August 29, 1836, which
caused the evacuation of troops so as to continue repairs on a larger
scale, Not only "ere buildings repaired during the period 1836-1840,
but outer works, a seawall, boundary wall, etc., were constructed.
During this interval, Captain Thompson was agent for the Engineer
Department, and among his frequent transmittals is a report which
includes the condition of the magazine,
The magazine is large, in good order, drier than those I have generally seen, & has a lightning rod, the only one at the Fort. [The magazine] requires a prote<otion in front of the door.,,24
The "protection" to "hich Thompson alludes, is a traverse to replace
the 011c "hich had been rc1r.oved in 1829. Nothing was done however
abo~t rebuilding the traverse,
24capt. Thompso1> to Capt. Smith, !~arch 21, 1839. NA RWD RG77 OCE lR 1838•66.
•
•
•
The magazine was tl1e subject of further interest, however,
On June 2~, 1839, Thompson sent a plan and section of the ma~azine
to c~ptain F. A. ~mith, Engineer Department. The letter which accom~
panies the drawings describes the building as follows:
The Building is of Brick, with a Slate Roof & a lightning Rod ••• there is no cellar or space under the floor.,,there is but one Ventilator or window in the rcar, •• two doors Which arc good & strong, •• a new window sbutcer will be required ••• it appears to me that the roof might be lowered considerably, & thus prevent its being so conspicuous an object, •• 25
The "window" was in tlie rear wall and ilas since been bricked up. While
Thompson's plan was generally correct, some details were based upon
assumption rather than fact. This is especially true of the vent
holes and roof structure •
Apparently he wa~ aware of the shortcomings of his drawings,
and in a follow•up letter admits to errors. In an effort to determine
the extent of the space under the roof, Thompson sent a "swall man"
into tlie space, but it was too "dark and gloomy" to learn anything,
and he finally concluded that it " ••• cnn only be seen "'ith the roof
off.,."26
The purpose of Thompson's effort "'as to determine if the roof
structure could be lo"'ered. That the roof projected above the rnmparts
hnd been noticed by others. In 1836 Colonel Fenwick had broughc the
matter to the attention of General Gratiot:
••• may I not observe thnt from its height, it presents too conspicuous of its Fire?27
an object to the Enemy fo< a direction
251bid., June ''· 1839 •
2 6 .!.ki.S!.:. > June '" 1839.
27c<:>l, Fenwick ,0 Gen, Gratio~, Janunry 9, 1836. NA RG107 OCE SG FT•KC 1811~37.
•
•
•
81
llowever, the matter, though revived occassionally, was dropped, and
the roof remained uncha.,ged.
On October 22, 1839, Captain lhompaon was ordered to repair the
rear window of the magazine with a shutter on the outside aod a row
of 7/8 inch diameter iron bars, set in the opening one foot inside
the walls, with a "wire gauze" sc-.::een installed on i;be inside,28
With repairs at the fort substantially COlllplete, the ~arrison
,,..,& turned back to the artillery as per Special Orders No. 94, Oecem-
ber 4, 1839.
While other minor repairs have been wade at various times, such
as bricking up the rear window, reworking the doors, and rataing tho!
ground level t.o provide better drainage, the powder magazine has not
undergone any significant changes. It was used as a coal shed in the
1880's, and senerally has never been entirely useful or satisfactory
as to its original function. It was never adequate as to size, nor
was it conveniently located with respect to the guns in the fort.
Altogether, the inagazine never served its function efficiently, and
ultimately it was discovered that to render the outer batteries
effective, several service magazines, continguous with the battery,
were a more satisfactory solution •
books 1840,
1:8"1\.n Account of such Repairs to Fort McHenry as appear on the of the Enaineer Department," by Capt. Frederick A, Sm.1th, Kay 5,
NA RWD RG77 OCE LR 1836·66.
•
•
•
" PART B. Architectural Information
A. General Statement, This powder magazine represents two stages of construction. As originally butlt, ca. 1800, it was the main powder storase facility for Fort McHenry, and as such played an important role in the defence of the fort during the British bombardment of Sept.ember 13-14, 1814, It is said to have sustained a direct hit during that engagement, and its present appearance is primarily a product of extensive alterations following that military action.
1. Architectural Character. Architecturally, the powder magazine is similar to other magazines of the late 18th and early 19th century, and should be compared with t\1e brick arseoal at Fort Mifflin, Pennsylvania, built 1798-1800 and the two magazines at Fort Washington, Maryland, built 1815-24. The massive, block-like appearance expresses its function as a protective enclosure for pololder storage. The lack of fenestration, the narrow dooruay, and the unusually thick brick walls adjacent to the entrance, contribute to the severely plain architectutal character. Exterior architectural detail is limited to the eight-sided, gambrel-type roof and the corbeled brick cornice along the sides. The original design of this powder magazine is unknown, since in 1814 it ...as completely enveloped by five feet of brick walls, and the roof replaced with a brick barrel vault. Originally, it was a rectangular structure of brick, 20 1 by 31'-6" in size. The interior po...:ler chamber is little changed and measures lD' by 26'. The side walls were originally five feet thick, while the front and rear walls were originally three feet thick, The original door opening still exists, but a window over the door which once daylighted the interior has been bricked up, The magazine once had a wooden floor, supported by joists over a cellar space. ~he cellar has since been filled with earth, and the wooden floor replaced with brick paving,
2. Condition of Fabric. Very good.
B. Exterior.
2. Poundations, The sidewall foundations of the original magazine are of random sized quarry stone, about :>'-4" thick, and extend below the joist ledge line to a depth of S'-8". When the brick walls ""re thickened around the eKterior of the building (in September, 1814), the additional required footings were constructed of brick and extend below grade about four feet.
3. Wall Construction. Brick throughout; the side walls are now 101-3" thick, front wall 8'-3" thick, and rear wall 6'-1" thick. Brick is laid up in common bond with headers inserted at irregular spacing, varying fro.m t~'C to eight courses. A portion of the original front wall ts visible above the doorway and brickwork in that area is laid in English bond.
I i I •
•
•
83
4, Openings.
a. Doorways and Doors, This structure is typical of other early nineteenth century powder magazines in that it is equipped "'1th inner and outer wooden doors. The door opening penetrates the origi· nal front wall which is three feet thick, and the doors are flush mounted on the inner and outer sur[aces of that opening. The outer door, of 2" stock, is supported by \Otought iron strap hinges, The infilled panels are composed of beaded boards. The inner door is 2" thick, is supported with iron strop hinges which embrace both sides of the door, The inner door is more like a cell-door, It has four rectangular openings with iron bars. This door is similar to those in the powder '°'"gazines at Fort Washington, Maryland. These doors probably date froro the mid•l8JO's,
b. Windows and vent holes. Originally, the magazine con• tained two ~indows, one over the door and one in the rear wall, The front window was bricked up at an early date when the outer walls were thickened, bur the rear window opening served at least until the late 1830's when it was fitted with i.-on bars and a ""i.-e gauze" screen. At some undetermined time after that, the rear opening was reduced in size to a rectangular vent slot.
There are also small vent holes along the exterior "8lls, but the ultimate destination of these holes is not ~nOW'n because they ~hange direction inside the wall and the inner surface of the po"1<1er storage room is plastered over their original inlet.
S. Roof.
a. Shape, covering. The inner storage chamber is covered with a brick "bomb-proof" barrel vault approximately seven feet thick which is plastered on both surfaces. Above this is a wooden superstructure or outer roof which carries a slate roof. This superstructure follows the general semi-circular shape of the vaulting, but is com· posed of eight straight-line segments, Posts, which rest on the ~pper surface of vault, carry the roof beams. The beams are decked, with one inch boarding or subroof to which is attached the slating.
b, Cornice and fascia. Tllere is no cornice as such, except a corbelling of brick along the sides of the magazine, which supports the lower roof supporting beam,,. A l" x 8" beaded fascia board on the front and rear walls, follows the broken roofline and serves to flash the joint between the brick walls and slate roof.
c. Interiors.
1. Floor Plan. There is only one interior room which measures 9'·11" by 26'-0" •
•
•
•
2. Flooring. Brick, two layers thick, laid in mortar Without any consistent pattern, except for cross bands of brick laid end to end, on approximately two foot centers. The original surface was probably of ""oden floor boarding supported by floor joists which rested upon the stone foundation ledge, There was probably a shallow cello.- space for circulation of air, but that ''as filled about 1837.
3. Wall and Ceiling finish. Plaster, probably modern,
D. Site. Behind the magazine is a granite and brick revetment wall spaced t<JO feet from the rear magazine wall, and which serves to separate the sodded earth terreplein from the magazine and thus keeps it dry.
The ground surface all around the magazine is paved with brick laid in a herringbone pattern. Adjacent to the northeast slde wall of the magaiine is a group of unmounted cannon lying upon the brick paving •
•
•
•
Illustration Ko, 23
The Po...ter Magazine, fs.c:ade and weet aide. Jack E. Boucher, July 1958 •
Pitotographer:
•
•
•
Illustration Mo, 24
I'he Povder Magai.1111!, re.ar view, Boucher, July 1958 •
Photographer: Jack E.
•
•
•
I
Illustration No. 25
The Pt>wder Magazine, interior "iew. Photoar•pher: Jack E. Boucher, July 1958 •
•
•
•
Illustration Mo. 26
The Povder Magaziue. View of attic, to11ard rear wall, shoving top of brick ba.rrel vault and roof framing. Photographer: Jack E. Boucher, July 1958 •
-----------------------------
•
L
~~'" ''' .,._.,,,, v•O•h ''" '.•o"''O ·,,,._,, ''"' .,,_,._~-,, ,_,,,, ,_, '•'' ''0"'' .,_ ,.,,,-,-,,,,,,''CO''"·'"''''' '·'1 ,•';,, ,,.,,
:,•
'
",,,;,·•T -,, ,,C, '"'''"" ,_.,,' J•TOC "'' "' , __ ,,_
..
C.
,.
',,,. -•-c--.,
_ .,, -----! -
' c'
-,- .,,,,-. ·" "•' n,_
• .. · ..
., ' -· ·"·""' _,_ -. ' -'"'' . ' "" •_·; :1
' ,, -
,.__ __,, - .--
' -//
"_.,,. ::>.::. '~--' -,-,,
)! .. "••
- ' -- /
-- _,
-- --- --- ----
C'
_,., ----·· .. ·-; _.,__ ·-~''' .... ,,,,. "·"'' ,- ,,._,
' -'•
··t ., "
' .. :._ > / .
._, "''••• --,.,_ •• , '"'' •• ,, > ...• ~'- -·-·- ., ... --
",,
'" ---0 '·''-·'' '"
...
" "
'
' . '.
•
-·, _
== ---··· ""'o"o '""''""" '""°'""' '"~ ""'" ~ .. '"=
• , .\: 'r ·,· ··;
:r;·
··'
•
L ..
' ' . - - ------~ '--·--~ --
[
,,,,,,.-~ ,. ' .• ' _;'
I '
,. . ' I.
' 1" 0 I '1 ' ' ·;, )._
'
-----
r
' ,. : _,._,
°"' ;_L~' 'L'"IZ>-J'
'~ ,, _
.._,. -,, :·;,>T\ "'' .,,JC'Cl\'I'-\ ''·'
-,._,
.i ,, '
u' (,I " ' ' ' / .- .,,-
') i~ ' ' ' ' ~' i ' ' ' ~-: ' ' ' ' L'
c c ' ' --(
r-j,-
.,. , ,, -'·(
"""""" 'M"'''-'" """~""" "'"""" , . ., ~ "~
------
•
•
' ., c-~,
l~--~·
~ -- -
·~
'
I . . . -~-
ll . - ''! -
--,, ' ---
:c··'~"'''
• 0
-"''1
.--.. -----·---- ~ok
'· .,,,- •'-"''"c~'"''
' -- _.,,
-'----"_.'
"'"""" 'M"''""" """':""' '"""" ~ °' -,N
-- - -----,
•
•
' 1 -~--·nOn•----~---·-~~----•-•
n
• . .
--~ •
,, .,~ ----•'"io1'"'r'••-·-•~o·¥~~~··- ....-.-0
• ._ O-°'f""l"-'f-.---,--,, c1-,,--,; :r,.---r ,,_ ~ ,._,,-"1 1- ,r-~~~ ,,--..,--~ .---rr11- .- . 1:-~ ~ -~- i'. 'l_"-.Jj 'I'' - T-,-,~--~~ ~-:- - rr-;r 1.
r I I r
,._. ... . "'-
" "
I
•• ' '
,, ~' . .-:~ ~ ~-
' '
.... ::.'- · '" ,,,.
------ ""
. ' ' . . ' . ' ... ,, . --------.... -.......... ,,,, -·~,._ - ·.t '>C\ill~:;;i_ .r ..._':.[_ ,,\Z!r1:.
c,,,-,- ~'.''"R'' ~"1 IQ~.'c_ ."-ON'J~,N~ ''"' """-''C '"""'- • 0>"-1-'\0•lr V:)IJN,-Y• ,,~,T,,\Oi>E l\tON;_,'ftD
~ ... , ... D 197
"'""'"" ..... ~ ""'"''""' ,.,._,. ·~'"-~
• l
•
' '
,, '
!:' J ' ' ' ' ~ :·1'
' ' '
' '
+1 ' ' ' '
• I '
j '
' ! ; '
.,
i '
,.· -~
' . ' '. ' ''" L '' "-"'-• '-''" · "<-~J· I."""' n ' ''" - 'o;O '''""'"'~ - ___x· _o_,-='"'~-, -
,,_ ·:-1·.1.·:~ ff\.\';_:..; .. _:·;:: I'"'' If ,c,,.,., ''' ''"-' , F<(t<''NN• A"' '"·'''2"1C '""'"'° -°"U ""'"''-'"- GCJC"<1 Y • I>'< , 1"').'le - "-"''fl.N'iU
Nl·t97
•
._,,, .. , ... ~" "'"~:--~~"··- ~
.__ . ,,., . "'~"'""'" ""''•''-~-
•o••••<O•o"" ,___, - ,_.._ ,_ ~ ,._.,_ J'-"--' ·r:
• j• •
·1 • .
' ~· I
_, •'
C•;'W O•OD OOGOC -, --- - .
~ ..... _
.,, '' -v~•' , ... ~--~, -"""
-~ ... ',_ .. ,, "~·-···
,mrf.~;~ i U]j··' : l'I'
.'
:nMt:R
J
"""
'
" '
• ·c·· ~. ', ~J,'
' ,_ - J
' M-
-.-_, <•
·····~·-· ' ... ,.. ,_, -··~-·---- ··- ... _._ .:..-. ';'(;:.;' _;:~:-~;::.•"
- , "' """ , __ .. __ --· ...
/ i
·-- ' ,,,,_ __ -
"'~~ O<~N~
-~\;-~:( .·.;,,::; .. ~
"
I ~-
" " -·o·c~: ·c,rc~·,;,
-
\
•" l '
-.,,
~--'--, ' ' ---~----- ~-:'./
I I
Ji
-·'-' >.'' ' '·' . ,._.
"'"'""'' •M<~OA"
""'"''""' '"""" -n-w~~
• ., :-
-
• CHAPTER IV
OFF1CERS 1 QUARTERS
(no~ known as Building C)
H,A,B,S, No. MD·l98
•
Illuserations Only
•
•
-
•
•
Illustration No, 27
Officers• ,.., ~~arcera (8utldi ) wall. Photographer· J 'I.Ill'. C • Facade and north ' ae E. Bouc~er, July 1958,
end-
•
•
•
.-; ""'- ;/:c "!>: . " ' "-~ t
llluatration No, 28
Offlcera' Qiaartera {BuildiP& C). Briclu!d~up cellar window and remnant of brick light-well, on front wll, Pbotograpbar: Jack 8, Boucher, October 1958,
•
•
•
111,..tration MD. 29
Officer•' qu.&rtera (Bu.ilding C). Viev of azcavatioq at cellar stairwell be.-1- north end-vall. Yhia featu•e vaa largely d.a..agad by installation of water pipe. Photographer: Jack K, Boucher, October 1958,
•
•
•
CHAPTER V
NO, l SOLDIERS' BARRACKS
(no~ known as Building D)
H.A.B.S, No. MD-199
•
•
•
CHAPTER V. ND. 1 SOLDIERS' BARRACKS (BuildinR D)
PART A, Historical Information
Although temporary barracks '1ere erected at lfuetstone Point as
a part of the Revolutionary \.lar fortlfications for Baltimore, they did
not survive to become a part of later defensive works at th.at place.
During the more e~tensive 1794M95 improvements at Fort Whetstone,
a f-.:ame barracks building was constructed from plans by John Jacob
Ulrich Rivardi, French artillerist and military engineer, who was
appointed by President \\lashington to lay out the works at Baltimore,
as a part of the coastal system of fortifications.I Although Rivatdi
designed but one barracks for Fort Whetstone, additional barracks were
built by Samuel Dodge, agent and assistant to Rivardi. These barracks
were located within the precinct of the upper water battery, but are
The most significant period of building on that strategic
peninsula, resulted from the quasi-war with France in 1798-1800.
l"An Act to provide for the defence of certain ports and harbors in the United States," Approved March 20, 1794. U.S. Congress, The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States ••• , Jd Cong., 1849, 1423-24.
Cf. Henry Kno~, Secretary of War to Gov. Thornes Sim Lee, March 28, 1794. Maryland ttall of Records, Annapolis, The Br0\111 Books, 716, IV, 27.
The writer acknowledges the assistance extended by Dr. S. Sydney Bradford and Franklin R. Mullaly, National Park Historians, during the arc~itectural evaluation of the historical documents, which they collected and arranged for the Fort McHenry research library.
2J. J. u. Rivardi to Secretary of War, American State Papers, XVI, p. 89, April 20, 1794. Rivardi planned a frame structure 16 1 by 40'.
Cf. Maryland l!istoricnl Ma!l.azine, V (1910), 291•92. Rivardi to Gov. John Stone, January 15, 1795. Rivardi complained that funds had been spent " ••• for the building of additional barracks &c. which were not in the plan [furnished by Rivardi]." Ihese buildings were also situated ~ithin the upper gun battery.
- -- -- ----------------
•
•
•
86
At that time, the gun batteries were supplemented with a regular
brick-enclosed fort, designed by John Foncin, French artillerist and
military engineer, The defenses were renamed in honor of James
McHenry, Secretary of War and a Baltimorean. l<ithin the compound
created by the pentagonal fort, quarters were built to accommodate the
garrison, and it is one of the enlisted men's barracks {now knolro as
Building D) that concerns us here, None of the buildings within Fort
McHenry can be accut'1tely dated, but this batt'1t\<S "as erected some-
time between 1799 and 1802, after which time it is known to have been
occupied.3
The earliest known plan to show the 1799-1802 improvements, is
the plan of Fort HcHenry dated "9th November, 1803."4 With respect
to the buildings, this document is architecturally important for it
shows their relative positions inside the fort, and at least indicates
their overall dimensions by a scaled plan,5
Building D, on that drawing, is represented to be 22 by 91 feet,
which closely conforms to its present dimensions, not including a
14 foot addition in lcngtl> which will be mentioned later.
JLt. Samuel T. Dyson to William Linnard, Military Agent, July 23, 1802, National Archives, Records of the ~ar Department, Record Group 92, Office of the Quartermaster General, Consolidated Correspondence File, 1794-1915, Fort HcHenry. Cited hereafter as NA RC 92 Q~£ CCF 1794·1915 FH,
4"Fort McHenry, 9th No\l'ember, 1803." [H .A .R .P. map no. ll. National Archives, Cartograpl>ic Section, Record Group 77, drawr 51, sheet l. Authorship of this map is unknown.
5The map is dra~TI to a scale of toises, a French measure of length. One toise in this case is equivalent to 6 feet. The plan was carefully me~sured (by the architect) on a rule divided into 64 parts per inch, each 64th being converted to a decimal fraction of a foot, thus making it possible to interpret the dimensions of the building.
•
•
• l
Another plan, dra1m. ca. 1806 by Captain \lalbach of the
Artillery, corroborates the 1803 map with respect to the overall
dimensions of Building o. 5
Although Building D has not undergone any basic changes in plan,
its original outward appearance, especially for the 1814 period, is
not certain, but by evaluating the physical and documentary evidence,
the 1814 condition of the building can be deteroiined with some degree
of accut3cy.
Architecturally, Building D at the time of the 1814 bombardment,
was a one and one-half story brick barracks building, which measured
the aforementioned 22 by 91 feet in plan, and was divided into three
rooms, c<1ch 19'-8" l'ide and about 28'·6" in length,7 Each JOOom was
heated by a single fireplace centered on the brick crosswalls. Clear
ceiling heights in the three rooms were slightly over eight feet,
The exterior structural brick walls were 14 inches thick and rested
upon shallow footings composed of random quarry stone. The brick work
in the front wall, or facade, was laid up in a Flemish bond, while the
side and rear walls are co<r.mon bond with headers every sixth course.
6"Plan of Fort McHenry by Capt. l<lalbacl1 of the Artillery for the U.S. Mil: Philo: Soc:, No, l" [H,A,R.P, map no. 2J, ca. 1806. New York Historical Society, United States Military Philosophical Papers. See H,A,R,P. indei< card for reference to documents that establish the approximate date of this tnap. This plan was also drawn using a scale of toises.
7col. Jacob Hindman to Col. W. K, Armistead, Engineers, March 17, 1819, "The present quarters, •• are, •• of one story only with three small rooms on one range and two on the second [range)," National Archives, Records of the l~ar DepartD'l"nt, Record Group 107, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Selected Correspondence Relating to Fort l1cHenry, Maryland, 1811-37. Cited hereafter as NA RG107 OCE SC FT•!«: 1811·37.
• "' The existence of a kitchen cellar under the north1;est end of
Building D, "'as est'1blished in October, 1958, by limited architec-
tural explorations under the supervision of the writer. The cellar
occupies the c11tirc space under the northernmost room of the building
(excluding the later additions) and was an integral part of the origi-
nal structure, with stone walls extending nearly 8 feet belou gtade
level. The kitchen cellar was lighted by four window wells, two along
the front wall and two along the back wall. Entrance to the cellar
was undoubtedly from the north end of the building, but that feature is
obscured by an 1829 addition to that end of the building.
Unfortunately, the type of roof structure on the original one
and one.half story barracks has not been clearly established, It was
• probably a gabled structure flanked ;iith three dormer windows. While
there are several vie;is of the "bombardment," only one, a watercolor
painting, is apparently contemporary,8 Though the view centers about
the naval action, Fort Mcttenry is depicted with several buildings
within, none of which correspond with Building D. Another barracks
which appears to be Building E, also a soldiers' barracks, is shown
with a gable roof and three dormer ;iindows. It is very likely that
the roof of Building D was similar. In turn, these barracks were
probably similar to the enlisted men's barracks at Fort Hifflin,
located below Philadelphia on the Delaware River, built in 1798·1800
from plans by Hajor Louis Tousard, also a French artillerist and
military engineer. Those barracks display similar disposition of
exterior architectural elements, i.c,, one and one~half stories, three
• exterior doors, flanked by windo~s and three dormer windo~s lighting
BAnonyroous watercolor painting of the Fort McHenry bombardment. Peale 1-luseuro, Baltiroorc. [H.f,.R,P. mo.p no. 336].
•
•
•
89
the attic space. Nor are the overall dimensions of the buildings too
dissimilar, i,c., Building D, 22' by 91 1; and Fort Mifflin 28' by
117 1•9 The similaritiC$ suggest the possible existence of a
"standard" barracks plan fox- th" period ca, 1800,
The gable roof was probably shingled and the rafters rested
upon a ~;ood plate atop the brick walls at a point t"O feet above the
attic floor line, The attic rooms under the gable roof were called
"garrets," but apparently they were seldom occupied by soldiers
because of the limited head room and poor ventilation.IO
The 1819 "Plan and Profiles of Fort McHenry," drawn by William
Tell Poussin, is the first known graphic document to show the fort
with its post-war improvements,11 This plan or map of the fort
indicates an addition to the northwest end of Building D, Such an
addition at that early date has not been identified as to function,
but perhaps it was a rudimentary kitchen to replace the one in the
cellar since it appears that tl1e cellar was ab<lndoned at an e<lrly
date because of ground water. This extension, must have been of a
temporary nature, since a permanent {brick) kitchen facility was
added in 1829, to be discussed later.
9"Buildings of Fort Mifflin," measured drawings, ca. 1835. National Archives, Cartographic Section, drawer 47, sheet 10.
lOcapt, F, Belton to Gen. Jesup, July 5, 1822, Belton described the officers quarters, which were similar to the soldiers barracks as ",,,containing three rooms, with garrets abova, scarcely allo"1ing ooe to stand upright in the1n," NA RG107 OCE SC FT•MC 1811·37.
Cf, Col. Jacob Hindman to Col. W. K. Ar1nistead, ~larch 17, 1819, "The Garret rooms can not be occupied in surt.mer on account of the intense hear." NA RG107 OCE SC FT•MC 1811·37.
11"Reconnoitring of Chesapeake Bay, ST/ITE OF ~JARYLAND, Plan and Profiles of Fort McHenry, 1819.'' Ora""' by h1illiam [Guillauttie] Tell Poussin, Captain Topographical Engineers [H.A.R.P. map no. 4]. National Archives, Cartographic Section, drawer Sl, sheet 2.
•
•
•
99
By 1823, the barra~ks roof required a replacement. One
interesting piece of correspondence for that year renders a contem.
porary opinion regarding pel'.IDanent roof coverings. A letter from
Lieut, J. 11. Porter, 6t\1 Infantry, to the Secretary of llar, expresses
his views as follows:
l have long since been of [thel opinion that ~inc roofs should never be put upon buildings, firstly from the cost & secondly because they corrode or give way inn few years. If the roof in question is very flat, it of course will have to be covered with a metallic roof. If •• ,there is a sufficient pitch to carry off the water it s~uld be covered with slate,12
Before this problem was solved, Lt. Henry \o), Fitzhugh, Acting
Assistant Quartermaster at the fort, brought another defect to the
attention of the Quarterwaster General. Fitzhugh's "exawination"
of the barracks at the fort revealed that the floors required s0111e
i'"portant repairs. " .•• the floors of all tfie buildings h"ve sunk in
consequence of the decay of tile joists, and the floors in many places
are litterally [sic] worn out ••• " 13
Repairs to the roof, though "only in a tolerable condition,"
was postponed in favor of the badly decayed and worn floors.
In the mid•lB20 1 s abandonment of Fort i'1c!!enry was considered
because of its "decayed condition," its "unimportant sit'1ation," and
12Lt, J. 1'1, Porter to Secretary of War, September 16, 1823. ~A RG92 Q~G CCF 1794·1915 B1.
l3Lt. Henry\~, Fitzhugh to the Quarte....,astet General, July 8, 1824. NA RG92 Q~t: CCF 1794·1915 Fl-!,
,----
•
•
•
91
its "unhealthy" environrnent.14 ao.,.,ver, the fort was retained as
a "second barrier," or as an accessory to the coastal defense system.
A major renovation progran was necessary if the post was to
continue as an effective military installation. To acco!!'modate a
larger garrLson, the barracks obviously required enlargement and
refurbishing, but the means of acconplishing tl>is enlargement was
not so certain. Several proposals were in the offing.
One proposal allowed for merely widening the barracks,15 The
scheme was opposed on the premise that widening the barracks would
only intensify the "unh=lthy" living conditions at the forc,16 since
the widened rooms would then be adjace11t to the ea.-then slope below
the terreplein. The argument was di:awn as follo1<s:
• •• the ill l!ealth of the Garrison ••• occupyins the Fort, proceeded not from the Position [of the fort] but from the construction of the Quarters. It is evident the close, confined Air, connected with Damp ••• generates the sickness, the prevention "ill be found in a free Circulation of Air thru {sic] the Buildings: this can easily be effected by raising the story •• ,17
'[he argument against widening the barracks "'as sustained in
favor of raising them to two stories, thus gaining better ventilation.
14Bernhard, !(arl. Travels through North America during the vears 1825 and 1826 (Philadelphia: 1828), 164. While Bernhard's comrients represent personal rather than official opinion, he does allude to the intended construction of "new fortifications several miles farther off in the Chesapeake Bay," as a first line of defence to replace Fort McHenry, The subsequent erection of Fort Carroll in the Patapsco Harbor was intended to fulfill that function.
11.iaj. T. Cross to Gen. Jesup, April 22, 1829. NA RG92 QMG CCF 1794·1915 FM,
l6Every suo:mer during the so•called "sicl<lY season," the entire garrison at Fort Mcllenry was evacuated to the Baltimore hinterland in an attempt to escape the humid and confining atmosphere at the fort.
17cen. J.R. Fent•ick to Gen, Jesup, ~lay 23, 1829. National Archives Records of the War Department, Record Group 92, Office of the Quarter· master General, Selected Pages fro~ Registers of Letters Received, 1818•57.
•
•
•
92
In June of 1829, the brick "'alls of the barracks were examined for
their structural ability to support the addition o( a second story.18
This having been estobllshed in the affirmative, construction
coir,menced and was ..-apidly pushed to completion. In anticipation of
this change, an estimate of proposed repairs had been prepared in
February 1829, and sutmitted to the Quartermaster General in Washing
ton. 19 Tl1is lengthy and detailed estimate is an important document
for it reveals not only the intention to raise the building in height,
but also contains inforo>ation as to existing conditions, With respect
to Building D, the esti!Il<lte contemplated the removal of the existing
roof, raising the buildini:,: to t""' full stories with a shingled hip-
roof, and the addition of a t\'O story poi-ch or "piazza" along the
entire front of the barracks. The proposal also included a 14 foot
addition at the north"est end of the building, to be used as a kitchen.
The "probable costs" for the alterations and additions to
Building D totaled $3102.76, but the final cost is not kn01"rt. The
chief carpenter employed for this "ork was Howell Downing, a Baltimore
carpentei-, hired at the i-ate of two dollars per day,20 The work seems
to have been completed in 1830.
18ttaj. ~l.M, Payne to Gen, Jesup, June l, 1829, NA RG92 RWD QMG CCF 1794-1915 FM,
19Lt. s. B, Dusenbury to General Jesup, February 24, 1829. ~ RG92 RWD Ql".G CCF 1794-1915 FM.
20Lt. S. B. Dusenbury to Gen. Jesup, August 4, 1829, National Archives, Records of the liar Depai-tment, Record Group 92, Office of the Quartenoaster General, Selected Letters received Relating to Fort ~icHenry, Maryland.
Cf. Capt. James I~. Ripley to Col. Bamford, October 7, 1829. NA RllD RC92 Ql'.G CCF 1794-1915 •
Cf. Matchett's Baltimore Director, 1833, 58, "Howell Downing, carpenter, 9 W Lei<ington St,"
•
•
•
93
The earliest extant drawings of the newly enlarged barracks
were dra<.11 in November, 1834, by Lt. Thomas J. Lee, 4th /\rtillery,
Acting Assistant Quartermaster at the fort. 21 Lt. Lee's drawings
are architecturally important for they are the first to show the
buildings not only in elevation, but also with their interior room
arr.i.ngement. The plans show door t1nd window openings, fireplaces,
stairways and porches, They also reveal the reason for the angular
end, in plan, of the southeast end of the porch. Located bet~een
Buildings D and ~ was a laree, bombproof brick vault over the water-
well. The height of the vaulting was such that the po~ch ends of
both buildings ~ere built on an angle, in plan, to accomi:nodate the
nearby brick vault, Though the well is now gone, the porches retain
the original and once functional angular ends.
Lt. Lee's drawing also shows the newly heightened brick
barracks with hip-roof. This roof was subsequently altered to its
present sloping or shed-roof, protected by raised, brick parapet walls.
In a recent examination of the attic space in Building D, the writer
observed the structural joist framing of the 1829 hip-roof still in
place. When the hip-roof was replaced by the present shed-roof. the
tapered joists were left in place, and the shed-roof rafters supported
on newly raised brick parapet walls. The older hip-joists have tapered
ends along the frcntand back toalls, A.long the side "alls are short
joists placed at 90 degree$ to the others and supported at one end
by brick beam pockets and at the other end by a mortise and pegged
2l"Fort Mcllenry, Drawn in obedience to a ~laster Gents. Office, dated Nov. 13th, 1834, by Arty, & i\.ctin;; A.Q.~l." [H.A.R.P. map no. 206]. Records of the War Depart~ent, Record Group 77, Engineers, Map file,
Circular from the Qr. Ihos. J, Lee, Lt,, 4th National Archives, Office of the Chief of
•
•
•
,, joint to the first cross joist. The precise date for the change in
roof shapes is not certain, but probably took place in 1837 when the
roof was newly covered.22
In 1833, the earthen and sodded slope behind the barracks was
replaced by a stone revetment wall, a substitution which was intended
to eliminate the water runoff into the barracks.23 In addition to
providing better drainage, the stone '"all allowed for mo..-e circula-
tion of air behind the buildings,
During the extensive improvements at the fort in the late
1830's, the barracks floors were removed. The cellar kitchen,
apparently aband<>n~d due to i;round water, was filled with earth,
and a new floor was to be lnid upon scantling over a grouted brick
22nuring the l958 H.A,B,S. measuring project at Fort McHenry ~lr. Orville II'. Carroll, Architect, National Park Service, brought the existence of the hip-roof framing (hidden in the attic) to the writer's attention.
A front elevation of Building D, drawn in 1840, leaves no doubt that the roof change had taken place prior to that time. See "Plans and Elevations of t\1e Soldiers Barracks at Fort M<:Henry," dra"1l from actual ~easurements by Lt, R, Butler, Engineers [Hay, 18401, National Archives, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, drawer 5l, sheet l7. This is an important drawing for it shows window and shutter arrangements, fireplace dimensions, crosswall locations, etc.
23cen, Gratiot to Lt, Thompson, September )0, 1833. National Archi,,.,s, Records of the War Department, Record Group 77, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Miscellaneous Letters Sent, Volumes 1·25, 1812·1872.
Cf. National Archives, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, drawer 51, sheet 4. Undated drawing, contains plan, section, and esti~ate for stone revetment wall, also slope of existing earthen bank [H.A.R.P. map no. 201,
•
•
•
,, floor.24 The date of the present first level brick floors is not
kno"1ll to the "'riter.
Though no major fii:e ti.as ever been recorded inside the fort,
the potential threat and the difficulty of saving such closely
related barracks in such an event, c~used enough concern to finally
replace the shingle roofs with a zinc covering.25 An estimate for
the "'<>rk was transmitted Aptil 5, 1837, by Captain H:enry A. Thompson,
agent for the improvements of the late 1830's, to General Gratiot,
Chief Engineer of the Army:
For covering the four [barracks) buildings at this Post "'ith tin [sic I at $475 each - $1800.0o26
The estimate "'as approved the following day, and the work of re-
roofing was undertaken ~mmcdiately. ~hether the hip-roof structure
was replaced "'ith a shed-roof at that time is not kno1"0.
While the other barracks within the fort suffered numerous
alterations in the post-CivLl ~at period, Building D undet"1ent com•
paratively little change. When Fort McHenry was restored in the late
24Lt. Thomas J. Lee to Gen. John FenlOick, January 7, 1836. NA R\JD RG92 Q!<',G CCF 1794-1915 fl!. This document includes an estimate and suggestion for raltIDing earth into the cellars as a base for the new floor.
Cf. Lt. T. J. Lee to Gen. Jesup, April 12, 1836, complains of " ••• the impossibility of obtaining earth sufficiently dry to fill up the cellars." NA R\ID RG92 QMG CGF 1794-1915 FM.
G£. Capt. Thompson to Gen. Gratiot, March 14, 1837, noted that cellars were not yet completely filled. National Archives, Records of the War Deportment, Record Group 77, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Letters Re~eived, 1826-1837.
25Agent Henry A. ThOlllpson observed that the close proKimity of the buildings would render it " ••• i<:ipossible to save them in case of 11 fire." He recommended slat~ as a substitute for the shingle roof, or if not slate, some other type of roof "impervious to fire."
26capt. Thompson to Ccn. Gratiot, April 5, 1837. NA- RG107, OGE SC FT-MC 1811-37.
-- - ,
I
•
•
•
96
1920's by the War Department under th~ direction of Colonel L, M.
Leisenring, Building D served .os a rrodel, since it alone retained
its porches. While it waa generally be"ieved that the restoration
re(lresented t)-.e 1814 condition of the bui.ldings, it actually
appro~imates the 1829-30 period when the second stories and porches
were added •
•
•
•
PART B. Architectural Information
A. General Statement. This building in its present appearance, is typical of permanent U. s. Army barracks for the period ca, lSJO, P.s such it is much changed from its original appearance as built ca. 1800. Since its .-estoration in 1927-30 by the \•Jar Department (under the direction of Colonel L, tt, Leisenring), it has been main· rained as part of the historic group of structures within Fort McHenry, birthplace of the Star-Spangled Banner.
l. Architectural Character. The present restored appearance does not depict the original architectural character, but rather that of 1830, when the second story and pia~za was added. The severity of the plain, brick wall surfaces is relieved only by the door and window openings. Except for the pia~za with its supporting columns, the exterior is practically devoid of at:chitectural embellishment,
2. Condition cf Fabric. Gocd,
B. Extericr.
I. Ovet:all dimensions. 22'·0" by 105'·3" (Ot:iginally 22'·0" by 91'·0") .
2. Foundations. Random size quarry stone laid in lime mortar, oxtending about 3~ feet below grade, except at the not:thern end of the building where the foundation extends about 7\ feet below grade to accorr:modate a cellar kitchen, \.lhich <;as filled With oar th about 1837.
3. Wall construction. Brick masonry throughout, Flemish bond in front; coOll\On bond on the rear and end \./alls, with headers at varying intervals.
4. Porches. Building originally had no porches. The existing two story piazza is apparently unchanged from the time of its installation in 1830, When the pinzzos for the other buildings (within Fort ~lcflenry) were reconstructed in 1930, this pia~za served as the model. Turned wooden Doric columns are spaced at appro><i=tely 9'-6" centers, and rest upon dressed and tooled stone plinths, The second story col\llillls are similar, but scaled dolin, except for the lower three feet which are square in cross-section. The roof of the pia<aa ~~s originally shingled, but lS no\./ covered with sheet metal joined with stand· seams, The shingles are still in place under tl1e metal roof. 'Ihe gutter and downspouts are 1930 replacements,
5. Chimneys. Reconstructed, capped with sheet metal.
6. Openin~s. Openings are any pediments, architraves, etc • arches.
limited to doors and windows Without E:i<terior lintels are flat, brick
a, Doors, are all replacements, original design unknown. Door sills may be the original dressed, granite-like stones.
•
•
•
08
b, \./indO"-'S and shutters, are all replacements. First floor windows are double hung, 15 panes over 10, and this arrang.,,.ent follows the original design. The details, such as muntin and sashbar sections, are 1930 in design and construction techniques. The slatted shutters are similar to the original shutters, but are replacements, including hl-"IJCS and shutter stops (original desig11 unlcnown). Second floor <•indows are arranged in a 12 over 8 design, as compared to the originol 5 over 6 design for the double-l1ung sash.
7. Roof, Shed-type, surrounded by raised, brick parapet walls. Original building had a gable roof with dormer windows, \./hen raised to two stories in 1829, a hip-roof was installed, The l>ip roof was replaced >lith tile shed-roof about 1S37. f\o,.ever, the hip-roof ceiling joists are still in piace under the sl1ed-roof. Present shed-roof is covered with slieet-metal joined with standL<1g seams, installed in 1930. 'the side pa-rapet walls step dowtl to accoo::modate the cha<1ge of level, A conti1,uous brick ~orbel supports the rear patapet wall, the other parapet walls beLng flush with the main ,.,..11s, and capped with projecting coping bricks moulded With 2 drip grooves.
C. Interiors.
1. Floor plans (lst floor). Plan of original building consists of three rooms, each measuring about 28'-6'' long und 19'·8" wide, In 1829·30, a kitchen addit1on to the northwest end of the buildi<1g c>Catcd a fourth room 13'·3" by 19'·8". Access to each of the three original roonis is by a dooi- centered along the front of each room, A window flanks each door making three doors and Si>< windows along the front wall. There are three windows along the rear wall of each roOJll. The 1829 addition in length does not have right angle outside corners, in plan, but rather they are cut off on 45 degree angles, This k~tchen addition has one exterior door on the front wall, and a window in each of the angular corners.
(Znd floor) is similarly a-rranged into three rooms, with the same disposition of doors and Windows e><cept that there are 2 windows in the rear wall of each room, (cell'1>). The original barracks buildin(l; was 22 1-0" by 91'-0'' in size, "nd the space under the north\lest room of that building (e><cluding the 1829 addLtion) was occupied by a cellar kitchen. Entrance to the cellai: was by an outside stair\lell, centered along the original end wall. The cellar was lighted by four wi.ndo,.s, t"o in front and t<;o in rear, The cellar was filled in 1837, and its e><istence and location was discovered during the 1958 Archi· tectural E><plorattons at Fol'.t ~!cHenry, but it "as not excavated.
2, Stairwavs, are replacements, original details unknown, but they a-re located in their original ~osition. There is one stairway in the middle room and one in the northernmost room; in each case they arc situated at the juncture of the front wall and the crosswall, rising into the corner, and turnine back 180 degrees to the second floor.
•
•
•
3. Floo•in>: (1st floor). Brick, laid in a lengthwise pattern, laid in 1930. Original floors \Oere ;1ooden, type unkno"--n. (2nd floor), a 1930 replacement of the ori,,;inal 5//, white pine flooring. Present flooring is 5/4 random width, probably yellow pine.
4. ~!all and ceiling fini~h, plaster over metnl lath, installed 1930, throughout botl1 floors, Origi.nally, the walls were eitposed b<ick, Whitewnshed, and tl1c ceilings •1ere exposed ''ooden joists.
S. Doorwnys a~d doors, 1930 replacements, original design unknown,
G. Trir.t, all dates from 1930, including <kior f.-ames, window frames, baseboards, etc,
7. Hardw3re, dates from 1930, including double hung window mechanism, oll hinge,,, and lock mccf:tanisms. Lock sets are brass reproductions of an old design, bu~ not necessary lil<e those originally install·,d at fort l"Icl!enry.
8. Lir.~, all modern, original provision for lighting unkno,,.n •
9. Heating, nrcscntly by modern stea1:1 radiators. Fireplaces, one in each room, '"ere r~stored in 1930, "S '"ere the cooking cr<l.nes and mant~ls. Each room contains " fir~pl~ce nnd chiir.ney, located <l.t the center of che crosswalls; tl>o of the fireplaces being back to back. The first floor fire~lace openings have no shelves or trim. The lintels are urched with header bricks, supported by iron bars with a rectangular croe~·-section. ~·econd floor fireplaces are sinalle, in size and have flat arcl1 brick lintel$. Th" mantel shelf and pilaster bonrds are 193D rcplaceme.>t,,, si"'ilar to those used on the 1829 fireplaces in this build;.r1p,.
D. Site. The building i" locnted :O~t.,·cen the Officern' Quarters (Building C) and No. 2 Soldiers' Bar;;aclcs (Building E), on the opposite side o[ the par.1dc ground tru,.\ the sally port. The front of tlte buildi_ng faces no>:thenst" Brick paving surrounds the build-ing and extends ~>der the piazaa. About eight Ccet behind the buildine is a granite rcveti.1ont \.•all :"hich runs parallel ta the rear building "-'all. The stone revetment "-'o:l seporntes tl1e courtyard level from the terreplcin level of the ra;;ip~rts,
'
•
•
•
IlluBtration llo, 30
di D) FecAda and aouthNo. l Soldiers' Barracks {Builnlngbuiiding vhich retained east end-..,..11. Tbis ~8 the :e ~ort ...,8 restored by the its ca. 1829 "pla:z:.a, 9 ~en ~tographer: Jao:k 8. Boucher, War Depart:meot in 192 - • July 1958 •
•
•
•
.. ;-,
~--;:~-.-
'''•d· -~"'--
·Jii··
Illustration No. 31
Mo. l Soldier•' Barracks (Buildin& D), Rear vall and aouthaaat end-wall. Brick patch1"0rk on end '!D.ll iodicata1 a nineteenth century (not original) window opening, Photographer: Jack E. Boucher, October 1958,
•
• -;
-----
•
--%: >
' ~ ~ ,"'C--~
111m1111111111
Illustration Mo. 32
No. l Soldier•' Barracks (Building D). Viev of stairway in center roam, firat floor, restored 1929-30 by the War DeparDl>l!Dt. Photographer; Jack E. Boucher, October 1958 •
•
•
•
Illustration Ho, 33
Ho. 1 Soldiers' Barraeks {Builditl8 D). View of brickedup cellar vindov, and altered brick light•.,..ll on front '1<111, Photographer: Jack E. Souther, October 1958,
•
• - -
•
';, -
•"""-~ .:...:;..1) t '·; .·;::·
Illustration Ho. 34
Mo. 1 Soldiers' Rarracl<a (~uilding D). View of brickedup cellar window, brick light-well and stone foundation at rear wall. End of stone foundation {at left) denotes juncture of ca. 1829 addition to building. Photographer: Jack E, lloucher, October 1958 •
•
-,i
.,, . .
~
' .,- ..•. --'"-' "'+''-""' . -·· ' ,, ' ' '
•
-· '' ,, ,, . .,,,, "· - ., - - __ , 1...--_ ---- --------~ _,________=----.
--- __. ___ - "
' "' . "" ' '• '
- ·• L • •\-• ·-··-·.:.· -!.• ·Cj.
" . ,, _, ",.' .. =L
' _ _:. ,,-__ . •'"+''-''-''
• • • ' 1 . J _,,
'
"'
. ,,-
,_,,_
•
,.,~ • ... . • • " "' . ,
• ' ' " • • " ,, ? ' • ' . .. • ··-- ._-,
' 'J...c••C. ' •t_ - • " - '-'-'-'-' '·~· '" '"'-• • •
L
"
. :): ' . ' '
u•·~~~=~ - - ,. ~ ::o:.'l.:<,._:,;~
•
"
-.. ': ,,
•
- '
. ,,.
. . ' "
' -' •\_,
• ----"'
-~ " '
:~
'-'' -
"' . "i-' .... ,.
'
'· " --~,, . "'""'"' ., '
•
'''" ''""' '"' ""' ,._,
' . . ' ~-
"'"'"" ·~'"""" "'""'""' '""""' '""' " . ··=
•
• r-· I 'i I •
' '
'
-j' o< '-''.!;" '
·-r·-'"~, ,'i
'L''"-"' ' ,,,~
" Lf.l-'O•:o "'',"O' '"""';;; • ~1-,," ~.•
"I' - 7,;.~~-~-r-,.o,,,._
' '
.~ .. " ~~" ~ ,..,," .. 'o'"' """'~' '" •~•
11·-,=~ ~~-'"'""~~,--I - - - - -
•
~-----' -----
!<EAR '_50UTH\IC5T) E'.LEVATIOr'. "'ALr o 'I&',"""- 'OOT
---~;,TO-~-.~
., '
' ·-- -
r 1 I
" I !<C:N r (H<)r.?THE,'.',3-:-: r.c.C''JAl"!,~:'!
'''-"" ' :, •, ""' '0"'~
'-"'~~ ·--· r:t:.::;T~D /\~r10 3>-\RRAc,;(,S ' E>Ui~i):~-::e " "'1 ~-"'"'' "'"0"'" ~"'"'"'"! .,, '·''"'" ,,,.,,, "'"""''"' "°"'''' >>.'•'V-•[-' ' '
-------- --,
• -'' ....... .,_,. ' J •
'le'""' : ! ,o, ...
. , "''' "
" I '" "
'' ,,, ... ~ ' I"''' - -..... ,"'-
' ~-
' I''"- ., ' ""'-1'..~'.~-: "'"
•• ~ "."""'
~ •m l,'I 1111
.,, .. , ...... ,. ~,,,.
_J --- """""'' ... ,.""'" ---,.~ """""""" """"" J '-~" -'"' -· .. ,, "'"' ' ' ' - ' '
• • '
_, .. _ ;_:__;.J,-1
1:~ ' L __ ;.,
-,~,
; ' , t;\ -.,, ......
-:
'
' -c .. -·~~=~
' '.':,'c\( :._,
'" .. , .. -.. · ... ,,
., ' ' ·1· ··- , n·-~·-=-· .--_:· ' ' '
.... , ,,., .. •'"'~-·
m •"~ "_., ... ,,.'
2,-' ')',(, 'J' o;· T: \C'O '-· "JN' '• 0\1 ·'" C\t • ,:,;·, ''·"
d'
" '
' I: ;
-.-· ' ' ' ' ' ,. ' "
"',-
' '· ~f- _, 'I· - I
·' -...
J~,,,J
~-------
"'~~" ·~'"'""" """"""' '""""' -~"~b·~
•
',_ I
•
'
.. -~~-i '
"
' " '
•
:·'"'--- -• ,•.:__ .J,_ _,,,.. -i ,- "'-"· --- ..,
_, "'"- "'- '·- ----------,--- - ·----r-;T?'ilF!'
' ''--'' '
~-·~~=o~ '~' ,' ,_, ''.li.~:i '{ ,.z:,. ~~.': ~/,c;: _ .. J
'"'·"'
_,__,,,,-
'., ~-"""o"' '~'"""'" '"'~"'"" ..,..,.... _, ~6~
•
• ,, 1J I ,.
' ' -,,.,
' -~~~- _ 1 __ ~
' ' , I 'I 11 ·I
-~~--::'' ,, I .
' I 11
_j_ L ,, ,
• l
7 -
' ,.
f-- ,~, ''CC''-~~
'· I'
I
ii\ 1, ', :;1 ! i ! i l j I//
• ·~.
--
-I
-
l --''--'" '""'''"'''"' "~
' " '·"
• ,- ...
'..8:, :1C\ ·, '..l'.-ON~ '.LOO~
~O•>CO'' • 0' "~"" •v• '"'
- ~:.::<.\.:
--,,, ' ----,,_ -
' ~,,-,;, ', ,,, ,;_ ,-
;.,
··~'
I -:~I
- '
• I
, __ , -"
~--~
fl T
~'.~-·· P_vl ::B'·:. 'it LJ 'L'.',V:, ':<' '<C~G.,
.__...,,; ·S
"'~'--- .... -"'
"'""""' '""'""" 1-"""'""'" """"" ,~,.w,o~
• /
""'··
v I/ " '
.~''" '<'•''-"
'~;~TI".,,~'='"
" / •• "" """
·~· ~" """'' '""'"' -· - """''
"
'fr--. .,, "'·'" n"' y_c_•
r;-
' p, . ,
[ .:: ·::i • -y- --
~-~· c ,:
'
r. "
D '
.
c_\ he; .·~
' ' I ' ' I /__
! !
\_)I-/'. .,
' ._.-,-_,, " '"' '--·- ''""'' -
• - -
'"~· "" ,_,, ,-cu_ ><LC
"-~
-•.
-,.:
-.,
~·. ' ' '
1! ' +-
''<
_,,-, -
El
' '' ''" .'C
-- -,, ' "' ,, -
'
' '
•
a
' I ' ' ' I
-- -
·~-
,,, ~~··-'
:i j
'
', ,,
'°' •,o ,,,,.c; ·~-~-
,'), ' --- ,, -:o• •••
- ---'~-- ~- ,.,,,, "' '
- - ·--,' -/
-rJJ -\ ·;
' ,,. : :w
•
- I -~ ' 'J -' I " -" --
·-'' ' {) '
l (, j 1 i'-'
I j
I ~
I ...... ,
' "
!
---" +
•
•
•
CHAPTER V!
NO. 2 SOLDIERS' BARRACKS
(now ~nown as B~ilding E)
H,A.B.S, No, HD·200
•
•
•
CHAPTl':R VI. NO. 2 SOLDIERS' BARRACKS (Building E)
PART A. Historical lnforrnat~on
No. 2 Soldiers' Bai-racks (the earliest kno1•n precise designa-
tion), is one of t•:o such buildings within Fort l'lcllcnry. lt was
built ca. 1800, but apparently was not finished in every detail until
about 1002.
The plan of Fort ~lcllcnry dated November J, 180.3, is the earli-
est extant graphic document to show th.is soldiers' barraci<S building.
Though the plan is drawn to a scale of _toiscs, it is only necessary
to reduce the building plans to feet by mathenlatical conve<sion. l
The building is represented to be 22 feet ''ide (which conforms to its
present width), and 88 (eel long. Today the barracks occupies a
length of 98'5" in plan. Unfortunately th" JU03 plan docs not sho"
any interior room arrangements.
Chronologically, the ne><t map of fo<t Hcl!onry is that drawn
ca. 1606 by Captain John B. l·,;albach, fo< the U. S. l'lilitary Philo~
sophical Socicty. 2 This map is quite sinii!ar to the 1803 map in
1"Fort McHenry, ';th i<overnber, 1803'' [H,A.R.P.noap no. I],
National Archives, Cartographic Section, RecoI"d G<oup 77, dI"awer 51, sheet 1. Autho<sl1ip of this map is unknown. Toises, an old French and S1•iss measure, is variously equivalent to 6 or 6.4 feet, 6 feet in this case. The plans were ea>efc.lly measured nn a r••le divided into (,4 parts per inch, each 64th being converted ~o a decimal fraction of a foot, thus making it possible to accurately interpret tl1e dimensions of each building.
The writer acknO<•!edges the assi.stance ei<tended by Dr. s. Sydney Bradford and Franklin R. t<Iullaly, ~;ntionnl Park Service Historians, during the architectural cvaluaticn of the historical documents, which they collected and a<rdnged fo> lhe Fort t!cHeury research library.
z"Plan of Fort J•jcJlenry by Capt. \·lalbach of the Artillery for the u. S. tlil: Philo: Soc:, No. l" [H.A.R.P. map no. 2], ca.1806. New York llisto<ical Soci"ty, United States ~l~litary Ph1losophical Papers. See H.A.R.P. index card for reference to document~ that establisl-, the app>oxirnatc date of this map; this plan is also drnwn using a scale of toises. !11albnch was earlier a Lt. in the Artillerists and Engine">s.
•
•
•
lGl
most respects, but it s~er..s to have been more accurately e><ec•ited.
Tnis i.s borne out by chcc:<ing the map against "'"asurable features
of Fort Mcll~nry. The accuracy of tJie dr"''ing is especially confirm-
able <•ith respect to the buiidings "1ithin th.e stnr (ort, No. 2
Soldiers' Barracl<s, for cxaI<1plc, sc:ilcs 22 by '>5 feet which is quite
close to its present size 22' t.y ';G'S". This is well 1oithln the
tolerable limi.ts of accur,.cy for such "- mnp, Thus, it is fairly cer-
tain that tl1~ building h~s not been changcJ in length or width since
its erection ca. 1800. In (act, it is li~<e:y tt.at its ground plan
remains as it''~" when bt•ilt. Unfortunately, '"'"cannot be so certain
as to the appearance of the huildin(': above i::round, and since the ca,
1806 map by Captain l·.'albach is Lhe last represei<lation of the fort
prior to the bombardment, tho appearance of the building at that time
is equally unccrtair .• )\ol·1ever, it is nu,·1 ;.os•ihle to obtain a reason-
ably eood picture as to the 1314 state o( the building by on-the-site
architectural exploration and by an archit~ctural evaluation of his-
torical documents pertaining to c.dditiorio and alterations as follows:
No, 2 Soldiers' Bar"acks, a one and one-half story enlisted
men's barrac:<s, 'Jae arrange<l into three •ooa\s 011 the ground floor,
and each measured ahouL 18'8' •.oi<!e and 31-'8'' long. 3 Each room had
3colonel Jacob il<_na,_,.in t~ Colonel \·I, ::. Armisteacl, Engineers, ~larch 17, 181>. "The present qua1tcrs ... Ji:c ••• 0£ one story only \;ith three sma11 room~ on""" i·onge & t''" in :he second [range].'' National Archives, Record Gc·cup 107, Records of the \lar Department, Office of the Chief ot Engineer;, Selectc<! Cor1cspondence Relating to Fort ~1cHenry, Maryland, 1811··37. Cited l.ercafter as NII. RG107 OCF. SC FI-t-!C 1811-37 •
•
•
•
a fireplace, 1;ith t"o of tl1e\n back to back. The floor to ceiling
heights on the g•ound floor- <•ere slightly over e1ght feet. The ex
terior brick walls avc>aged 14 inches in thickness and extended above
the ceiling joists for a lceLght of two feet. There 1;0.s a cellar
(probably used as a kitchton) under th" easternr.'.ost room, though it
appears to have been ,1bnndoned at an ea,-Jy date because of ground
wnter problems. The cellar <oas fi!le<l 1oith 0arth ca. 11\37. 1958
archeological work (~IISSION 66), under- rhc dirco;;tion of G. Hubert
Smith, revealed <In e"<terior bricl<-lincd 5tairweJl centered along the
eastern end \·1all. Fuu,- cellur "indo<,~, wt:h bricl;--lined light wells,
provided the ce 1 lar •.1i th daylight-.
bricked up when Lhe cellar 1<as filled, thut is, ca. 1837. /I. cellar
fireplace was cxcr.vatcd "toy th~ '1:ritcr durinr; the 1']58 '1rchitcctural
series of explor'1tions. This £ir~pi,1ce i~ locatQd under the Ci<isting
ground floor fireplace, is of th~ s.;mc _'J"CTICr-i>l d1'~ign, with a brick
hearth, and contains the occorr.n1odaLing h~rch;arc for cooking cranes.
As to the roof structure for tl>is one and one-half story bar•
raclcs, it ''"S prob~bly vcr:y sir«i1-ar to the soldiers' borracks at
Fort Mifflin, located ~clo•-' l'hiladelphi.o ~nd built coeval with Fort
McHenry, that is, 17S8~1GOO. The 'larracks at that place arc similar,
not only in plan, but <_t> tl1c gepct"l Jisposition of such architcc•
tural features as doors, ''1ncio1;s, ,•tc. It '' very possi;,le that '1
"$tandard" plan existed for ;,arr"ck~ of tllat pcrt:id.
Un(orlunately, there drc vcr;• few r"li'1Cie vic1;s of Fort
McHenr:y for the a'.tl importan•: 1814 perio<i. Of the m<lny "bombardment"
scenes, only one, a 1·1atcreolwr r;.intiog, bas been evaluated as o
contemporary and ,~ccurate p~rlr~y~l of tl:c Scptctnber 13-14, 1&14
•
•
•
British bornbardmcnt. 4 Or.e of the buildi<1gs <lcpicted in that painting,
corresponds by its position to ['lo. 2 Soldiers' Barracks, and was re-
presented as having a gabl~ coo£ with dormer <;indo,,,s. As a result
of the October, 1958, archilectural invcsti[lation behind tl1c plaster
of the easternmost, second story plastered end \..•all, the outline of
the original gable re-of is discernible from the filled-in two story
addition of 1G29. The original roof "'"-S pi-obnbly shingled.
The height 0£ the main brick '"all~, as mentioned previously,
extended above the ceiling joists l'-'O feet. This fact was deter-
mined in Scptcetber 1~58, 1<hcn the 1;riter ope~ed the plastered side-
walls just above the second floor line and revealed the top of the
old brick walls • l·!hen the building """ later raised to two stories,
an eight inch bric:< ,_,,.Jl 1oas added to th~ existing 1oalls and this
juncture is now ev~dcnt. The identlfication of this arcl>itectC>ral
detail is furlher corroborat~d by an 132'; _;ns~ection report of the
structure,
The orii;inal g'1ble roof enclosed n BP~'CC frequently referred
to as "garrets," though these ctttic i·oocio 1.J~r" nc.ver adequat<> for
(, occupancy, due to their lin1ited he~J rnoo1. ilpr'1rently, the buildil1g
4Anonyr:cuu~ H.A.R.P. "'·'P no.
----------------<oatcrcolor µaint'ng '>f the Fore ~lcHenry bombardment 33;, ,
5Maj. ~;. ~;. P~vne [0 Gen. Jc3up, Jun~ 1, 1829. "The present walls of the bujiding•, ,'lrG fourteen inch~s thick, nn<l they run up two feet nbovo the upp~r f 1oor, consl.qu'2ntl)' [sic] "1•all nine inches thielc and seven feet high <·Jo\;ld giv'-' the upper rooms a sufficient pite\1 to render thc<n airry [sic] '1nd cocifortab;~." National Archiv<>s, Records Df the \·!ar Depa•-troent, Record C;.-oup 92, Office of the Quartermaster Gene•al, Consolidated Co1·r,,spondence Fi:e, 1794-l<JIS, Fort McHenry. Cit~d hcrc,,fter as !{;, RG92 QCJG GCf' 1794-1915 F~J •
0col. J'1eo0 l!indman to Col. •J. 1;. ,\rc.iistead, ~larch 17. Itl9. "The Garret rooms can not oe oceu~ied in sutr1ner on account of the intense heat.'' i'i' RG~07 OCE SC F'i:-,'oC lf.1~-37.
Cf. C.,pt. F, ilclto1' to Gen. Jesu~, Ju•y 5, 1822. Belton described tPe offlcei:-,;' qur.~ters, 1,lli~h 1;crc si,,,;_:_,r <;o the soltlier's b'1rracks, as' •. _containing three rooci:;, witll g'1ri:ets above, scai:cely ~llowing one to st3nc\ upright in th<'m.' '''A RC107 OCE SC FT~MC 1811-37.
~---------------~-----
•
•
• L___ -
did not h3ve a ful 1 length porch or "piazza."
Ihe 11ll9 ;'Plan and Profiles of Fort McHenry," drawn by 'lilliam
Tell Poussin o( the Topographical Engineers, is the first plan to
show the fort in its improved condition. 7 No. 2 Soldiers' Barracks
is shown (by a scale plan) as being 22 by 127 feet, but the apparent
increased length is misleading, since the addition is not really a
part of Building E, but rather a guard house which nearly abutted
the west end of the barracks, with only passage room between the two
buildings. The guard house <•as never actually attached, and the
structure was later removed,
By 1823, the barracks roof needed repairs. An interesting
letter from J,t. J. ''· Porter, 6th Infantry, to the S~-crctary of l·lar,
"In relation to the repair.• to roofs of Quarters &c at Fort McHenry,"
attempted to discuss the relative merits of ~inc and slate roofs as
follows:
I have long since been [of] [Lfle) opinion that zioc roofs should never be put upon buildings, firstly from the cost 0. secondly because they corrode or give ""Y in a few years. If the roof in question is very flat, it of course will have to be covered with a metallic roof. lf .•• there ts sufficient pitch to carry off the water it should be covered with slate •• ,D
Ho1•ever, other def,,ct.>, such as decayed floor joists and W'Orn floors,
corr.roanded more immcdiat~ attentior.; at1d repair of the roofs, though
7"Reconnoitring of Chesapeake Bay, STATE OF MAHYLAND, Plan and Profiles of Fort t1cHenry, 1819." Drawn by 11illiam Tell Poussin, Captain, Topographical Engineers [H.A.R.P. map no. 4]. National Archives, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, drawer 51, sheet 2.
8~r. J.M. Porter to Secretary of \Jar, September 16, 1823. NA RG92 Q}!G CCF 1794-1~15 Ft! •
•
•
•
"only in a tolerable condition,'' was 9
postponed. By the late 1820's,
the barracks at Fort ~lcl!enry had been so neglected that a major reno-
vation program was necessary ;f the post were to continue even as a
secondary installation in the coastal defensive system,
Enlargement and refurbishing of the buildings was mandatory to
handle a larger garrison. On February 24, 1829, a comprehensive
cstiwate of "proposed repairs" was transmitted to General Thomas S.
Jesup, Quartermaster General, in w
'.'ashington. This detailed docu-
ment is particularly important for it contains clues not only to new
work, but to ei<isting conditions. 1·/ith respect to l,o. 2 Soldiers'
Barracks (first designated as such in this document), the estimate
contemplated ren1oval of the existing roof, raising the builcl.ing to
two full stories, capping the structure with a shingled hip•roof,
and adding a two story porch or ·piazza" along the entire front of
the building.
The estimated costs for these alterations totaled $2590.45.
The estimates for this major architectural change reveal not only
quantities, but quality, unit prices and labor costs. An addendum
to the specifications denotes ''here qualitative substitutions may
take place. 1/here the estimate calls fo• the "best Suffolk shingles,"
for example, at $14/~\, the addendum alloi.s '·bundle shingles," at $3
to $5/M.
9Lr. Henry II, Fitzhugh to the Quart~rmaste.- General, July 8, 1824. iYA RG92 QMG CCF J794·1915 FM.
w Lt. S. B. Dusenbury to Gen. Thomas s. Jesup, February 24, 1829. NA RG92 Q~iG CCF 1794~1915 FM •
I I
•
•
• I
,06
Before thls work was executed, other proposals were in the
offing. One such scheme provided for merely widening the e><isting
barracks, instead of raising them to twD stories. 11
This was an
altempt to reduce the contemplated expenditure. However, this idea
was attacked on the premise that widening the building would only
increase the health problems at the fort, since the barracks rooms
would then be adjacent to the damp earthen slopes below the terre-
p1ein. 4 chronic problem at Fort McHenry during the summer months
was the so-called "sickly season." Every July or August, the entire
garrison was evacuated to a summer bivouac in the Baltimore hinter-
lan~s. 'lhe arsument ;ias pressed as follo<;s:
,,,the ill Health of the Garrison ••• occupying the Fort, proceeded not from the Position [of tne fort] , but from the construction of the Quarters. It is evident the close, confined Air, connected with Damp ••• generates the sickness, the prevention "ill be found in a free Circulation of Air thru {sic] the Buildings; this can easily be effected by raising the story ••. 12
The argument against encroachment upon the ramparts was sus·
tained; and the brick ;ialls of the barracks were examined in June
of 1829, for their structural ability to support the addition of
another story. This having been established in the affirmative,
construction commenced and was rapidly pushed to completion. The
Chief Carpenter employed for the second story additions (all the
barracks builtlings were raised to two stories) was one Howell Downing,
11 ~111j. T. Cross to Gen. Jesup, April 22, 1829. NA RG92 Ql'IG, CCF 1794·191S fii.
12Gen. J. R. Fenwick to Gen. Jesup, May 23, 1829. National Archives, Record Group 92, Records of the lo/ar Department, Office of the Quartermaster General, Selected Pages from Registers of Letters Received, 181S·57.
•
' •
•
hited out of Baltimore "' "' dollars day. n
The 1<ork seems " "'" have been completed early '" 1830.
Tho old.,,st e>:tant plan of "' newly enlarged barracks buildings
1;as drawn in llovemher, l!.134, ,, !..t • Thomas '· :.ee , 4th Artillery and
Acting Assistant Quartermaster. Lt. Lee's draloings are architectur-
ally important since they are the earliest plans to show the interior
room arrangement of all the buildings. 14 These plans indicate door
and window openings, fireplaces, stairways, and porches. They ex-
plain, for instance, that the west end of the porch on Building E had
to be built on an angle to accommodate the nearby bCTlllbproof well
structure. The well, with its protective brick vault, is now gone,
but the porch, in plan, retains its angular end.
Lt. J.ee's drawing also depleted the barracks building "ith a
hip-roo(. Today, the barracks has a sloping or shed roof protected
by raised brick parapet walls, In a recent e"amination of the attic
space of Buildiog E, the writer observed the structural joist frani-
ing of the 1829 hip-roof, still in " place, h'hcn the hip-roof was
replaced by the present shcd-toof, the tapered joists "ere left in
place, and the shed roof rafters supported on raised brick parapet
13Lt. S. B. Dusenbury to Gen, T. S, Jesup, August 4, 1829. National Archives, Record Group 92, Records of the l•ar Department, Office of the Quartermaster General, Selected Letters Received Re• lat:ing to Fort ~lcllenry, ~!aryland,
Cf, Capt. Jatnes I·,'. Ripley to Col, Bamford, October 7, 1829, liA RG92 R\,'!l Q~;G CCF l79li-l9!5.
Cf, ~\atchett's Baltimore Director, 1833, :;::;, ''Howell Downing, carpenter, 9 .~. Le,..ington St.''
l4'"Fort McHenry, Dra\<n in obedience to a Circular from the Qr. ~!aster Ge"ls. Offi.ce, dated Nov, 13th, 1834, by Thos. J, Lee, L.t. 4th 11.rty, 0. Acting A.Q.~1." {H.A.R,P. map no. 206]. National A,·chivcs, Record Group 77, Records of the ~lar Department, Office of the Chief of Engineers, ~lap File.
15ouring the 1958 H. A. B. s. measuring project at Fort Mcllllnry, Mr. Or11ille W. Carroll, Architect, National Part< Service, brought the existence of this detail to the writer's attention.
- - - --------------------
•
•
• l
>08
walls. The older hip-joists have tapered ends along the front and
back walls. Along the side ,,alls are short joists placed at SO de•
grees to the others and supported on one end by brick beam pockets
and on the other by a mortise and tenon dotoeled Joint to the first
cross joist. The writer has not yet learned when the shingled hip·
roof "'as replaced by the O'.etal covered shed roof, but it was prob-
ably in 1837, when the roof was ne11ly covered.
In 1833, the earthen and sodded slope behind the barracks was
replaced by a stone " revetment loall. Substltution of the stone wall
for the grassy slope practically eliminated the water runoff into
the ba.-racks. It also allotoed for better citclllation of air behind
the buildings.
Du•ing the extensive const<u<:tion pe<iod of tile late 1830's
at Fort ~lctlcnry, the barr<icks floor and roof 1>as rene<-Jed. The
l<itchen cellar was filled with earth, and a new floor was to be
laid " upon scantling. The date of the present first level brick
16Gen. Gratiot to Lt. Thompson, September 30, 1833. National Archives, Record G•oup 77, Records of the War Department, Office of the Chief of Engineers, 11isce\laneous Letters Sent, Volumes 1-25, 1312-1872.
Cf. Undated Drawing, contains plan, section, and estimate for stone •evetment wall, also slope o( existing earthen bank [H.A.R.P. map no, 20]. National Archives, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, d,awer 51, sheet 4.
17Lt. Thomas J. Lee to Gen. John Fen,iick, January 7, 1836. NA RG92 RWD Qt'.G CCF 17':14-1915 Fl'!. This includes an estimate and a suggestion for ramming earth into the cellars as a base for the new floor.
Cf. Lt. T. J. tee to Ge11. Jesup, April 12, lSJ[,, complains of " ••• the impossibility of obtaining earth sufficiently dry to fill up the cellars." NA RG'.12 QMG CCf 1794-1915 f1'!.
Cf. Capt. Thompson to Gen. Gratiot, March 14, 1337, notes that cellars "'"re not yet completely filled. >'lational Archives, Record Group 77, Records of the '·•ar Department, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Letters Received, 1&26~1G37.
•
•
• l
floors is not :<no<on to the t•riter.
Surprising enough, no major fire has ever been recorded among
the barracks buildings, but the potential th•eat of fire, caused the
rn shingle roofs to be replaced with new zinc roofs. An estimate for
doing this work was transmitted A.pril 5, 1837, by Captain Henry A.
Thompson, agent for the imp..-ovements of the late 1830's, to General
Gratiot, Chief Engineer of tile Army:
Fo• covering the four [barrac)<sl buildings at thi~ Post with tin at $475 each - $1800.00.19
The estimate was approved the iollowing day, and work was undertaken
irrrrnediately. In !•lay 1840, following completio" of the renovation
program, the soldiers' barracks were merely described as being in
·'excellent condltion. -,
Xuch later, prior to 1..'orld '!er I, tl1c two•story porch "'as
removed from Building E, Window and door openings were altered, and
Victorian window and door lintels were appliquad, apparently in an
attempt to update the building.
\/hen Fort McHenry was "restored" by the i>Tar Department in
the late 1920's, ur.der the earnest direction of Colonel L. M.
icisenring, No. l Soldiers' Barracks (Building D), served as a
18tbid., Thompson observed that the close proximity of the buildings-;:;o;;-Jd render i.t " ••• impossible to save them in case of {ire." H<l reeorr,mendcd slate as a substitute for the shingle roof, or if not sl11te, some other type of roof "impervious co fire."
19 capt. 1hompson to Gen. Gratiot, April ;, 1837. NA RG107 OCE Sc FT·l1C lliIJ•37. An J840 drawing of the barracks also shows the brick parapet walls, indicating that the roof structure had been changed in 1837 from a hip•type to a shed·roof, its present form. See Plans and Elevations of the Soldier's Barracks at Fort ~!cHenry, drawn from actual measurements by '..t. R. Butler, [1840), National Archives, Cartographic Section, Record Group 77, drawer 51, sheet 17.
•
•
•
model, since it alone retained its porches. !-Jhile it 1•as generally
believed that the restoration represented the 1014 condition 0£ the
buildings, it actually approximates the 1829 period when the upper
stories and porches "ere added. llith the documentary material made
available by the recent Historical and Archeological Research Pro
g,-am at Fort McHenry, it is now evident that the "restored" build
ings substantially represent the 1Ll4 period in ground plan only,
Everything from a point two feet above the second floor line, in
cluding porches, represents an architectural additive process, the
biggest change occurring in 1829,
•
•
• I
;u
P/\RT B. Architectural Information
A. General State~. Present appearance of this building depicts a typi~al permaner.t u. S. A.-rny barrac:<s of the period ca. 1D30. It is much changed from its original condition as bu;lt ca. 1000. lt "'"s restored in 1927~30 by the \Jar Department, under the direction of Colonel L. ~l. teisenriog, and has been maintained as part of a historic group of slructures.
l. Architectural Character. The prese"t restored appearance does not portray the original architectural character, but rather the building as it looked in 1830, after the second story and full length piazza was added. Although many of the exterior and interior details are restored, the first floor str<.>cture is original, and the ground floor room arrangement is substantially unchanged. Entire building is very plain, and except for the porch, devoid of any architectural refinements. The severity of the brick wall surfaces is broken only by the simple unframed openings for doors and windows.
B. Exterior.
l. Overall dimensions. 22'-0'' by 98'-5''•
2. Foundations. Random quarry stone foundation walls, \Ohieh extend about three feet below grade, except at easternmost end of building, where stone walls extend nearly eight feet below grade to accommodate a cellar kitchen that was filled with earth about 1G37.
3. \!all Construction. Brick masoriry, throughout, commorl bond with headers every sixth course.
4. Porches. Building originally had no porches. The present piazza is a reconstruction of the 1830 piazza, l•hich had been removed sometime before \-Jarid \Jar I. Restored piazza is of wooden construction, ,•upported at 9'-4' intervals by turned, freely interpreted Doric columns resting on dressed and tooled stone plinths. Second sLory piazza is supported nt same spacing by smaller turned columns except that lo\Oer three feet of column is square in section. Reconstructed piazza follo1;s it.; predecessor in general disposition but the details such as mouldings on columns, railing, etc., do not closely conform to those on No. I. Soldiers' Barracks (Building D), which retains it original 1330 piazza. The roof of the second stC>ry piazza is a shed-roof. The rafters are supported on one end by the wooden columns and on the other end by beam pockets in the brick ,,all. Roi:>f was originally shingled, but is no'' covered l<ith sheet metal joined "'ith standing seams. Porch roof, gutter and downspouts also are replacements dating from 1930. The eastern end of the porch is cut off on an angle. in plan, and was originally built thus to make room for the nearby bombproof well, now gone. \lhen the porch "'as reconstructed in 1930, the angular end design was retained.
•
•
• I
H'
5. Chimneys, Reconstructed, presently capped with sheet metal.
0, Openi!!&§. All openings are unframed without any architraves, pediments, etc. All e~terior lintels are flat arches of brick,
a, Dooi-s. Ace all replacements, original design unknown. l'!ill"'<lrk details are all 1930 as to design and construction. Door sills ai-e probably orJ.ginal, being of a dressed, gr-anite~like stone.
b. Windol<S and shutters, Are all •eplacements. First floor windows are double hune, and Similar to the original 1.'indows, that is 15 over 10, "'ith respect to the arrangement of panes. Second story windows, also double hung, are arranged 12 over 8, instead of the 6 over 6 arrarlgement of the Wl\ldows as built in 1830. All details such as muntins, sash bars, etc., are modern as to design and construction. All shutters and shutter stops are replacements, original design unknown.
7. Roof. Sloping, shed-type, covered with sheet metal, joined with standing seams, Present covering was applied in 1930. Original roof was lower, gabled With dormer Windo,,s, In 1829-30, lihen the building was raised to two stories, a hip-roof was constructed, which was replaced with a shed-roof <1bout 1837. Under11eath the present shed-roof, the hip-roof ceiling joists are still in place. Surrounding the shed-roof are raised, brick parapet walls, which step down on the ends to accoir.w.odate the change of height between the front and rear parapet walls. Parapet walls are capped with projecting coping bricks, moulded With two drip grooves, All gutters and downspouts date from 1930, original design Ullknown.
c. Interiors.
1. Floor Plans (1st floor). Plan is similar to original as built c<t. 1800, that is, three rooms, each measuring abo<Jt 19'-8" deep and 31'-8" long, Brick crosswalls had been removed, but were recon~ structed by the War Department to their original location, Access to each room is by an exterior door centered along the front of each romn. A window flanks eaclt door so that there.are tltree doors and six windows aloni the front wall. There are two windows in the rear wall of each room, except the easternmost room, which has three, (2nd floor) is similarly arranged into three rooms, corresponding in size to the rooms below. Three exterior doors, located over those below, open into the second floor piazza. l-lindow locations correspond to those below, except the easternmost room which has two windows in the rear wall, (cellar) Located under the easternmost room of the lst floor is a cellar room built as an original part of the building, ca. 1800. The cellar room, probably a kitchen, was entered from an exterior cellar stairwell, centered alollg the end wall. There were four windows which daylighted the room, two in front and two in back, all of them located below the first floor windows. The brick walls above the cellar windows are supported by £lat arch brick lintels • The cellar Windows were protected by brick light wells, About 1837, the cellar was filled with earth, the windows removed and the openings bricked up, and the brick light ~ells destroyed.
•
•
•
HJ
2. Stairwavs, as they exist are replacements. They loc>1.tion as shown in the Lt. Thomas J. Lee plan of 1834. arrangement has been discovered, 'fhere are three stairs, room, and each occupies the co..-ne.- created by the meeting front wall and the crosswall,
occupy the. No earlier one in each of the
3, Flooring (1st floor). Bri~k, laid in a herringbone pattern, installed 1930. Original floors were floored with W<'.lod, type unkno~-n. {2nd floor) Original floor as installed in 1829~30 was 5/4 white pine flooring, b»t the pi:csent floor 1s a 1930 1·eplacement of 5/4 pine, Sl;:" wide. {cellar) Remnants of a brick floor reroain, one course thick, laid without mortar,
4, Wall and ceiling finish. (1st floor) walls, ei<posed se~ond floo<: joists above. (2nd metal lath on Wlllls and ceiling, applied 1930.
~'hitewashed brick floor) Plaster over
S_ Trim, all dates from 1930, including door frames, window frames, b3Seboards, fireplace mantels, etc.
6. Hardware, all installed 1930, original designs unknown. Lock sets are brass reproductions, but not necessarily like original lock sets.
7. Liehtine, electric, installed in 1930 and later •
8. Heating, modern steam radiators. Originally, heat was fur• nished by fireplace, one in each room. Fireplaces, and chimneys, restored in 1930, are located at the center of the crosswalls, two of the fireplaces being back to back. First floo< fireplaces have no shelves or mantel pieces, openings are arched with header bricks, supported by iron lintel bars, ractangular in cross section. The cellar fireplace is similar to those on first floor, except that it is whitewashed. Second floor fi<eplaces are smaller, with flat arch brick lintels. The ~antel sheif and pilaster boards are 1930 replacements, similar in design to those $how~ on the 1834 drawing by Lt. Thomas J. Lee,
D. Site. This bt.iilding is located between No. I Soldiers' Barracks and the Guard Rooms, on the parade ground. The front of the building faces northwe~t. About eight feet behind the building, and parallel with it, is a stone revetment wall which serves to separate the upper terreplein level from the parade ground level •
•
•
•
Illustration No. 35
No. 2 Soldiers' &arraclui (Building E). west end~wall. Photographer: ~ack E.
Facade and south~ Boucher, ~uly 1958 •
•
•
•
,·
-,:~;Ii!; __
' ' ' ' , __ . :~:-~- -- ;~---
Illuatration No. 36
Mo, 2 Soldiers' B&rracke (lhlilding southwest end wall. Photographer; October 1958,
E), &ear 11i111ll and ~aek E, Boucher,
•
•
•
Illustration No, 37
No. 2 Soldiers' Barracks (Building E). Second floor ll!vel of "pia.zza," reconetructed in 1929-30 by the l<iar Department, using Building D as a prototype. Photo• grapber: Jack E. Boucher, July l9SS •
I•
•
• I
I .·oc
HIJIJ/////J/l/I
Illustration No. 38
Ho. 2 Soldiers' Barracks (Building E). Partial excava~ tion of cellar fireplace under northeast room, first floor. Photographer: ~ack E. Boucher, October 1958 •
•
•
•
,.
,. . , . . ' > "
-'" -,_u-::i;,,. ·--~ $ ::.~:,,,{6.-,ifii-!&6 '..-.;:, -~}" . .. --·' -,;;,'.;.~#!.'1'ilJ -~---~ . .., ·~-·-t-··~- 1-
,. lt-"fe'o~· 1-~~ ~'}~ _,-.:,,.4:
l·
,Illustration llo. 39
" '
No. 2 Soldiera' Barrw::ka (Buildi!lil E). Viev of bricked~ up cellar window and remnant of brick light~well under rear wa.ll of oorthee.at rO<JCD. Photographer: Jack E. Boucher, October 1958 •
•
•
"
' .: __
J I
i i
/
• -···· - i ..
i=~o;>",=""'"' >==-T.c.......-=~"''ii'·=r=-:: -Cc='il ' -, '
'.... . ...
·'--C
___ ,, __
•
' ,, '
;. " '
,..- ____ . _ _,.,_ _
- "'-'
•
.... " ··~'""~ -;~-;,:.:;c:
,,
. ' _--___,_ __ ,: "·
.... .' ' ·-' -
_,
' ' -, '
_,., '·' ... - · ... ···--, '
--'-·
- ,_ ,1 T ,I
'
"
\ ~-.,,,
- ~"
'- ) '' ,,, ___ ,, .. -' '"''
__ ,,_,,,
•
• ~~~~~ -~~-~, ~~· -- ,,,,,__. ·.~ ' ~"""' J .\...---~'-'- L.>-
.1. .1.
"''"'·' ' -~-'" ' "~····' ~·,' .. ""
. M. s - 1- -
l!llll II . '. __ , . Ill!.
" IJ '
-,.-_-;0--.-{~-··'·'·~···-·-.· -- ·~' --., L_ ... ~~..+'--~--'='.---'+-~·--'-.;.~~
.1., I. .1. ! 'Ii' .I' I j
-·~
"I
. ''"""''~"~ ......-~-..- . ,,... ,.,..,_......,.,,. . .,.
"'''''""' "'"'°""' •M"'*" ""'"''""' "'"""' ~1 ~' ~
•
-· -· _ ......
• ,, . ..,.. .. , . '"' • • "' ' n• ,,
• ''" i--j ' ' ' I --,__, -'---t__ -, -~
~J - r ', ·1! ' I " F
l-''L' __L __ ____LLj , :-~l '·/,\I '.()~
• ~·< "'~'
'''"' ' ''"' ' ' ~'"". ,.,, '."" ""'
'
,•
. .
-~
'
.
' '
l ' ··'
• .L~
.,,.-·
-I;
1,
'
.... ~,,~~ ll','.1.:\1'.[J '.:r',. ~:>'<'.IO:::~;C ·~Li'.~-~·.:, '·'
'o•r "'"'''''·"'a'"',,.,.,.,,,,.-'~-'""'~,,,,,,,,. '"·-·'''' ,_,, .. ,
.]
' -:.!, ' ,. '
•• .. ... -- ' ,,
' •j_
" ' ! '
....
'
•
,,.
, ,_
•
r---1 '
. ,,, __ ~
'
·~
--:;:~;.;:'.~ .,_ -~, ,,
""'"""'~~ ·~~~·-
;'°'1£_: ,. ' d
~:'!L:-~l"ED i\Ll'i1.'.l-·IS·W'i:K:'.J · illlLCING 'r_'
'""":='°J.;'.:.':.::,~,:;~==-.::.~- "-"' ,•, .!f:iOY '·'flO:V.L JC'= 0'!<0 :J~"DQI~ ;:JJOlt<O • MlillC<tt =Jlrrt· 1'\IJ1"°'1' """1'WIC'
l
I I
--- -----
• ~ ----L ___ _
------
/
~:~~,1- r:co:< K:·R(,!~ cOLU1\t-: ""- ;;x,
1 -••·•--•••"'"~-·-·~·w•-~ ~<-~---- ----~ ~-'" ..,,. '"
~ '-• --+
• '\':
I ' ·---~ ! L r-
' L-
--i--
I
+-J~
I -+
" '
'J..COllJ l''_V'.)2 j{)fc'.l.W (,Q_,Jfllli 'lf.L """"-'
~, ... "~'""' :.~ ;;::, 1,0.1.1,.>:,cv<; - ~·J · .. l' NI-. '· '
,:,,, '
-~ '':'(f,,
{ '"' ;1;-/!>I <· ''U ;;:,-Yi K/,' ==
I
[>',~:I~·: IG'(>C: Dt:T:\.'_
"'-' '"'''
' '
r
'·' .,
' I
1
.. -'-~ --- '""''
--- """°"'' 'M'"""'" """"'""' """""' '""""'-~
•
-
• r i
~ '
11- '< ·~· • "''"
,,, 'o'
~-,, 'll .l.L [_>::_)::JI( s: I : :C ilJ I Ii~'.) FUll :,CAC'
~"' ,.. . ..., ~•~• ~ '"-" = -""=o "'"" "-='· "''" '"""' "°""' -- '"'"'"' ""-"'' ~ ,.,_._ "'·~·~· ·-~~""' " ''''" ~ ..., -· "' ·~ '""" ""' -·· -""' ' ""' ,..,,, " '" """'" "'"" """"·
• : "'' ,_, "-"·"' " '~'°"' ""'°' '""' ,. '
-'·~-----,.
.'J'.-~'-~
.,,,~:o'<
--
Q[]
noo, wl JJ ' ' 
~--
•·
'
---~ . , ' i· ' -
,,,,,_ "Tl~ '
'
' '
' '
' I
' " -I
L ~
7 ' _, I
IL T ..
• ' _,._,.,
' i ' '
' ' ' ' -' ' ' ' -' ~
f',,,.,T l ICD!l ."!IND01\' :-ll,\f\t 0-,lll :;.:,AU
'
,,.
--- <'l -,
'
Ll'...;,::'.'O' -i/0 :OJ~DINC - "'-',;.AL,_
' ,. ,, - - " ' -I '
I -" ' -+
tiT-I LJ-tj ~-
j ·:·>.''1.:-·_ •. ,(;O;J. l •'J .. :o_'. :-~l.G '.·:1·~:-<Yll
.'.~'i.i~[J ~~CJ;.\ c:G1·c,1l!r_
' 'f,
' ·' '
' ' ' ' J-
.,,., •
~- - • ... 10G
""''""" ·~"''""" "'""'""' '""""' '•"'~b~·~
• l
------~
• • • ...,,_~ .,.,., _____ ,
,,,,.,,....,,...,, -. J
I, ' ' • ,.-r,,. -- C.-=ii_U.l'\N 1\.'!D .'DJ: DINC. I ' l,,, ' ,_, L. v.
' ' i ! ' I -; T' ,. _,,
'
' ' ,, ,. ·J' .,. ,,. ,.
' I l', l' ·r· .- T I" I ! ' '
' ,' '"}-, r;:- - -·-
I ' ' 'I '
I II ' 'I I ' ' I
;,i' ' Jr ' I
I. I ' I I
,, I ) "'
' ' -.:
I I
J I I
., ' ''1~ I I
:1 I I I
I ! ...._,_ "' ,....,, •• I ' '
' ' '
i ' ' ' ' ... ,-- .. -
r~rJf_ ' • .t:DCtJ : 7'..'J\~ l j?,[_j'!,. SC'.D:-;[J I irr.;;.o • ~-~:,J I I + """ """·' : Q._,,',\J: ~UNG 'JlfJ[XJV
'
'
l,_L + ' ·,-1r·11·r·u '""" OU1SiOL
"'-""'' ,,
' •' ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '"' "''· I ' ' ' ' '
"=·-~ .. -· '~-"". '"'~'' '' ,, ,,,- ,•C••>
! """':f,=.:._ ':~! ~':!:",''~0"''!";;".:_.-_;'..;'; '•=" 1 _"O'T "" •';'"'-':",~~~".'.. '
~~ ... "'"""" ""''"'"'" -- ' =~IL',,5-~C'.'.J :'.: 1:1·.c:::<G -"'-~ ,_ .._.,.i< (,',~,(3. - ~·D·'l'.D """"""" """"""
' '"'' ·o,:o•,,_ '"'' ''"" ,,,._,10;: ,,.__, __ "' ' ,c,, ''""'' '''" '0'' - '''"'·'"" -·' _,
~
' ' '
•
'
•