U.S. Iron Ship Building 1860 to 1900: A Comparison between Two Small Shipyards in San Francisco and East Boston

-

 

U.S. Iron Ship Building 1860 to 1900: A Comparison between Two Small Shipyards in San Francisco and East Boston

By Patrick R. Eaton

The Post-bellum period saw rapid expansion across industries in the United States. Coupled with the great move west and ‘manifest destiny,’ the United States transitioned towards an economy of heavy industry and large-scale manufacturing.

Shipbuilding, naturally underwent change between 1865 and 1900. The pre-Civil War era saw shipping production at large and small yards across the West Coast, Great Lakes, Mississippi River, the Gulf Coast and of course, the East Coast. The ships constructed were generally wood and were sail powered.

The advent of the combustion engine, use of steam and coal saw technologies from rail applied to ships. Further, ship design underwent radical change and soon hulls were made of both; wood and steel.

Traditional Pre-Bellum shipbuilding relied on wood and craftsmen from carpentry trades. This allowed for numerous small and independent boatyards to flourish wherever there was water and demand. With the advent of the combustion and steam engines, the outlay and investment required of iron shipbuilders increased cost tremendously. As the age of sail dawned, small wooden boatyards gave way to large scale steel shipyards. The Atlantic and Dickie yards are excellent representatives of that period where small yards with wooden boat mindset began the iron age of shipbuilding.

Two small yards are selected for comparison here between one in San Francisco and one in Boston, Massachusetts.

The San Francisco based Dickie Brothers established an iron shipbuilding yard in 1871 and began shipbuilding from 1875 to 1907. The Dickies were Irish immigrants and during their run built over 31 vessels for a total of 22,000+ Gross tons[1]. The largest vessel produced was assessed at 1,797 Gross Tons.

       The U.S. Revenue Service Walcott, built by the Dickie Bros. Shipyard in San Francisco, CA circa 1882.[2]

The Atlantic Ironworks based out of East Boston and ran from 1860 to 1950. They, like the Dickie Brothers, produced small vessels of iron and steel with the largest assessed at 1,165 Gross tons. Atlantic built 32 vessels between 1860 and 1908 for a total of almost 12,000 Gross Tons.[3]

While the East Coast had numerous shipyards, the West was simply expanding and establishing new yards as the United States expanded westward. A comparison between the Dickie Yard and the Atlantic Ironwork yards conveys scale and customers. For Dickie, the majority of the vessels produced were Cargo with a few schooners and ferries.


 

      The U. S. Revenue Cutter “Manning,” built by Atlantic Ironworks Shipyard, Boston, MA circa 1900.[4]

By 1906, however, the West Coast had firmly established shipyards. From the San Francisco Newsletter dated 21 July, 1906 a specific comment mentions Dickies. “Today there are no better built ships anywhere than those constructed right in San Francisco. The Union, Risdon and Fulton Iron Works, Boole’s shipyard, Dickie’s yard, and a few lesser ones, are capable of turning out as splendid vessels as any of the boasted yards of England, Scotland, Germany or the Easter United States.”[5]

The Atlantic Ironworks, however, produced almost an equal mix of tugs/barges and government vessels such as monitors, gunboats, and Revenue (Pre-Coast Guard) Cutters. The development of iron shipyards, although independently producing small vessels of low tonnage, collectively produced enough tonnage that by 1899, “The British and Americans together control one-half of the entire merchant ship tonnage afloat.”[6] That is, afloat in the entire world!

 

 

 

Bibliography

Colton, Tim, “Shipbuilding History: Construction records of U.S. and Canadian Shipbuilders and Boatbuilders,” 25 June, 2021, www.ShipbuildingHistory.com.

 

Naval History.Net, “United States Navy, Revenue Service/Coast Guard and Coast & Geodetic Survey Log Books: Ship Histories,” http://www.naval-history.net/OW-US/Wolcott/USRC_Wolcott.htm

 

Online Archive of California OAC, “A guide to the John W. Dickie & Son records, 1900-1910,” https://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/c8hh6mdf/entire_text/

 

San Francisco Museum, “San Francisco Shipyards,” http://sfmuseum.org/hist11/shipbuilding.html

 

The Maritime Heritage Museum, San Francisco, CA, “The Worlds Fleet,” The Boston Daily Globe, https://www.maritimeheritage.org/news/worldsFleet.html.

 

U.S. Revenue Cutter Manning, The Library of Congress, Alaska Photographs, http://www.museumsyndicate.com/item.php?item=71811

 

 Tables


                    Dicke Bros. Shipyard Prodcution Data 1875-1908. Tim Colton www.ShipBuildingHistory.com

 


                    Atlantic Ironworks Shipyard Production Data. 1860-1908. Tim Colton www.ShipBuildingHistory.com

[1] Colton, Tim, “Shipbuilding History: Construction records of U.S. and Canadian Shipbuilders and Boatbuilders,” 25 June, 2021, www.ShipbuildingHistory.com

[2] Naval History.Net, “United States Navy, Revenue Service/Coast Guard and Coast & Geodetic Survey Log Books: Ship Histories,” http://www.naval-history.net/OW-US/Wolcott/USRC_Wolcott.htm  

[3] Colton, Tim, “Shipbuilding History: Construction records of U.S. and Canadian Shipbuilders and Boatbuilders,” 25 June, 2021, www.ShipbuildingHistory.com.

[4] U.S. Revenue Cutter Manning, The Library of Congress, Alaska Photographs, http://www.museumsyndicate.com/item.php?item=71811

[5] San Francisco Museum, “San Francisco Shipyards,” http://sfmuseum.org/hist11/shipbuilding.html.

[6] The Maritime Heritage Museum, San Francisco, CA, “The Worlds Fleet,” The Boston Daily Globe, https://www.maritimeheritage.org/news/worldsFleet.html.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

“U.S. MARINE CORPS PRE-WAR TRAINING AND THE BATTLE OF BELLEAU WOOD: 1917-1918”

-
Image
I : Introduction                     The fighting in Belleau Wood, France, in  June, 1918 saw the command of the U.S. Marine 6th Machine Gun Battalion change hands four times in 11 days. Such was the nature of the vicious fight between the 4th Marine Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division (U.S. Army) and the Germans pushing towards Paris. By all accounts, this first real test of the U.S Marines in the First World War, was a bloodletting that should have ended in a rout as the experienced and veteran German machine gunners tore into the inexperienced U.S. Marines. Rather than collapse, the 4th Marine Brigade withstood the German assaults and not only held firm, but triumphed. The U.S. Marine Corps 5th and 6th Marine Regiments in 1918 fought against the veteran and very experienced German infantry. This study seeks to identify how ad hoc Marine Corps infantry battalions and the newly formed 4...
Read more

1968 TET OFFENSIVE: The Beginning of the End for Continued U.S. Involvement in Vietnam

-
Image
  The Vietnam War after the Tet Offensive of 1968   The 1968 “Tet” Offensive spread out across South Vietnam between 30 and 31 January. The offensive produced shock both politically and militarily in the capital cities of Saigon and Washington D.C. The purpose of the offensive, in the extreme, was for Hanoi to cause a general uprising across the beleaguered cities of South Vietnam; a ‘popular enjoining’ of the fight by sympathetic South Vietnamese against the South Vietnamese government and her mighty ally, the United States. Sam Adams, a CIA analyst who was stationed in Vietnam at the time, believes Hanoi’s chief objective was to “jolt American public opinion right before the American elections. And in my view they succeeded in spades in doing that. [1] And at minimum, to cause chaos, sow worry and concern for South Vietnamese citizens and Americans alike, and to influence American public opinion. Surely the calculus of the North Vietnamese took into consideration the fre...
Read more

Generals Lee, Sherman, And Grant: The Tactical vs the Strategic

-
Image
  Generals Lee, Sherman, And Grant: The Tactical vs the Strategic General Tecumseh Sherman has been memorialized for his “March to the Sea,” the carnage wrought upon Georgia from November to December of 1864. This campaign was the culmination of his own unique strategy, developed as a subordinate of General Grant, and as a student of his own successes and failings during the three previous years of campaigning against the Confederacy. Sherman had seen Grants magnificence in the Vicksburg campaign in 1863. Grant had all but abandoned his logistics columns and supply lines after they were destroyed by Confederate Cavalry. Undeterred, Grant continued. Sherman modeled this concept during his own “Meridian” Campaign in Mississippi. Sherman is more remembered for his Armies ‘March to the Sea’, burning and wrecking most of Georgia along the way. “He fought in the battles at Shiloh , Vicksburg , and Chattanooga with mixed results, but he is the only man to twice receive the thanks of Co...
Read more

"CONVENTIONAL COMMANDERS IN AN UNCONVENTIONAL WAR: THE U.S. ARMY IN VIETNAM 1965-1967"

-
Image
INTRODUCTION                  Between 1965 and 1968 the majority of the Infantry Brigade and Battalion commanders fighting in Vietnam were veterans of the Second World War and/or the Korean war. Who were these   WWII veterans who led the U.S. Army in Vietnam and, as a group, how did they interpret their assigned tasks during the first two years of America’s involvement in Vietnam. This study illustrates how the ‘first wave’ of maneuver commanders, of whom a majority were veterans of the Second World War or Korea, adapted to myriad of conditions they faced across the 44 provinces in the Republic of Vietnam.   Within the historiography of the U.S. Army in Vietnam, the secondary literature concentrates on the strategy developed and implemented by the Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV) and the ‘search and destroy’ operations executed across the country. A small group of scholars have argued that without any clear method th...
Read more