An Alternate timeline USN beginning with Ulysses Grant, David Porter and George Robeson.

[miletus12]

George Robeson.

He was a scalawag and as straight arrow as a bent Comanche nail, which is to say that during his tenure as the US Secretary of the Navy from 1869 to 1883, he managed to oversee and: (And this is real fraud and conspiracy, not alternate history stuff. M.); 
a. he increased his personal fortune, which grew from $30,000 to $300,000 apparently chiefly from kickbacks and under the table payments for naval construction contracts. 
b. he managed to accumulate bookkeeping errors that amounted to $15,000,000 dollars in Department of the Navy operating and construction funds. Refer to a.
c. he froze out the US Admiralty: specifically; one David Dixon Porter who believed Robeson was a crook. Refer to b.
d. he managed to cover up the murders of Oliver Halstead and Charles Hall.  Refer to c. 
e. he committed massive fraud in that he built a fleet of Theseus Ships, the famous Amphitrite class monitors and the USS Puritan. 
f.  he lied to the New York Times and to Congress about the USN's operational readiness.

That is where I think I shall start. With David Dixon Porter, George Robeson, Ulysses Grant, the murders, the mendacity and the monitors... what kind of navy results if George was more of a patriot?

Miletus12 
 

[miletus12]

Intelligent Whale...

From Wiki

Type Submarine
Displacement..................4,000 lb (1,800 kg)
Length...........................28 ft 8 in (8.74 m)
Beam..............................7 ft (2.1 m)
Draft.............................9 ft (2.7 m)
Propulsion....................Hand-cranked screw
Speed.............................4 knots (4.6 mph; 7.4 km/h)
Endurance........................10 hours
Complement........................6 to 13 officers and men
Armament......................Hatch for diver

This is an example of what happens when one loses track of the plot and misses the objective. The original purpose of that debacle was to get something into the water quickly to sink the CSS Virginia. This would never be accomplished, since the USN admiralty who served Gideon Welles was fairly conservative and timid, compared to the terrorists and traitors who served Stephen Mallory, the one man spin generator who drove the Confederate States Navy. There might be a lesson there, that if the zealous and fanatical Undersecretary Gustavius Fox had been in charge of the Union Navy, madmen like Admiral Samuel Dupont and John Dhalgren might have been given more-free reign to run about and blockade runners from Bermuda and the Bahamas more willy-nilly. But those are American civil war issues and this is the `1870s with the nefarious George Robeson, the philanderer Oliver Halstead and the Intelligent Whale being batted around like a ping-pong ball.

SEA GIRT MUSEUM
The Intelligent Whale
The American Civil War brought about numerous advancements in military technology. Innovations such as the repeating rifle, the Gatling gun, and the ironclad warship would transform battlefields of the 19th Century dramatically. In addition to advancements in land and naval surface combat, an entire new domain of warfare was explored as well; the development of submarines would turn the undersea environment into a battlespace for the first time.

Both the Union and Confederacy had an interest in developing submarines to undermine each other’s efforts. The Union needed a way to clear underwater obstructions protecting Confederate ports and clear the way to assault them, while the Confederates needed a weapon capable of penetrating the Union naval blockade. The Confederates designed a nine-man submarine, the Hunley, which in 1863 was deployed against Union forces near Charleston, South Carolina. During testing it sunk with loss of life and was raised three times. On its fourth mission, the Hunley finally had success, using a spar torpedo (an explosive attached to the end of a long pole on the bow) to sink the Union sloop-of-war Housatonic. The explosion of the torpedo also destroyed the Hunley itself. This time the submarine was left on the seabed until it was rediscovered and raised in 2000 to be made into a museum display.

History of the Whale

Less known, however, is the story of the Hunley’s Union counterpart, the Intelligent Whale. In 1863, engineer Scovel Merriam approached the US government with a proposal to design and build a submarine. With consent from Secretary of War Gideon Welles and a $15,000 budget, Merriam’s recently founded American Submarine Company soon got to work. Merriam also obtained the financial support of New Jersey businessmen and their representative Oliver “Pet” Halsted. Halsted had connections in the Lincoln administration and used them to his advantage, effectively becoming America’s first big time lobbyist. He petitioned the Navy, and even President Lincoln himself on behalf of Merriam’s design.



In 1864, Merriam completed the Intelligent Whale, most of which was built in Newark, New Jersey. The vessel was tested in the Long Island sound and initially appeared to be successful, but at the time the Navy was not sufficiently interested. (The failure of an unrelated 1862 submarine design, the Alligator, had already left a bad image of submersible technology to the Navy.) Unable to sell the vessel to the Navy, Halsted bought it himself and moved it to the Passaic River in Newark, where it was docked for several years. Halsted tried to sell it to Irish Revolutionaries but was unsuccessful, before the Navy finally decided to purchase it in 1866.

The Intelligent Whale was transported to the Brooklyn Navy Yard, but was not tested until 1871, with limited success. However, after the death of Halsted in 1871, who had been the driving force behind the development of the project since his involvement began, the Navy’s enthusiasm with the Intelligent Whale waned. In 1872 the submarine was tested again, but this time it became caught underneath a dock and began to leak water. At this point, the Navy judged the projected to be a failure and its development was terminated.

The Intelligent Whale remained as a lawn ornament at the Brooklyn Navy Yard before it was moved to the Washington Navy Yard on the closing of the Brooklyn base. The Navy loaned it to the National Guard Militia Museum of New Jersey in 1999.

Though the Intelligent Whale itself did not see practical service, it was a significant development in American military history. The Intelligent Whale provided a physical basis as well as an engineering inspiration for future submarine designs. Just several years later, John L. Lay developed a highly successful self-propelled, remote-controlled torpedo. Further engineering would culminate in the commissioning of the Navy’s first operational submarine, the USS Holland, developed by John Holland of Paterson, New Jersey, in 1900.

Anatomy of the Whale

The Intelligent Whale was crewed by six men, four of whom drove a massive crank which turned the boat’s propeller. The cupola atop the submarine has several viewing holes for the crew to look out of. Each viewport is cone-shaped and tapers to a tiny hole on the exterior. In addition, on each side of the submarine are two “eye-socket” viewports, one fore and one aft.



(Orientation is toward the bow of the device. M.)

Inside the Whale

The hole where the set of stairs are located currently had a door which could be opened during underwater operations. Using two large internal air tanks, the pressure inside of the submarine could be kept greater than the pressure of the water, allowing a diver to exit the craft safely. The diver, connected by lines to the air tanks inside the submarine, could walk along the seabed and place an explosive mine on an enemy ship or remove a mine or obstacle before returning. Though the Intelligent Whale was never used in this combat capacity, Halsted allegedly took his family on trips in the submarine and used this method to explore the bottom of the Passaic River.

The "idea" behind the "Intelligent Whale was entirely different from the concept of operations (con-ops) as envisioned for the Confederate submarine, the "Hunley".  The Confederates, leaders and rank and file, in military matters thought and acted as pirates and brigands, being all flash and vainglory in war and not much in the way of common sense.  This was especially true of their navy, where the tradition of single ship duels and showy battles interfered with prudent naval planning and overall naval strategy. Whereas the Confederates intended to ram and sink Union blockade ships with the Hunley, which they tried and failed once with loss of boat, crew and mission, because the imbeciles who operated the boat did not understand that underwater explosions produced concussive shock waves that could kill a human being from mere "sound" by embolism and lung collapse, something the USN knew about from 1844 forward.

A "Most Awful and Most Lamentable Catastrophe": The Explosion on the USS Princeton

4/25/2018 in DC, Virginia by Anne Hollmulle

“Never in the mysterious ordinance of God has a day on earth been marked in its progress by such startling and astounding contrasts — opening and advancing with hilarity and joy, mutual congratulation and patriotic pride, and closing in scenes of death, and disaster, of lamentation and unutterable woe.”[1] –Virginia Congressman W.C. Rives

February 28, 1844 was a cold, clear day in Washington and it marked a momentous occasion. The USS Princeton, a newly designed vessel for the U.S. Navy, was to be inaugurated with an excursion from Alexandria, Virginia to Mount Vernon. Hundreds of Washington’s best society boarded the ship that day, including President John Tyler, several cabinet secretaries, and former first lady Dolley Madison, the scion of Washington society.[2]


A seated portrait of President John Tyler (Credit: Library of Congress)

At the time, John Tyler had a lot on his mind, both political and romantic. Tyler became President in 1841 following the death of President William Henry Harrison after 31 days in office. His chief political goal was the annexation of Texas: a firm believer in Manifest Destiny, Tyler sought to facilitate American expansion from sea to sea. His Secretary of State, Abel Upshur, hoped that the annexation of Texas would perpetuate American slavery by offering more land for the cultivation of crops. In the winter of 1844, Upshur and Tyler were preparing a treaty that would join the Republic of Texas with the United States.[3]

On this balmy winter day, Tyler was also occupied by thoughts more personal than political. Tyler’s wife of 29 years, Letitia Christian Tyler, died in 1842 at the White House, leaving him a widower deep in mourning. Five months after his wife’s death, Tyler met Julia Gardiner, a beautiful young woman from a wealthy Long Island family whom Tyler’s son had invited to visit the White House. After some months of letters and meetings between the young woman and the much older president, Tyler proposed marriage to Julia, who refused him. Yet Tyler continued his pursuit, writing her poems and continuing to entertain her and the family at the White House. Julia Gardiner was among the festive crowd aboard the Princeton, as was her father David.[4]


[Julia Gardiner Tyler, wife of Pres. John Tyler, three-quarter length portrait, seated, facing slightly right]

A portrait of Julia Gardiner (Credit: Library of Congress)

In the midst of all this, the wealthy and well-connected Robert Stockton had convinced Tyler into letting him construct a new model vessel for the U.S. Navy. The USS Princeton was a marvel of modern engineering and had been produced by means of a partnership between Stockton and John Ericsson. Ericsson had been born and educated in Sweden, then moved to England, where he had invented the screw propeller. This innovation was crucial for nineteenth-century naval warfare, as a screw propeller located beneath the surface meant that the ship’s machinery would be out of reach of cannon fire.[5] Ericsson would later design the U.S. Navy's first ironclad vessel, the USS Monitor.[6]

George Sykes, congressman from Pennsylvania, described the festive mood on the day of this excursion down the Potomac.

“As the president and members of the Cabinet passed over the side of the ship on a plank from the hurricane deck of the steamboat-the sailors and Marines in the shrouds- pulled off their hats and gave three cheers while the Marine band a full band of excellent musicians struck up 'The Star-Spangled banner' with a very happy effect. The day was mild and serene without a cloud-the company were all dressed in their very best and everyone seemed pleased and happy. As soon as the company had all got on board the steamboat pushed off and left for Alexandria at which place a vast assemblage of persons were collected on the wharf and gave three cheers for the Princeton."[7]

The USS Princeton engraving

An 1844 Lithograph of the Princeton by Nathaniel Currier (Credit: Wikimedia Commons)

Most of the Washingtonians aboard the Princeton were not particularly interested in the new screw propeller system, invisible below the waterline. They were amazed and enthralled by the ship’s two enormous cannon, 12-inch guns that could send a 200-pound ball over a distance of five miles. One gun was named the Oregon, and the other, surely with a touch of irony, was called the Peacemaker.[8]

As the ship traveled down the icy Potomac, the Peacemaker was fired twice, displaying to the delighted crowd the range of this powerful armament over the icey Potomac River. Following these two shots, most of the crowd went below decks for a fine reception of food and wine, specially arranged for them by Captain Stockton. As the ship approached Mount Vernon, however, the guests began to demand that the Peacemaker fire once more, an honorary shot to commemorate the first American president. Stockton agreed, and several men and some women went above decks to view the cannon as it would fire once more.

Julia Gardiner’s father David went above decks, as did Abel Upshur and the Secretaries of War and the Navy. Julia Gardiner stayed below deck, as did John Tyler, whether to seek her company or to propose another toast to the gathered crowd. The group on deck anticipated the firing of the Peacemaker, and Captain Stockton gave the order for the cannon to fire.

When the gun was fired for this third time, tragedy struck. The cannon’s breech exploded, and deadly shards of hot iron were blown across the deck and into the crowd of bystanders. The gun, unable to withstand the force of repeated firing, had ruptured, turning a scene of celebration into a site of tragedy.[9]

The National Intelligencer described the scene as chaos broke out upon the Princeton.

“The scene upon the deck may more easily be imagined than described, nor can the imagination picture to itself the half of its horrors. Wives, widowed in an instant by the murderous blast. Daughters smitten with the heart-rending sight of their father’s lifeless corpse! The wailings of agonized females! The piteous grief of the unhurt but heart-stricken spectators! The wounded seamen borne down below! The silent tears and quivering lips of their brave and honest comrades, who tried in vain to subdue or to conceal their feelings! What words can adequately depict a scene like this?”[10]

Six people were killed in the explosion of the Peacemaker, including Upshur, Secretary of the Navy Thomas Walker Gilmer, Beverly Kennon, Virgil Maxcy, and David Gardiner, and Armistead, the black enslaved valet to President Tyler.[11]

Tyler and much of Washington’s elite had only narrowly escaped death or serious injury, and two crucial Cabinet members lay dead.

The headlines in the newspapers on the following day spoke to the terrible shock of this sudden tragedy, as Washington and the nation absorbed the shock of the gruesome events. “Horrible Accident! Great Gloom in Washington!” blared the New York Herald. The National Intelligencer wrote of a “Most Awful and Most Lamentable Catastrophe!” and a “Narrow Escape of the President!” The Madisonian, another Washington journal, proclaimed “Melancholy Catastrophe!”[12]

The coffins of four of the victims were laid in state in the East Room of the White House, and crowds of people filed through the executive mansion to mourn the unfortunate victims. Following this period of mourning, the bodies of the four men were brought to Congressional Cemetery in a large and elaborate funeral procession.[13]

Upshur’s death signaled the short-term failure of the plans to annex Texas, as debate over the Tyler-Texas Treaty stalled in the Senate as the 1844 Presidential campaign proceeded. Tyler ceded the Presidency to the pro-annexation James K. Polk, who would complete the task of bringing this new state into the Union.[14]

Also blown to smithereens were Stockton’s self-aggrandizing hopes for a new and modern American navy. This murderous explosion on the newest American naval ship was a tragedy and an embarrassment that dampened immediate hopes of a modernized U.S. fleet. Luckily for Stockton, John Tyler absolved the captain of all responsibility for the incident, writing to Congress that the disaster “must be set down as one of the casualties which, to a greater or lesser degree, attend upon every service, and which are invariably incident to the temporal affairs of mankind.”[15]

For John Tyler and Julia Gardiner, the explosion on the USS Princeton brought about the happy conclusion of his romantic pursuit. The tragic death of her father severely traumatized the young woman, who desperately missed her father and sought comfort in Tyler’s affections. In the months following her father’s death, Julia Gardiner consented to the President’s standing proposal, and the two were married that June. Despite the large difference in their ages, (a gap of about thirty years between them) the marriage was said to be a happy one and produced seven children.[16]

Footnotes
^1 www.washingtonpost.com/local/from-peacemaker-to-widowmaker-remembering-the-uss-princeton-disaster/2014/10/25/2587af18-592e-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html?utm_term=.a5250fb5b11a
^2 wamu.org/story/14/06/06/how_an_explosion_on_the_potomac_170_years_ago_arguably_begot_the_civil_war/
^3 slavery.princeton.edu/stories/abel-upshur
^4 Explosion on the Potomac: The 1844 Calamity Aboard the USS Princeton by Kerry Walters
^5 The "Princeton" and the "Peacemaker": A Study in Nineteenth-Century Naval Research and Development
^6 monitor.noaa.gov/150th/ericsson.html
^7 journals.psu.edu/phj/article/viewFile/21070/20839
^8  wamu.org/story/14/06/06/how_an_explosion_on_the_potomac_170_years_ago_arguably_begot_the_civil_war/
^9 www.washingtonpost.com/local/from-peacemaker-to-widowmaker-remembering-the-uss-princeton-disaster/2014/10/25/2587af18-592e-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html?utm_term=.a5250fb5b11a
^10 www.washingtonpost.com/local/from-peacemaker-to-widowmaker-remembering-the-uss-princeton-disaster/2014/10/25/2587af18-592e-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html?utm_term=.a5250fb5b11a
^11 The "Princeton" and the "Peacemaker": A Study in Nineteenth-Century Naval Research and Development
^12 books.google.com/books?id=xTyACQAAQBAJ&pg=PT7&lpg=PT7&dq=“Horrible+Accident!+Great+Gloom+in+Washington!”&source=bl&ots=UKJgxcRQj1&sig=HQIetwkJuC1d3Yxjl68KLLeBzpg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_9bHNptDaAhXSpFkKHVz_BhwQ6AEIKTAA#v=onepage&q=“Horrible%20Accident!%20Great%20Gloom%20in%20Washington!”&f=false
^13 journals.psu.edu/phj/article/viewFile/21070/20839
^14 slavery.princeton.edu/stories/abel-upshur#ref-12
^15 www.washingtonpost.com/local/from-peacemaker-to-widowmaker-remembering-the-uss-princeton-disaster/2014/10/25/2587af18-592e-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html?utm_term=.a5250fb5b11a
^16 Explosion on the Potomac: The 1844 Calamity Aboard the USS Princeton by Kerry Walters

Some of the victims of the "Peacemaker" did not have obvious wounds on them from the burst barrel, yet they were still dead. Autopsies revealed they had been "jellied". This was something unexpected,l that pressure waves could kill a person by passing through her or him.   

The USS Princeton Incident made the USN leery of newfangled ideas and concept and made them cautious to the point that when John Ericcson told them to full charge the the guns on the USS Monitor to kill the CSS Virginia, they went to half charges instead as a safety measure and against his advice, took the USS Monitor out into the open ocean to tow her down to join Dupont's attack on Charleston, South Carolina.   

This may, in part, explain how and why the Intelligent Whale was designed as an underwater swimmer / diver delivery and operations boat. Instead of a rather vaingloriously foolhardy, stupidly showy and "directly ram the monster turtleback Union ironclad" type attack, the Confederates envisioned for their subs and rams, the Union navy intended for Intelligent Whale and her sisters to sneak around and get in close to where Confederate harbor obstacles and ships were moored and the trained diver, who was part of the Intelligent Whale's crew, would egress from the underkeel lockout diver's airlock and trailing an air hose behind him to provide him with an air supply, would underwater trudge his way to the spot where he would place an explosive charge next to or under the Confederate object of Union annoyance to be blown skyhight, scuttled or otherwise be rearranged to suit the Union Navy's tastes.    

We have lost the documentation of how well the Intelligent Whale did in test runs from 1866 to 1873 when it all mysteriously vanished after Oliver Halstead's murder.

The Murder of Pet Halsted.



Oliver "Pet" Halsted

Oliver Spencer Halsted Jr., better known as Pet, was a political gadfly^1 in the Lincoln administration. Coming from a prominent family of New Jersey politicians, Pet Halsted was a political insider, both in Washington and back home in Newark. Like so many in his profession, Pet Halsted was also a man of unbridled lust and in 1871 he became romantically involved with one of his legal clients. His rival for her affections, a charcoal peddler, was not impressed by Pet’s credentials and was ready to fight to the death for his lady.

^1   He was a Lobbyist in the modern sense in that he would waylay, wine and dine and routinely bribe politicians in the Congress and in the Lincoln administrations to push his own pet projects, one of which was the Intelligent Whale.  Of course a criminal, like he was, was going to be murdered. M.   

Date: July 2, 1871
Location: Newark, New Jersey
Victim: Oliver "Pet" Halsted
Cause of Death: Gunshot
Accused: George Botts

Synopsis:

Oliver "Pet" Halsted, son of Oliver Spencer Halsted Sr., former Chancellor of New Jersey, worked in Washington as a lobbyist for arms dealers, and although he never held elected office, he was a successful politician behind the scenes. Halsted gained entrance to the White House by befriending Mary Todd Lincoln while she was vacationing on the Jersey Shore, and he soon had the ear of the President. Pet Halsted became nationally known early in the Civil War for his harsh criticism of General George McClellan, general-in-chief of the Union Army.

After the war, Halsted moved back to his hometown, Newark, New Jersey, and practiced law. In 1871 he was living with his wife and six of their eight children in the heart of the city. It was common knowledge that Pet Halsted also kept a mistress, Mrs. Mary E. Wilson, in a rented apartment, just a short walk from his home.


Newark, New Jersey

Halsted met Mary Wilson in April 1871 when she hired him as her attorney in her divorce proceedings. The relationship went from professional to romantic that spring and after winning her divorce, Halsted rented Mary an apartment on the third floor above a South Street beer saloon, where he came and went at will. The problem with this arrangement was that Mrs. Wilson had sought a divorce specifically so she could marry her fiancé, George Botts—also known as “Charcoal” Botts because of his occupation as a charcoal peddler. She broke off the engagement with Botts, claiming she could not tolerate his intemperance, but Botts knew the real reason and he refused to accept it. He showed Mary Wilson a revolver and said he was going to shoot Pet Halsted. Halsted, aware of the threat, carried a revolver of his own and said he would shoot Botts first if it came to that.

Botts and Wilson had planned to spend the Fourth of July together, but Mary Wilson sent Botts a letter canceling their plans, saying that she was going to visit her sister in Philadelphia and did not wish him to be there. In fact, she was planning to spend the holiday in Newark with Pet Halsted. With his wife and children away, visiting his married daughter on Long Island, on Saturday, July 1, Halsted went stay on South Street with Mary Wilson.

Botts knew that Mary Wilson had not gone to Philadelphia, and he spent Saturday night trying to drink her off his mind. It did not work. It only fired his anger more. He was drinking in the saloon owned by John Spies, landlord of Mary Wilson’s apartment. Botts showed Spies his pistol and said, he was going to shoot that son of a bitch, Halsted, and left the bar. At three a.m. he was back at Spies’s door ringing the bell, asking to see Mary, saying, “I love that woman.” Mary, hearing the bell, went downstairs and told Spies not to let him in and Botts left again.

At seven o’clock, Botts was back again and this time he was upstairs trying to break into the apartment. Halsted was on the other side of the door trying to keep him out. Botts pushed his way in; and Mary Wilson could see that he was brandishing the revolver. “George, don’t shoot,” she said. Botts replied, “You son of a bitch, I’ll shoot.” Halsted grabbed Botts and a struggle ensued, then the pistol fired. Halsted collapsed on the sofa and Botts ran out the door and down the stairs.

Halsted was shot in the chest, the bullet puncturing his windpipe. Mary Wilson stood over him saying, “What a wicked woman, what a wicked woman I am.” He lived another thirty-five minutes before literally drowning in his own blood. Outside, Botts had gone just a short distance when he was arrested by Officer Cullen. Botts told him he was on his way to the police station to surrender himself, explaining, “Pet wanted to have her all to himself; he wouldn’t divide, so I fixed him; I have got satisfaction, and I don’t care if I swing for it; I suppose I shall be locked up over the Fourth, but I’ll have a better Fourth than he will.”

Trial: October 17, 1871

George Botts’s prosecution was a classic case of “Jersey Justice.” Unlike New York City, where a murder trial could last a month or more, and with appeals take years to reach a resolution, or Connecticut where an investigation could get bogged down in the inquest and never resolve at all, New Jersey trials were swift and short, and if an execution was required it was done quickly and without hesitation. The coroner’s inquest began the afternoon of the murder and ended the same day with the indictment of George Botts. The case was tried at the next session of the Essex County Court of Oyer and Terminer, and on the opening day the judge told the attorneys he wanted the trial concluded within three days.

The trial lasted five days, but it was fairly cut-and-dried, there was little disagreement as to the facts of the case. At issue was whether or not George Botts was sane when he shot Halsted. The defense claimed that “Jealousy ruined the mind of George Botts who was already on the verge of mania a potu (madness from drinking). He was in a frenzied and, therefore, irresponsible state of mind.” Mary Wilson opened another line of defense when she said in her testimony that she thought the gun went off accidentally.

The prosecutor countered both theories in a three and a half hour closing argument, saying, "It was trifling with the attention of the jury to occupy time in considering the theory of insanity. Botts had simply been drunk, and had harbored revenge for many a long month, and even had he been insane, and yet known he was doing wrong, he would have been guilty. The prisoner's gross nature afforded no excuse. He voluntarily put the Devil in his heart and strengthened it with cups. Neither Botts nor his counsel had ever thought the shooting accidental, notwithstanding all their consultation, until Mrs. Wilson's testimony had been given."

The judge’s instructions to the jury strongly favored the prosecution. After deliberating for three hours the jury returned a verdict of guilty.

Verdict: Guilty of first-degree murder.

Aftermath:

The defense moved for a new trail claiming that one of the jurors had been unduly induced to convict Botts. The motion was denied, and George Botts was sentenced to hang on December 21. The hanging was delayed until January 27, 1872. In the meantime, George Botts produced a marriage certificate proving that he was actually married to Mary Wilson. They had kept it a secret to protect her from prosecution as a bigamist. Since the trial, Mary Wilson had entered a house of ill-fame in Philadelphia and Botts saw no further need to protect her.

At 11:32, the morning of January 27, 1872, George “Charcoal” Botts was launched into eternity, inside the Newark Jail.

Sources:

Newspapers:

"A Newark Tragedy." New York Tribune 3 Jul 1871.
"George Botts to be Hanged." Cincinnati Daily Enquirer 15 Nov 1871.
"'Pet Halsted,' a Well-Known Character, Murdered." Albany Evening Journal 3 Jul 1871.
"Poor Halstead." Daily Inter Ocean 4 Jul 1871.
"The Gallows." New York Times 27 Jan 1872.
"The Halstead Murder--Interesting Developments." Daily Albany Argus 11 Jan 1872.
"The Newark Tragedy." New York Herald 17 Oct 1871.
"The "Pet" Halstead Murder Trial." New York Tribune 19 Oct 1871.
"The "Pet" Halstead Murder Trial." New York Tribune 20 Oct 1871.

Websites:

Library of Congress: City of Newark, N.J. / Parsons & Atwater, del. color film copy transparency. Mr. Lincoln's White House: Mary's Charlatans: Oliver 'Pet' Spencer Halsted (1819-1871).

So: what does this have to do with the USN and George Robeson? As far as I can determine, in a side deal, as with the Theseus ships, George had paperwork he had to hide in a hurry when "Pet" Halsted got himself murdered by a jealous "co-suitor" who was married to Halsted's street walking, Mary Wilson. In those days the New Jersey state police were not only among the most corrupt in the United States, they were also among the best investigators, which meant that when it came time to investigate Mister Halsted and determine a reason why anyone would want to hurt him into an early grave, the fictional idea that the man kept a ledger of his kickbacks, bribes and payoffs, was one that should have worried any number of his "business associates" in an alternate time line. This is New Jersey. George Robeson had been its attorney general before he became Secretary of the Navy Actual. One of the first probable crimes he, George, committed as Secretary of the Navy was to buy the Intelligent Whale from Halsted. A conspiracy nut could easily write a fiction account in which Potts, the alleged pimp, loaned out his "wife" to entrap the venal Halsted, and then tried an extortion scheme for money, and then would have bungled the evolution to the extent that he, Potts, committed murder. In this case, Robeson would be entirely innocent of arranging the murder, but he would have to call on his friends in New Jersey politics and in the state police to ensure that "ledger" was recovered and disappeared.

Remember that in 1869, Halsted tried to sell the Intelligent Whale to the Fenian Society. These Irish national liberation fighters were Irish terrorists who searched for a practical way to smite the Royal Navy. We will meet them later, when we discuss John Holland, the father of the modern submarine.              

The key thing we do know, is that USN and Halsted family accounts still tell us that this man, Halsted, took the Intelligent Whale out on several occasions to go sightseeing on the bottom of the Passaic River. The one time the USN tried this contraption out to function as it was intended, was when the Intelligent Whale got herself stuck under a dock at the Brooklyn Navy Yard in an incursion test in 1872, but that test only came after Halsted was murdered and the USN had formal possession of title, free and clear.  The efforts, to dislodge the Intelligent Whale, produced leak points around the forward fisheye porthole. The navy salvaged it, repaired it and posted it as a Civil War Monument for a while at the Brooklyn Navy Yard; until it was sent to the Washington Navy Yard to clutter that place up. It would finish up as a New Jersey National Guard Museum Piece in 1999. New Jersey, having little actual martial history of merit to really brag about in the American Civil War (New Jersey units were noted by McClellan as "untrustworthy" with a fondness for the rear when the shooting started. M.), eagerly latched onto this anomaly in 1999 to claim that it, too, was in there pitching with the Union with its "submarine", and but for the fortunes of war, the Hunley would not be the first sub to sink an enemy warship. Except that this contraption was not finished on the weighs until 1866, which New jersey state historians like to ignore, claimintg it was ready in 1864.  

Well, the USN really tried with this anomaly to find a role and mission. Where George Robeson comes in, is that as a personal buddy and co-crook with Oliver Halsted, he cooked up a typical Robeson side-deal to buy this submarine for the USN. Over the admiralty's objections, the deal went through, and now the American navy had a "submarine" in its inventory. 

If it had succeeded in trials... history might have changed?

====================================================

This is the 1872 United States Navy State of the Art as far as typical ships go when the SS Virginius Affair threatens to become an early Spanish American War. .



From Wiki.

General characteristics (1864)
Type...............................Screw steamer
Displacement.........................383 tons
Length...............................140 feet (43 meters)
Beam..................................28 feet (9 meters)
Draft.................................10+1⁄2 feet (3 meters)
Depth of hold.........................12 feet (4 meters)
Sail plan...........................Two-mast schooner rig
Complement............................37 officers and men

We will hear a LOT about her when I cover the Hall scientific expedition to the North Pole.

But that ship is what passed for an average USN naval vessel in 1872. Notice that she is described as s "heavy screw tugboat" and that she carried a single mortar or pivot gun during her Civil War service?

If Robeson's scam had panned out as something worth the effort, it is conceivable that the US Congress could have gone on a submarine and naval mine spending jaunt, which would have made the USN a largely coast defense navy with few ocean-going vessels of any note.

So why is the SS Virginus Affair important at this point in an alternate USN history? 

Rise of the United States Navy Part One: The Virginius Affair

by Chris Knupp | Nov 10, 2018 | History Article | 0 comments

Following the Civil War, the United States Navy had languished as funding was diverted to efforts aimed at rebuilding a wounded nation. Only a small handful of ships were kept to serve as a coastal defense force. Elsewhere, nations had observed the power of Ironclads during the Civil War and hastily began building fleets of iron plated warships. Somewhat "ironically", the United States had largely abandoned the development of the ironclad following the War. While they relied on leftovers from the Civil War, other nations began introducing more advanced ironclad models. This caused the United States to fall behind in quality as well as quantity. The United States needed a reminder that the Navy was an important component in strengthening the country. That reminder would come in the 1870s when the country found itself at odds with Spain during the Virginius affair.

The Virginius Affair

In 1868, war broke out in Cuba as landowners rebelled against Spain. Though the United States maintained stable relations with Spain, many in the country rose in support of the Cuban rebels. One such individual was John Patterson, an agent acting on behalf of the rebels. He desired to bring ammunition and supplies to the rebels. To accomplish this, he purchased a Confederate blockade runner named Virgin in 1870. Renaming the ship Virginius, she was used to transport supplies and men to Cuba in support of the rebellion. For three years, Virginius successfully delivered supplies to Cuba. Spain was aware of the ship and made many attempts to stop the ship.

They would finally succeed in 1873 when Spanish authorities received a report that Virginius was heading towards Cuba with another shipment of supplies. A gunboat was dispatched to intercept the ship as she approached Cuba. On October 30, 1873, the Spanish gunboat finally located Virginius and gave chase. Virginius, in poor condition and incapable of outrunning the Spanish ship, surrendered. Spain brought the ship to Cuba and put the entire crew on trial as pirates. The entire crew, comprised of American and British citizens, was found guilty and sentenced to death. The American government attempted to aid its citizens, but Spain ignored them and began executing the crew. 53 people were executed with several then being decapitated while the bodies were trampled under horses.

Fortunately, the British Government had become aware of what was happening and dispatched a warship to Cuba to investigate. The warship, HMS Niobe, arrived at the city of Santiago where the executions were taking place. The commander of the ship, Sir Lambton Loraine, immediately ordered the Spanish to cease the executions. Loraine even went so far as to threaten to bombard the city if his demands were not met. Spain relented and halted the executions, sparing the surviving crew of the Virginius.

The United States public, upon learning of the executions, immediately began calling for war against Spain. Luckily, the United States Government was able to diplomatically resolve the crisis. They secured reparations for the victims as well as the return of Virginius and her crew. This victory in diplomacy served to quell public anger and prevent the out brake of further hostility.

The Effect on the United States Navy

While the American public was demanding war, the United States Navy was no doubt dreading the prospect. At the time, a Spanish ironclad was in New York Harbor awaiting repairs. A more modern ironclad, the United States Navy had no warship in its inventory capable of engaging it. This led to the sickening realization that if war had broken out, the Spanish warship could have begun shelling New York City with impunity, the US Navy powerless to stop it. Had Spain sent its fleet to battle, the US Navy would be fighting an enemy with a larger number of more advanced ships. The US Navy was surpassed by Spain both in quality and quantity. To make matters worse, the few warships the United States had were incapable of fighting abroad.


Secretary of Navy George Robeson. During the Virginius affair, he began pushing for the United States Navy to begin strengthening itself.

The available ironclads were originally designed for operation in coastal areas and on rivers. They could hardly make the 100 mile journey to Cuba much less sail to Spain from across the Atlantic.

While diplomacy was hailed as the driving force that settled the Virginius Affair, the US Government no doubt noted the effect that gunboat diplomacy had in preventing further executions. Spain had continued executing captives despite demands by the United States. The executions only stopped when a British warship arrived and issued a threat that Spanish authorities could not ignore. Military power had succeeded where diplomacy had not. The United States must have realized the weight of power a blue water fleet would provide on the negotiating table.

Luckily, the lessons of the Virginius Affair had not gone unnoticed. George M. Robeson, then serving as the Secretary of the Navy determined that the United States Navy must begin rebuilding itself into a more capable force. He immediately began calling for a new fleet of warships capable of matching those found in foreign navies. However, he faced stiff opposition from the United States Congress. Through clever tricks and outright deception, Robeson would eventually get his fleet. His efforts laid the groundwork that saw the United States Navy rise from a poorly equipped coastal defense force into a large, modern blue water navy able to project United States power abroad.

These would be the Theseus Ships...in the alternate history, they would be a bit "different" than the real Amphitrite Class  

[miletus12]

So why is the SS Virginus Affair important at this point in an alternate USN history?

Rise of the United States Navy Part One: The Virginius Affair
by Chris Knupp | Nov 10, 2018 | History Article | 0 comments

Following the Civil War, the United States Navy had languished as funding was diverted to efforts aimed at rebuilding a wounded nation. Only a small handful of ships were kept to serve as a coastal defense force. Elsewhere, nations had observed the power of Ironclads during the Civil War and hastily began building fleets of iron plated warships. Somewhat "ironically", the United States had largely abandoned the development of the ironclad following the War. While they relied on leftovers from the Civil War, other nations began introducing more advanced ironclad models. This caused the United States to fall behind in quality as well as quantity. The United States needed a reminder that the Navy was an important component in strengthening the country. That reminder would come in the 1870s when the country found itself at odds with Spain during the Virginius affair.

The Virginius Affair

In 1868, war broke out in Cuba as landowners rebelled against Spain. Though the United States maintained stable relations with Spain, many in the country rose in support of the Cuban rebels. One such individual was John Patterson, an agent acting on behalf of the rebels. He desired to bring ammunition and supplies to the rebels. To accomplish this, he purchased a Confederate blockade runner named Virgin in 1870. Renaming the ship Virginius, she was used to transport supplies and men to Cuba in support of the rebellion. For three years, Virginius successfully delivered supplies to Cuba. Spain was aware of the ship and made many attempts to stop the ship.

They would finally succeed in 1873 when Spanish authorities received a report that Virginius was heading towards Cuba with another shipment of supplies. A gunboat was dispatched to intercept the ship as she approached Cuba. On October 30, 1873, the Spanish gunboat finally located Virginius and gave chase. Virginius, in poor condition and incapable of outrunning the Spanish ship, surrendered. Spain brought the ship to Cuba and put the entire crew on trial as pirates. The entire crew, comprised of American and British citizens, was found guilty and sentenced to death. The American government attempted to aid its citizens, but Spain ignored them and began executing the crew. 53 people were executed with several then being decapitated while the bodies were trampled under horses.

Fortunately, the British Government had become aware of what was happening and dispatched a warship to Cuba to investigate. The warship, HMS Niobe, arrived at the city of Santiago where the executions were taking place. The commander of the ship, Sir Lambton Loraine, immediately ordered the Spanish to cease the executions. Loraine even went so far as to threaten to bombard the city if his demands were not met. Spain relented and halted the executions, sparing the surviving crew of the Virginius.

The United States public, upon learning of the executions, immediately began calling for war against Spain. Luckily, the United States Government was able to diplomatically resolve the crisis. They secured reparations for the victims as well as the return of Virginius and her crew. This victory in diplomacy served to quell public anger and prevent the out brake of further hostility.

The Effect on the United States Navy

While the American public was demanding war, the United States Navy was no doubt dreading the prospect. At the time, a Spanish ironclad was in New York Harbor awaiting repairs. A more modern ironclad, the United States Navy had no warship in its inventory capable of engaging it. This led to the sickening realization that if war had broken out, the Spanish warship could have begun shelling New York City with impunity, the US Navy powerless to stop it. Had Spain sent its fleet to battle, the US Navy would be fighting an enemy with a larger number of more advanced ships. The US Navy was surpassed by Spain both in quality and quantity. To make matters worse, the few warships the United States had were incapable of fighting abroad.


Secretary of Navy George Robeson. During the Virginius affair, he began pushing for the United States Navy to begin strengthening itself.

The available ironclads were originally designed for operation in coastal areas and on rivers. They could hardly make the 100 mile journey to Cuba much less sail to Spain from across the Atlantic.

While diplomacy was hailed as the driving force that settled the Virginius Affair, the US Government no doubt noted the effect that gunboat diplomacy had in preventing further executions. Spain had continued executing captives despite demands by the United States. The executions only stopped when a British warship arrived and issued a threat that Spanish authorities could not ignore. Military power had succeeded where diplomacy had not. The United States must have realized the weight of power a blue water fleet would provide on the negotiating table.

Luckily, the lessons of the Virginius Affair had not gone unnoticed. George M. Robeson, then serving as the Secretary of the Navy determined that the United States Navy must begin rebuilding itself into a more capable force. He immediately began calling for a new fleet of warships capable of matching those found in foreign navies. However, he faced stiff opposition from the United States Congress. Through clever tricks and outright deception, Robeson would eventually get his fleet. His efforts laid the groundwork that saw the United States Navy rise from a poorly equipped coastal defense force into a large, modern blue water navy able to project United States power abroad.

These would be the Theseus Ships...in the alternate history, they would be a bit "different" than the real Amphitrite Class

[miletus12]

When creating an alternate history premise, especially in the era of 1869 to 1877, one has to recognize that the era was beset with commercial and economic scandal and internal technological and civil bottlenecks that were not present or were much less present in Europe at the same time. The eight years saw the Americans fall behind critically in telegraphy, finance, metallurgy, steam engines, large continuous cast foundry work and even in such things as gun making. Take the double action revolver. This was not invented by Colt Firearms in1877.

There are a lot of “firsts” in the world of firearms and with those “firsts” comes a great deal of misinformation and seemingly pedantic clarifications. For example, Colt did not make the first revolver, no matter what Wikipedia says. Conversely, when many folks think of the first semi-automatic pistol they incorrectly think of Hugo Borchardt’s strangely beautiful C-93. While that is an early entry into the field of semi-automatic pistols, it is in fact predated by the Schönberger-Laumann of 1892. Borchardt enthusiasts or others wanting to maintain their fact’s “correctness” counter by saying that the Borchardt was the first commercially successful semi-automatic.



That’s where the mountains of confusing clarifying details begins to cloud history.



Now, the Borchardt isn’t the first semi-automatic pistol, it’s the first commercially successful semi-automatic pistol. By adding those two little italicized words, the claimant’s statement remains true. However, to a society not mired in nuance, and more often focused on the biggest, fastest, first, longest, or other measurements of superlative magnitude, this aggrandizement can be misleading and often times, downright incorrect.



To that end, in researching this article, even the Schönberger-Laumann 1892 is referred to as the first commercially sold semi-auto pistol. Was this because the man who designed the pistol, Joseph Laumannm, had built earlier functioning models before he signed over his patents to the Gebruder Schönberger company? Is he predated by another pistol all together yet unearthed in my research? In any case, one can see how a quick clarifying term can change a gun’s claim to a prestigious historic title. This is even worse when it comes to revolvers! Claims abound when it comes to: the first revolver, the first cartridge revolver, the first successful double-action (DA) cartridge revolver, the first standard issue revolver, the first modern double action revolver, and so on ad nauseum.



Nothing is wrong with acknowledging the contributions of the gradual improvements to firearms throughout history. Small improvements over time lead to big, finalized changes. Do you think Winchester would be famous without Walter Hunt, Lewis Jennings, Smith, Wesson, King, or Henry? In fact, too many inventors and contributors throughout history are often not given their due proportional to their influence. However, one must remain accurate in historical attribution. The first revolver was not invented by Samuel Colt. The first semi-auto service rifle was not the M1 Garand. The first lever action was not the Winchester. The first rimfire cartridge was not invented by Smith & Wesson.



The First Double Action Revolver




Alexander Thomson Adams Patent Double Action Revolver


Robert Adams was a British gunsmith and inventor born in 1809. The general mentions of him historically are for his work at the London arms factory of George & John Deane. It was under their employ, on August 22, 1851, that he was granted a British patent for a revolver design that functioned in a revolutionary way (no pun intended). Adams’ patent covered a new design of gun that indexed the cylinder, cocked and dropped the hammer, all with a single pull of the trigger.



At the same time Samuel Colt’s revolvers were selling like hotcakes in the United States. His Colt Walker (1847), despite its limited production, was extremely effective for the men who used it (despite problems with ruptured cylinders), and it soon saw improvements in the subsequent models such as the Dragoon (1848), Baby Dragoon, and the 1851 Navy. Some of these weapons he brought to the 1851 Great Exhibition of Works of Industry of All Nations (a.k.a. The Great Exhibition of 1851) held at the Crystal Palace in London’s Hyde park. Like many similar shows it sought to display each nation’s products to each other and the world. For manufacturers, there could be no better time to make a name for one’s self or to show off one’s wares to big buyers and governments from all corners of the globe. There were only two revolvers on display at this exhibition (though other manufacturers such as Lefaucheux were present), a display by Colt and a booth of George & John Deane showing the new revolver design by Robert Adams. A collision course had been set.



The Deane & Adams revolver on display was a five-shot revolver was likely chambered in .500 caliber (12.7 mm). Other calibers would come later, such as the 1851 Infantry in .440 (11.2 mm) and the 1851 Pocket in .320 (7.65 mm). In that huge expo building of glass and iron, the Deane booth of firearms was the only one that had brought a decorated firearm – a single revolver described as “ornately engraved.” Colt, who had brought a large display, had only brought his plain, machine-made pistols, giving the Adams the lion’s share of the public’s attention. To add further insult to injury, the Deane brothers won a prize medal for their display, while Colt was issued an Honorable Mention. The burgeoning arms maker quickly turned the newfound attention to his advantage, and found himself running against Colt in the military trials that began September 10, 1851 at the Royal Arsenal at Woolwich.



The Adams had several advantages over its American counterpart. First and foremost, it was a double-action revolver, and requiring only one hand to operate was seen as a large advantage. In fact, the revolver was solely a double action (DAO), with the hammer spur having been removed so that a shooter could not cock it manually. They were virtually hand-made and thus had a higher quality and fit than the Colt. The Adams took less time to reload than the Colt, fired a larger cartridge, fired it more quickly, weighed less, and did not experience a single misfire during the trials. It also utilized a solid frame with the barrel and frame being created in one forging, giving the gun additional strength, an important benefit before the introduction of more sophisticated metallurgy techniques. In the two hour test, the Adams fired 25 times with no misfires, but the Colt suffered four.



However, it had its disadvantages as well. The same hand fitting that gave the gun its high (though somewhat inconsistent) quality and solid feel, slowed production, eliminated part interchangeability, and increased its cost; something Colt did not suffer with his machine-made guns. It offered no recoil shield, its longer DAO trigger pull hurt the gun’s accuracy, and the percussion nipples had not been hardened, sometimes resulting in several problems, but most notably their occasional fracturing upon detonation of the percussion cap. Also, while the rapid fire of the double action was appreciated, the lack of a single action option was viewed as a detriment.





Adams Patent Repeating Pistol


As ordnance boards around the world tend to do, they chose the more traditional design and signed a contract with Colt that resulted in an overall sum of 9,500 revolvers going to the Royal Navy and 14,000 to the British Army (5,000 of which were produced in America). This purchase of mostly Model 1851 Navy revolvers was made despite the fact that the Ordnance Board did not approve either revolver. Perhaps this contract is what caused Colt to build his London factory, that “officially” began production on January 1, 1853. The mass-production and assembly lines were an eye-opening experience for the European gunsmiths of the day. Charles Dickens even came to tour the factory and wrote about his experience in the May 27, 1854 issue of his magazine, Household Words. Despite the Colt contract, many British officers still recognized the quality and higher stopping power of the Adams revolver, often buying them out of their own pockets.



While Colt was busy selling his single actions and being content with his military contracts, Adams was stoking the fires of improvement and commercial sales. He was putting immense pressure on Colt in retail sales and was so successful at such that the Deane brothers made him a partner, changing the name of the business to Deane, Adams, & Deane. He also kept improving his revolvers. By adding a bullet rammer similar to one in use by W. & J. Rigby (known today as John Rigby & Co), he quickly eliminated one major objection to his revolver. To address the lack of single action operation Adams designed a system of his own, but eventually preferred that of Lieutenant Frederick E. B. Beaumont, to which he bought the patent. By incorporating the improved DA/SA action and hammer spur in his weapons, which were now being manufactured more cheaply and quickly, he had removed nearly every objection to this revolver. The newly improved revolvers are known as Beaumont-Adams revolvers and began production in 1856 (patent date for Beaumont is Feb 20, 1855). By the time production rolled around, they had also substituted the Rigby bullet rammer for one designed by James Kerr, Adams’ cousin.




John Clough & Son Retailer Marked Beaumont-Adams Double Action Percussion Revolver


Lot 2461: Engraved and John Clough & Son Retailer Marked Beaumont-Adams Double Action Percussion Revolver‌‌Note the newly added ramming lever flush to the left side of the barrel and the hammer spur. Sold February 2016 for $1,610.

This put both revolvers squarely in the middle of the Crimean War (Oct 1853 – Feb 1856), where each saw much more arduous testing than that of the Ordnance Board. The Colts were found to be more rugged, but the rapid firing, large caliber DA Adams revolvers held their own. Two readily available quotes best describe the reputations of the two weapons. The first is a letter from Crimean War soldier J. G. Crosse from the 88th Regiment of Foot, who felt compelled to write a letter to Adams after he experienced the following:

“I had one of your largest sized Revolver Pistols at the bloody battle of Inkermann, and by some chance got surrounded by the Russians. I then found the advantages of your pistol over that of Colonel Colt’s, for had I to cock before each shot I should have lost my life. I should not have had time to cock, as they were too close to me, being only a few yards from me; so close that I was bayoneted through the thigh immediately after shooting the fourth man.”

It is worth noting that the Russians also valued the Adams revolvers, often taking them as war trophies and eventually reproducing their own copies of the gun. The Colts, on the other hand, suffered from the reputation of being slow and under-powered, accusations made even more severe by the previous letter. The following letter was written by Lieutenant Colonel George Vincent Fosbery during the Indian Mutiny of 1857. It reads,

“An officer, who especially prided himself in his pistol shooting, was attacked by a stalwart mutineer armed with a heavy sword. The officer, unfortunately for himself, carried a Colt’s Navy pistol of small caliber and fired a sharp-pointed bullet of sixty to the pound and a heavy charge of powder, its range being 600 yards, as I have frequently proved. This he proceeded to empty into the sepoy [an Indian soldier] as soon as he advanced, but having done so, he waited just one second too long to see the effect of his shooting and was cloven to the teeth by his antagonist, who then dropped down and died beside him. My informant told me that five out of the six bullets had struck the sepoy close together in the chest, and all had passed through him and out of his back.”

It wouldn’t take too many stories of men having their heads split open to turn the tides of opinion against the Colt revolvers. Beginning in 1855, Beaumont-Adams revolvers were ordered for the British Army and the War Department, most being chambered in .479 caliber. British officers, who had to purchase their own sidearms at this time, also favored the domestic product. With the loss of the military contract and the immense popularity of the Adams in the retail market, Colt was forced to close his London factory in 1856 (some sources say 1857), approximately four short years after it had opened. Some say that the experience in London soured Colt against double actions, which he never produced in his lifetime. Colt died in 1862; the first DA was the less-than-rugged Model 1877 “Lighting.” Even rival Remington had a solid frame DA dating back to 1862 (pat’d 1858). Even after their founder’s passing, Colt seemed to be ignoring the writing on the wall.



Unfortunately for Adams, the view from the top would not last long. In 1856 he had a falling out with the Deane brothers, left that partnership, took most of his patents with him, and founded





Four European Double Action Revolvers Lot 621: Four European Double Action Revolvers‌‌ Only the 3rd from the top is not an Adams Patent.


the London Armoury Company on February 9, 1856. He had some help again from his cousin James Kerr, who would later develop the Kerrs Patent Revolver. By 1857 there was trouble in the provinces and the Indian Mutiny of 1857 cemented the Adams’ position as the official sidearm of the British Army. When it came down to it, the practicality of the gun’s rate of fire and large caliber were deemed more important than the suffered accuracy of the double-action.



Eventually, Adams would have his disagreements with the London Armoury Co. as well. He would sell his interest in the company, leaving it to Kerr, but would keep the rights to his revolver and have them produced under license, even by his most recent employer. This turned out to be remarkably prescient on Adams’ part as the issue that sent him away was the increased production of infantry rifles at the expense of the production of his revolvers. The new rifles were to be sold to the newly formed Confederate States of America, the primary buyer for Kerr. At the end of the American Civil War, London Armoury lost its biggest client and went out of business the following year.



The standard issue revolvers Robert Adams made would only be replaced in 1867 by those made by his brother, John Adams. The pistols from John’s Adams Patent Small Arms Company would remain the official revolvers of the British Army until they were replaced by the Enfield Mark I in 1880, the same year of Robert Adams’ death.





Revolver drawing

Sources:



Ezell, Edward C. Handguns of the World. A Comprehensive International Guide to Military Revolvers and Self-Loaders. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1981. Print.



firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2010/07/revolver-double-action-revolver.html



tonnel-ufo.ru/eanglish/weapon/revolver-adams-m-1851.php



www.google.com/patents/US9694?dq=adams+revolver

In that small case specifically but also generally, the Europeans were well on their way to a technical superiority all across the fields of ordnance over the Americans, that they would not relinquish until around 1900-1910 when the Americans finally achieved a parity, thanks to Driggs, Schroeder, Seabury, Fletcher, Browning, Dupont, Berdan, and Benet. It was not that the Americans could not invent in the field of ordnance, for the rolling block Seabury guns were a refinement of the Berdan American Civil War system writ large and Fletcher's two action interrupted screw breech block was in use about the same time as the Wellin refinement to the de Bang system. These would function well enough until the naval gun factory procured rights to the Wellin interrupted screw pattern.

But if one is doing an alternate history of improvements, one has to begin with something that can be an alternate and earlier license path to function as the basis for a more effective if different coast defense type navy of the late 1870s and early 1880s.