Submarine H.L. Hunley: Mesmerizing, fragile artifacts on display at The Charleston Museum provide insight into crew's appearance and how they worked as a team

Items associated with Hunley skipper George Dixon (all photos courtesy The Charleston Museum; click to enlarge)

Among all the crew clothing, personal items and components of the H.L. Hunley now on display at The Charleston Museum, historic textiles curator Virginia Theerman has a few favorites.

“I find (crew member) Miller's windowpane check vest fragment, (Lt. George) Dixon's shoe with his footprint, and the yellow sling that helped raise the submarine to be some of the most compelling objects in the exhibition,” said Theerman.

“Textiles from the Deep: Findings from the H.L. Hunley Submarine” opened this past weekend in the South Carolina city. It is the first time these newly conserved textile fragments are on view to the public.

Each of the eight crew members have a slant board display with their archeological materials from inside the Hunley. A mannequin represents one interpretation of how that man might have been dressed, using garments primarily pulled from The Charleston Museum's collection. (At left, bandana worn by crew member James A. Wicks.)

The gallery is a U-shape, and the introductory panel leads the visitor right into the space. 

“Everything I want them to take away is in the label texts,” Theerman told the Picket in an email Wednesday. “We're establishing the importance of textile conservation, recreating the possible garments of the individuals, and situating the H.L. Hunley within its moment in naval warfare history.”

The exhibit, which runs through April 4, is being sponsored by Friends of the Hunley and the South Carolina Hunley Commission.

On Feb. 17, 1864, Hunley made history by becoming the first submarine to sink an enemy warship. The 40-foot iron vessel -- bullets pinging off its iron exterior -- planted a torpedo in the hull of the Union ship USS Housatonic, setting off a charge that sent the Federal vessel and five crew members to the sandy bottom within minutes.

The Hunley and its eight-man crew disappeared beneath the waves and entered the realm of legend. To this day, historians, scientists and others debate what caused it to end up on the ocean floor. 

Since recovery from the Charleston Harbor in 2000, the submarine and the crew’s belongings have been undergoing extensive conservation at Clemson University's Warren Lasch Conservation Center in North Charleston. Some of the textile items were freeze-dried during conservation.

Kellen Butler, executive director of the friends group, told the South Carolina Daily Gazette the Lasch Center has been unable to display the textiles because of the lack of humidity controls.

Exterior rivets, crew member Miller's vest, ballast blocks from interior floor (The Charleston Museum)

The exhibit at The Charleston Museum is sure to get a patron's attention.

On the left is a replica of the hand crank used to power the vessel. Behind that is a profile of the sub’s exterior. Numerous artifacts are in the foreground, including tools.

The next section explores the recovery of the Hunley.(below).

Past that is an area that focuses on the painstaking conservation of the submarine itself and all the items found inside with the crew (below, click to enlarge).

The rest of the display are the eight mannequins and items found with or near each individual. That includes clothing fragments, a bandana, buttons and shoes.

Given it having been open only a few days, Theerman said she doesn’t have yet a sense of the public’s reception of the exhibit

“However, the gallery was definitely occupied the couple of times I was upstairs today, which is always lovely to see.”

MORE ON THE HUNLEY:

https://civil-war-picket.blogspot.com/2025/02/these-tools-helped-keep-submarine.html

https://civil-war-picket.blogspot.com/2020/05/hl-hunley-fascination-social-media-post.html

https://civil-war-picket.blogspot.com/2019/11/new-clue-hunley-crew-wasnt-using-air.html

https://civil-war-picket.blogspot.com/2015/01/hl-hunley-scientists-peeling-away-crust.html

Ballast water pipe from the submarine H.L. Hunley (Photos courtesy The Charleston Museum)

Remembering the Sultana disaster: This 14-foot model greeted Arkansas museum visitors for years. It was one of two made for a film about Civil War tragedy

The old Sultana museum (Picket photo), Gene Salecker with model and a still from film abouit the disaster

About 25 years ago, an Ohio documentary maker who was passionate about the steamboat Sultana tragedy put his dreams into production, filming scenes in a river, swimming pool and a recreated ship’s cabin, among other locations.

The late Tom Koba’s production apparently never enjoyed widespread distribution, but he did leave behind two models of the Sultana. The actual vessel exploded and caught fire in April 1865, killing about 1,200 people. Hundreds of Federal soldiers, many recently freed from Confederate prisons, including Andersonville and Cahaba, were on their way home.

Sultana author Gene Salecker worked from the remains of those boats to create new models, one of which was the star at the Sultana Disaster Museum in Marion, Ark., before the museum closed two months ago as a larger, permanent venue is built a few blocks away.

A giant version of the doomed vessel will be the centerpiece of the new museum. “People will be able to actually walk up onto the recreated deck and see our actual 1842 steamboat engine (right) and a display on the fateful boilers, as well as other featured displays,” said Salecker, who has purchased numerous artifacts for the museum over the years.

Museum executive director Jeff Kollath said Salecker’s model, which was disassembled recently, will be placed in the main area, too. Salecker will put it back together in October, a month ahead of the museum’s grand opening.

“People can see pictures or drawings of the Sultana, but can only imagine what it really looked like,” said Norman Shaw, a founder of the Sultana Association of Descendants and Friends. “With Gene's large model, they can examine one up close. Also get an idea (of) how it operated.”

History is fortunate a photograph of the overloaded Sultana, taken shortly before the disaster, survives.

Blue tape in the gym shows shape of new Sultana model (Gene Salecker)

Sultana author Jerry Potter said Salecker’s model “is an incredible tool to give people an understanding of the layout of the Sultana. Gene has done an amazing job of restoring it. Now, it is going to its final home.”

I asked Salecker to talk about the Sultana models and how they have been used. His responses have been edited and ordered for brevity and context.

Q. Did you build the model? If so, when did you build it and why?

I built the existing model during the summers of 2013 and 2014 while I was still teaching and had the summers off. However, the foundation of the model came from someone else.

The 14-foot model (actually, two of them) were the brainchild of Tom Koba, of Berlin Heights, Ohio. Tom was an independent filmmaker who had worked with the state of Ohio on a couple of Civil War documentaries

I met Tom at the Ohio Civil War Show in Mansfield after my 1996 book was published. Tom bought a copy and was instantly hooked on the story. He would come to the show each year and pick my brain, hoping one day to make a documentary on the Sultana.

Scenes from filming in 2000, of survivors and fiery water (Courtesy Gene Salecker)

I believe Tom began his film in about 2000. He lived on a large farm and actually built a full-scale main saloon, boiler and coal bin area, some of the decking, etc. At one point, he rented out a public pool and at night, he put up some fake deck pieces, lit them on fire and had people rushing from the burning "boat" and jumping into the water. He hired professional stunt people to set themselves on fire and jump into the water, and a professional makeup person to put "burns" and "scalds" on many of the people. He also used local re-enactors as some of the ex-POWs.

Tom hired a couple of retired gentlemen to build him the two 14-foot models. One was to be detailed and the paddlewheels could move by radio control. He planned to run this on a river near his farm and take shots of the crowded boat going up the river. The second boat was not as well detailed and was meant to be exploded and burned.

Original Sultana model several years after film production (Gene Salecker)

At one of the Sultana Association reunions, Tom came and showed a few of us the finished "rushes." He was getting ready to edit the scenes when he unexpectedly died in 2007 at age 61.

In about 2012, I got a phone call from (his companion and business partner) asking me if I wanted the two 14-foot models. They had sat on her mother's front lawn, covered by a blue tarp .. . near Lake Erie. I rented a U-Haul truck and went and brought the two models back to my house in River Grove, Ill.

(The Picket contacted the business partner and will update this if she responds to questions about the project.)

In the summer of 2013, I moved the best model into my shed and began stripping off the old paint and mold and preparing it the way the Sultana had actually looked. It took me two summers and a lot of work but I completed the first model and brought it down to Marion for the grand opening of the interim museum in April 2015 (photo above).

Q. What materials are primarily used? How much of the original models were used?

A. I primarily used cedar and balsa wood. I also used chairs, spittoons, door handles, buckets, barrels, etc. from scale dollhouses.

Model that greeted museum visitors for 11 years awaits reassembly in new venue (Gene Salecker)

As for how much of Tom's original models I used, (it was) the hulls (Tom had them painted black and I had to strip, sand and paint them white.) I used the decking. I used all the slats in the railings and the upright railing posts. I used much of the paddlewheel housings but had to cut and redesign them. I used all of the stairs leading into the Texas cabins. I used his stage planks. In other words, to honor Tom, I used as much of the original model as I could but much of it needed a lot of modification. I would say I used about 60% of what was not too damaged by the elements.

Q. How did you/the builder come up with the specs and design?

A. All of the information about the Sultana (size, number of boilers, etc.) came from the January and February 1863 Cincinnati newspapers, which were reporting on the building of the Sultana. In 1979, I was working as a draftsman and drew up blueprints of the boat. No steamboat was built by blueprints so there were no existing prints for the Sultana. When someone wanted a new boat built, he went to the boat builder, gave him the measurements he wanted and etc., and the boat builder went to work. Steamboats were pretty standard.

Click on this 1865 panorama of St. Louise to see Sultana at center-right (credit below)

I used the information on the Sultana for specifics, and for the genera overall design of a steamboat, I referred to “The Western Rivers Steamboat Cyclopoedium” by Alan L. Bates, a retired steamboat engineer. Bates wrote his book, which is almost entirely of line drawings of parts of the steamboat, with "a nod to the modeler." When I was finished with my blueprints, I sent them to Alan L. Bates himself to check them over and he returned them with some comments and corrections. Those were what I used and referred to in building the 14-foot model.

(Photo above: Courtesy Herman T. Pott National Inland Waterways Library at the University of Missouri-St. Louis)

Q. Tell me about the second model you built.

A. I used the best of the two (Koba) models to build the one that was displayed in the Interim museum. A few years later, I used the second model to build an "after the explosion" model which has only been put on display once -- at the 2021 kickoff of the fundraising for the new museum. I had to make an exact duplicate of the first model and then strategically wreck it.

I tried to use as much of Tom's original model in the second one (above, courtesy Gene Salecker), also. However, since I had picked the best pieces from both models when I made the first one, there weren’t much undamaged pieces left. Of course, I used the hull and some of the decking but most of it had to be handmade to an exact match of the first model. That was the hard part -- being exactly like the first model except for the ruptured middle of the boat. The stern, the bow, the paddlewheel boxes, everything had to be exactly the same.

Fortunately, I took hundreds of photos as I worked on the first model so I used those as reference for the second model... and I made sure that I kept my measurements of everything.

(Editor's note: There is no room in the gallery for the  "after the explosion" version, which is in storage in Marion, Kollath told the Picket.)

Q. How has the model added to the story of the Sultana?

A. Melody Walker of the interim Sultana Disaster Museum used to say that the two things everybody photographs when they come to the museum is the many names on the Memorial Wall and the 14-foot steamboat model. People like to look at the model to get a better understanding of what the Sultana looked like. They can see how difficult it would have been for a soldier to leap from the top hurricane deck into the crowded water 25 feet below.

Photograph of the Sultana near Helen, Ark., a day before tragedy on the Mississippi (Library of Congress)

The model has added to the understanding of where the explosion came from (top, back end of the boilers in the center of the boat), and how the blast traveled upward at about a 45-degree angle, tearing everything before it, including the pilothouse. The model adds to the understanding of just what the ex-POWs and the others had to go through to reach the supposed safety of the water.

 As they say, a picture (or in this case, a model) is worth a thousand words. It is a great educational aide in helping to explain the tragedy of the Sultana.

Previous Sultana coverage:

• Documentary, events mark 150th anniversary

• Will victim's journal and Bible become part of collection?

• Descendants drop flowers in memory of the lost
• Model captures every detail of Sultana

• Disaster took lives of those who had endured so much
• Siblings recall learning of disaster

Savannah dredging operations brought up numerous Civil War and Revolutionary War cannons and artifacts. How did the projects and weapons compare?

CSS Georgia Dahlgren pulled up from river in 2015; one of the Revolutionary War cannons in 2021 and this week's unveiling of conserved artillery pieces at the Savannah History Museum (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers photos)

A stunning collection of Revolutionary War cannon recovered off Old Fort Jackson in Savannah, Ga., is now on public display, the culmination of an extensive archaeological and conservation effort.

A contractor dredging the Savannah River in 2021 came across the first of the 19 artillery pieces, which some thought might belong to CSS Georgia, a Confederate ironclad that was scuttled nearby by its crew in December 1864. But it soon became apparent they dated to the American Revolution and the British siege of the city in 1779. They were on ships scuttled by the British to prevent French support of the colonists.

The surprise discovery of the Revolutionary War weapons came following the 2015-2017 recovery of items associated with the Civil War ironclad.

That U.S. Army Corps of Engineers harbor deepening project, which involved contractors and U.S. Navy divers, recovered more than 30,000 CSS Georgia artifacts, including 241 pieces of ordnance, five cannons and two large casemate sections. The latter were documented and left in the water.

A section of the CSS Georgia's casemate in 2017 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)

The Corps of Engineers worked with Texas A&M University to conserve the CSS Georgia material and then 17 of the cannons associated with the Revolutionary War. The Savannah History Museum this week opened “Loyalists and Liberty: Savannah in the American Revolution.”

Chris Dostal, director of the conservation lab at Texas A&M, told the Civil War Picket:

“From a conservation standpoint, both projects involved large, concreted iron artillery from a marine or riverine environment, but the Savannah River cannon presented a particularly unusual opportunity because so many guns were recovered together, several with associated bore contents preserved.”

Some CSS Georgia artifacts are on display at the National Civil War Naval Museum in Columbus, Ga. (At left, one of its propellers, Picket photo).

That venue "is the only institution with CSS Georgia artifacts on loan from our office," said Kate Morrand, a conservator with the Naval History and Heritage Command. "The remainder of the CSS Georgia collection includes over 5,100 artifacts and is curated by the NHHC Underwater Archaeology Branch, based at the Washington Navy Yard."

The command was involved in the CSS Georgia project but the Revolutionary War cannons were not under its purview.

The Picket recently asked Corps officials to provide some context to how both archaeological projects dovetailed or differed.

The following responses came from Francis “Franky” Stankiewicz with Chronical Heritage, Andrea Farmer, archaeologist with the Savannah district of the Army Corps, and Cheri Pritchard, media relations chief with that office. The responses have been edited for brevity and context.

Q1: Are you any closer to knowing precisely which British ships these Revolutionary War cannon belonged to? I know the HMS Rose was ruled out.

A: We have learned a great deal since the cannon were conserved, but I would not say we can assign individual guns to specific vessels with certainty. The strongest current interpretation is that the assemblage most likely originated from the armed ship Savannah, formerly the American privateer General Arnold, and the British transport Venus, both of which were associated with the 1779 Siege of Savannah. Current research suggests that domestic colonial production is the most likely origin for the guns attributed to the General Arnold/Savannah. However, manufacture in Britain, France (particularly Bordeaux), or Spain (particularly Bilbao) cannot be ruled out. Within the realm of domestic production, Rhode Island and Pennsylvania presently appear to be the most probable manufacturing centers.

Andrea Farmer with two reenactors at the Savannah History Museum (USACE photos)

Q: There was early speculation these 19 cannons might date to the Revolutionary War era but might have been placed on the CSS Georgia or fortifications. What led you to determine they dated to the Revolution?

A: The Revolutionary War interpretation rests on several lines of evidence. Typologically, the guns are mid-to-late 18th-century 6-pounders, including examples exhibiting Armstrong-pattern characteristics as well as related short-gun variants. Historically, British and French accounts document the burning and scuttling of armed vessels in this section of the Savannah River during the 1779 Siege of Savannah, consistent with the location of the recovery area. Archaeologically, many of the cannon were recovered in a loaded condition, containing tampions, wadding, shot, powder cartridges, fuse remains, and powder residue, indicating that they were likely prepared for immediate use rather than discarded at a later date. Taken together, the age, location, and loaded condition of the guns strongly support their association with the Revolutionary War-era scuttling events in the Savannah River.

Q: From an archaeological and conservation viewpoint, how different are these cannons vs. those found at CSS Georgia site?

A: From a conservation standpoint, these cannons were unusually rich in sealed contexts. Most were heavily concreted and contaminated cast iron, but many still held preserved bore contents. That meant conservation was also excavation: tampions, hemp junk wads, shot, cartridges, and residues had to be removed and documented in sequence. CSS Georgia material, by contrast, is Civil War ironclad wreckage and ordnance context: later, more industrial, and tied to an armored floating battery. The Savannah cannon assemblage is earlier, Revolutionary War-era muzzle-loading artillery, and its research value comes heavily from the combination of gun form, loading evidence (i.e., material within), and scuttling context. (See link for more photos)

Q. I know the investigation into CSS Georgia concluded a few years back. Have you learned anything more about the site or vessel since then?

A: The CSS Georgia investigation itself concluded earlier, and the current investigations do not indicate a major new interpretation of the vessel since that work. What they do add is a broader landscape context: the cannon cluster site lies near, but is not part of, the CSS Georgia site, and prior mapping work around CSS Georgia actually helped identify the Revolutionary War cannon concentration.

Q: Do you have a schematic/map or illustration showing their precise location in the Savannah River? And do you have anything similar showing the CSS Georgia cannon location -- or both put together?

A: To help preserve and protect these cultural resources long-term, we are not publicly disclosing their precise locations. While the locations are known to a limited number of researchers and resource managers, there is broad agreement that this information should remain restricted for now. Limiting access helps protect the sites from disturbance while supporting future research and analysis that may provide additional insights. Researchers continue to use a variety of mapping products, including sonar and multi-beam imagery of the Cannon Cluster Site near Fort Jackson. Specific details about the exact locations of these resources and their relationship to one another are also being withheld to support ongoing stewardship and future study. In addition, the Savannah Harbor shipping channel is heavily trafficked by large commercial vessels. Restricting site locations helps discourage unauthorized diving activity and reduces potential safety risks. (At left, anchor from one of the 18th century vessels, USACE)

Q: Finally, what is your long-term perspective on both CSS Georgia and these 19 cannons -- What do they tell us about their chapters in American history?

A: Although separated by nearly a century, CSS Georgia and the Revolutionary War cannon cluster represent two distinct chapters in Savannah's long history as a strategically important river port. CSS Georgia represents the Civil War effort to hold the river with improvised Confederate naval technology, including an ironclad that functioned more as a floating battery than an effective maneuvering warship. The cannon cluster reaches back to the Revolution when British forces deliberately used vessels and their armament to obstruct the river and help stop the French fleet during the Siege of Savannah. Together, they show that control of the Savannah River was repeatedly central to military strategy, commerce and the fate of the city.

------

Postscript: Gordon Watts' perspective on the RevWar cannons

Archaeologist Gordon Watts, who dived and studied the CSS Georgia wreck site for decades, was present for the recovery of artifacts and helped write a final report on the project. I asked him for his perspective on the Revolutionary War cannons.

Gordon Watts studies CSS Georgia casemate section in 2017 (Civil War Picket photos)

Q. Were you surprised that British cannons were found near Old Fort Jackson?
A.  No surprise. If familiar with the Revolutionary War in Savannah, Fort Jackson did not even exist at that time. Construction on that fortification did not begin until 1808.

Q. Any reaction to their discovery? Also, what do you think of the combination of Civil War and RevWar artillery in the same area?
A. Initial reaction was with the lack of associated Revolutionary War vessel remains with the ordnance.  Savannah was the site of considerable Revolutionary War military and naval activity. Likewise, Savannah was the site of considerable military and naval activity during the War Between the Confederate States and the United States. The presence of sunken vessel remains and artifacts in the Savannah River in the proximity of the city is not unusual.

Q. Have you learned anything more about the site or vessel since then?
A: Conservation and analysis of the ordnance, casemate structure and cultural material from the CSS Georgia has shed considerable light on one of the earliest Confederate Ironclads. The CSS Georgia underwater archaeological investigations was, and remains, one of the most comprehensive undertaken to date and has resulted in extensive historical research and publication.

The archaeological investigation has produced an extensive collection of ordnance, vessel structure and cultural material that supports informative displays.

Q. Anything else?
A.  Very pleased to see the levels of interest in and support for documentation and exhibition of material associated with both of the Savannah River underwater archaeological sites. Hopefully, that level of interest will inspire similar investigation of other underwater archaeological sites in the Savannah and back rivers and other sites in waterways farther away but closely associated with Savannah and Georgia's history.

Concussion of thundering 1st Connecticut mortars at the Battle of the Crater left artillerist Chester Beckwith with bleeding ears and a lifetime of pain. Descendants have donated his 1861 rifle, accoutrements to a New England museum

Tom Therrien and Kimberly Beckwith with Springfield and cartridge box (NE Civil War Museum) and 1st Connecticut mortars at Yorktown, Company C (labeled 8) position near the Crater and the "Dictator," Company G, Petersburg (Library of Congress)

Amid the heat, flashes of fire and acrid smoke rising from belching siege mortars, Chester Beckwith furiously worked to prepare ammunition to support the Union assault during the Battle of the Crater on July 30, 1864.

The artificer with Company C, 1^st Connecticut Heavy Artillery, was cutting timed fuses in the bombproof/powder magazine of Fort Rice at Petersburg during the bombardment, according to his pension file kept by the National Archives.

“While so engaged the concussion produced by the firing of the heavy siege guns and mortars injured both of my ears so that blood came from them…during many months afterward I was troubled with a discharge of matter from both ears,” he wrote.

In the end, the company’s ten 10-inch mortars fired 360 rounds during the doomed assault that resulted in disaster and eight months of ghastly trench warfare.

A 2019 article on HistoryNet.com details the injury that cost Beckwith much of his hearing for the rest of his life.

Beckwith, a carpenter by trade who repaired artillery equipment as an artificer, served through the end of the war. He was plagued by his injury and the loss of his brother, Robert, who was mortally wounded at Second Manassas in August 1862.

Chester H. Beckwith’s military service and sacrifice will be remembered following the donation last fall of his 1861 Springfield rifle-musket and accoutrements to the New England Civil War Museum & Research Center in Vernon, Ct. (Photos at left and below courtesy of the museum)

Dan Hayden, the museum’s executive director, told the Picket conservators will prepare the artifacts for exhibit rotation.

“We focus on bringing to life individual people of the time period, but more importantly, to create a way to highlight the emotional and human elements that show how similar we are to them, even today,” said Hayden.

Two cousins, Kimberly Beckwith, a Connecticut native currently working in the Netherlands, and Tom Therrien, who moved from Connecticut to North Carolina a year ago, traveled to the museum to make the donation.

The artifacts for years were kept by Beckwith’s late father. The gift seems especially appropriate because Alfred Pierce Beckwith was a highly skilled machinist who could fix almost anything, she wrote in an email

“So he was sort of artificer too (he was also a jet engine mechanic in the Air Force in the late ‘50's to the early ‘60s.) It seems those skills run in my family of handy Yankees who served their country.”  

His younger brother Robert died at 2nd Manassas

The 1^st Connecticut Heavy Artillery saw extensive service during operations in Washington, D.C., Virginia and North Carolina. Company C participated in the Peninsular Campaign and ended up at Fort Brady on the James River by the end of the war.

Chester Beckwith was 35 when he mustered in for three years in March 1862. His pension records indicate he had red hair and blue eyes. While 22 men from the Vernon area served with the 1^st Heavies, Beckwith hailed from Windham, nearly 20 miles away.

Beckwith’s younger brother, Robert, was living in Pennsylvania when joined the 1^st New Jersey Infantry. Some of Robert’s letters to relatives have been published on HistoryNet and the Spared & Shared blog.

In July 1862, Robert wrote to friends about a visit from Chester at his camp in Virginia.

“Oh, tell Susanna that I was surprised the day I was sitting in my tent & who should come & look in but Chester. He has been [in] one fight with me but I did not know it at the time. He is in the 1st Connecticut Heavy Artillery. They lay about one mile from me. We are to go there 2 or 3 times a week. I expect him over tomorrow -- Sunday. He was paid off the other day & sent $40 dollars home to Minerva (Chester’s wife). Chester said he had written to you the other day.”

Robert was mortally wounded at Manassas a month later, apparently dying days later while being held prisoner. His grave in Windham may be a cenotaph. 

(I have been unable to find a photo of Chester. Robert’s image can be seen here. I have been unable to locate the current owner to obtain permission to include it here. Photo at right by Matthew Dingler, town of Windham)

Chester was detailed as an artificer on January 10, 1864, a role that acknowledged his skills and ability to repair the critical equipment that the 1st Heavies operated, a museum Facebook post says. When his original term expired on March 18, he reenlisted, serving until September 1865.

At Petersburg, the regiment’s companies were stationed at a couple forts, with Beckwith’s at Fort Rice near the larger Fort Sedgwick. They were in the thick of action during the Battle of the Crater.

The 1^st Heavies' most famous mortar, the massive “Dictator,” was operated by Company G.

Company C was in the thick of things

Much has been written about the siege of Petersburg in 1864-65; I won’t be able to get into detail here. But the Federal force depended on heavy guns like those used by the 1^st Heavies.

National Archives map shows Fort Rice (center right) across from Rives Salient (click to enlarge)

Company C was across from Confederate Rives Salient and adjacent to the original location of Confederate Battery 22, part of the initial Confederate Dimmock Line, said Emmanuel Dabney, chief of resource management at Petersburg National Battlefield.

“Keep in mind much work was done by Union troops in July 1864 to dismantle the original Dimmock Line which lay behind the Federal fortifications,” Dabney told the Picket.

The line was a series of 55 Rebel artillery batteries and connected earthworks. They were built to protect Petersburg’s vital railroads and industry.

The 1^st Heavies were among the artillery units meant to suppress Confederate resistance as the attack unfolded on July 30, 1864.

The Battle of the Crater dashed Union hopes for an end to the siege and, for that matter, the Confederacy. After a massive explosion from a mine set off by engineers, Federal troops, including U.S. Colored Troops, rushed in, only to be rebuffed by dazed Confederates who held strong.

According to Beckwith’s pension files from the 1870s, a sergeant from Company C wrote a letter to pension officials detailing the artificer’s injuries. The article on HistoryNet describes how gunners were told to place canister rounds into 10-inch shells to be fired from mortars.

Union artillery on July 30; Fort Rice is numbered 8, click to enlarge (Baylor University Digital Collections)

Sgt. Elisha Jordan wrote the following:

“…I was on duty…near Fort Rice in front of Petersburg Va on July 30th 1864. I know that Chester H. Beckwith was an artificer…and was on duty in the bombproof sawing fuses during the explosion of Burnside’s mine and attack on enemy line….I was ordered to go in the bombproof and direct said Beckwith to put 27 grape shots into a shell which I did and found Beckwith with his ears bleeding badly….I know that ever after this day while in the service Beckwith was excused from roll call because his hearing was bad.”

The HistoryNet authors obtained the pension information from the National Archives in Washington. I have been unable to travel there for those purposes.

A lot of suffering for Chester and Mary

Chester Beckwith returned to Connecticut and worked as a carpenter. His wife Minerva passed away in 1879 and he married Mary E. Beckwith in 1903.

Dana B. Shoaf, editor in chief of HistoryNet in 2019, wrote Mary recalled occasionally “the blood would run out of his ears and head,” and that “he was [in] dretfull suffer as long as he lived.”

Chester died of a “lingering illness” in Hamburg (North Lyme), Ct., in November 1909 at age 82 or 83. Half of his 10 children survived him. His body was returned to Windham, where he was buried at Windham Center Cemetery. At one point, a U.S. flag and Grand Army of the Republic marker were evident at his grave.

An ailing Mary’s application for a widow’s pension in 1912 apparently was denied because the government determined Chester’s wartime injuries did not cause his death, Shoaf wrote.

I have been unable to determine when Mary died and where she is buried.

(Matthew Dingler, Windham’s cemetery sexton, was of great help to me as I researched the resting places for the Beckwith family. He mentioned the history and Victorian homes of Willimantic, which is part of Windham. A mill drew many immigrants. He also mentioned the humorous Battle of the Frogs story. Read about it here)

A trove of weaponry and an ode to hard tack

The inscription about Chester Beckwith is slowing fading away (Courtesy Kimberly Beckwith)

Kimberly Beckwith grew up believing Chester and Minerva were distant a distant uncle and aunt. Not many stories were passed down, though her father said they underwent some kind of tragedy, Beckwith told the Picket.

After further research, Kimberly now believes Chester and Minerva were her great-great-grandparents. To this day, the family has deep ties to the Windham area.

She turned to the museum in Vernon for the donation after doing online research. She and her late sister, Lynda, inherited the items after their father died in February 2023. (Lynda thought first of donating the items to a museum in Pennsylvania, where she lived.)

The items were Chester’s Springfield, bayonet and seven-rivet scabbard, percussion cap box, cartridge box, belt buckle and a book with regimental history. The family also donated an early edition of John Billings' “Hard Tack and Coffee,” a memoir containing tales of the war and illustrations.

The cartridge box still bears the pressed stamp of Gaylord contractors in Chicopee, Massachusetts, with a late pattern percussion cap box and bayonet with seven-rivet scabbard.

The museum says this of the artifacts:

“Though his belt and cartridge box sling have passed out of existence, the buckle remains, as most notably does the musket sling. Along with an early edition of John D. Billings' 'Hard Tack and Coffee,' the remainders of Chester's service with the 1st Heavies will be proudly conserved and interpreted for future visitors at the museum.”

The 1861 Springfield was used by most soldiers from Vernon and many New England soldiers in general. 

Museum serves up soldier artifacts and library

The Civil War museum in Vernon is housed in the former meeting place of the Thomas F. Burpee Post #71 of the GAR. The Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War Alden Skinner Camp #45 meet in the building today.

Highlights of the permanent collection include New England and GAR artifacts, a wartime uniform of Seth Plumb of the 8th Connecticut Volunteer Infantry, a pair of trousers owned by James Baldwin of the 2nd Connecticut Heavy Artillery, and personal effects of Thomas Burpee, including spurs, belt, shoulder boards, tin cup and the bullet believed to have mortally wounded him at Cold Harbor, Va., in 1864. 

1st Connecticut Heavy Artillery monument near Capitol in Hartford (Cosmo Marino, hmdb.org)

Thirty-six Vernon men died during the war, 14 of them killed in battle and 11 dying in Confederate prison camps, said Hayden.

The research center and archives contains letters, diaries, journals

“We curate the library to help researchers find sources around the everyday soldier, as well as to the general public for finding information about their relatives who served during the Civil War. Notably, famed artist Don Troiani donated his research archive he collected while preparing to paint his Civil War works of art. These are being scanned and will be made available for public access,” the director added.

The New England Civil War Museum & Research Center, 14 Park Place, Vernon, is open 10 a.m.- p.m. on Saturday and Sundays. Call 860-870-3563 for more information.