February 4, 1863, The New York Herald
We have unexpected news and rather startling in intelligence from Charleston for the entertainment of our readers this morning. We derive the news from a late number of the Richmond Dispatch, and the substance of it is, that on Saturday morning last the improvised rebel fleet of Charleston, consisting of two little patched up iron-clads and three small attending steamboats, made a sortie upon our blockading squadron, sunk two of the ships, set fire and crippled several others, and cleared the roadstead of every vestige of a blockade. We refer the reader to the details in our news columns.
But there is another feature in this disgraceful affair which is suggestive of more serious mischief to follow. We allude to the proclamation by Gen. Beauregard and Capt. Ingraham, commander of the petty rebel attacking squadron, declaring the blockade of Charleston raised and the port legally open to foreign trade, which proclamation is seconded by the foreign consuls accredited to Charleston in their proceedings to the same effect. A similar pronunciamiento was issued by General Magruder after his successful cutting up and dispersion of our blockading fleet in Galveston harbor. We are not aware that there is anything in the recognized international law upon the subject which puts an end to a blockade thus temporarily raised by a successful sortie; but there may be some special understanding in the matter between the government of Jeff. Davis and the governments of England and France. At all events, from the rejoicings of the rebels at Charleston, it is evident that they attach much greater importance to this successful raid of their contemptible fleet than the mere sinking of a federal ship or two and the dispersion of the remainder of our squadron for one short day would warrant. We shall probably be enlightened upon this question in the course of the day from Washington.
But this melancholy affair at Charleston, superadded to the late Galveston disaster, and the Merrimac affair in Hampton Roads, and the escape of the Nashville from Beaufort, and of the Oreto from Mobile, ought to be sufficient to satisfy President Lincoln that old Mr. Welles is not the man for the Navy Department at this crisis. Had any one of our new iron-clads been on the ground those two rebel gunboats from Charleston might have been destroyed or captured. But it seems that Mr. Secretary Welles, in this case, as at Norfolk, against the Merrimac, relied upon his wooden ships, and was incredulous concerning the reports afloat of rebel iron-clads in preparation for a disastrous surprise to our wooden blockaders. A Secretary who thus refuses to be taught, or is incapable of profiting from the lessons of a costly experience, repeated over and over again should no longer be retained at the head of the Navy Department, after such evidence of his incapacity as that which is furnished in this shameful surprise, defeat and dispersion of our blockading squadron at Charleston.
But perhaps the great armada of iron-clads and gunboats awaiting good weather for their departure from Beaufort, N. C., may shortly administer a blow to the rebels which will amply atone for these late disasters at Galveston and Charleston. We cannot, however, understand the necessity of the policy, meantime, of leaving Charleston to be guarded by a squadron of wooden ships, with the knowledge before the Navy Department that the rebels in that quarter were watching their opportunity, with two or three iron- clads, to repeat the sortie of the Merrimac. The country must have some satisfactory explanation of this business, or it will be wise on the part of President Lincoln to relieve Mr. Secretary Welles from their duties of an office which he has failed so signally to discharge to the public satisfaction.