SPECIAL TOPICS CONTRIBUTIONS BY JOHN G. SHARP

The Gosport Navy Yard Apprentice Boys School and the question of foreign birth, June 7, 1839

Introduction:  Below is a transcription of Commodore Lewis Warrington’s transmittal letter dated 7 June 1839 and monthly report of May 1839, forwarded to the Secretary of the Navy, regarding the Gosport Navy Yard Apprentice Boys School.  As required by naval regulation this monthly report details the name, country of origin, conduct and progress of each individual boy. In his letter Warrington states to Secretary James K. Paulding  his thoughts about the apprentices of “foreign birth” and his “belief that the apprentice law was intended for our own boys exclusively.”

Discussion: In 1827 then Lt. Matthew Perry established the first apprentice school for boys at Gosport Navy Yard on the USS Alert on 29 November 1826.1 However the idea was promoted for the navy as a whole by Secretary of the Navy, Samuel Southard. The naval apprentice bill was finally signed into law on 2 March 1837. The law made it lawful to enlist boys for the navy not being under thirteen nor over eighteen years of age to serve until twenty-one." Within a few months there were several hundred apprentices on board naval vessels, and the experiment gave promise of success. The secretary directed that the boys were to be "thoroughly instructed so as to best qualify them to perform the duties of seamen and petty officers."2 One such school was run at Gosport Navy Yard. The boys in May 1839 were housed aboard the frigate USS Java  an old receiving ship for new enlistees The apprentice bill authorized  that at the time of their enlistment, apprentices be rated either as second or third class boys, depending on their size and qualifications. The pay for a third class boy was $5.00 per month, $6.00 per month for second class boys and those promoted to first class could expect $7.00 per month. Apprentice boys were not allowed to draw spirits “grog ration” or use tobacco.3 

Commodore Warrington’s unease with “foreign” born sailors and questions of their loyalty has long been a subject of public concern, especially in times of war or perceived threat.  The federal government in its early years, however, had only minimal worries regarding the loyalty of its employees.  Those few employees appointed to annual or salaried positions were required to swear or affirm their loyalty to the United States.  Josiah Fox (1763-1847) a native of Falmouth England, prior to taking up his position as Clerk at the Gosport Navy Yard was required to sign a loyalty oath.4  Fox like many early employees had recently immigrated to the United States.  As a Quaker, and member of the Society of Friends, he chose to affirm his loyalty rather than swear, since his religious convictions prohibited swearing.  As early as 1817 the Board of Navy Commissioners reacting to rising nationalism and perceived security threats directed:  “None but citizens of the U.S. are to be employed in any Situation in the Navy yard under your command.  Should there be any such at present employed they are to be discharged.”5  The Board stated:  “This regulation was founded on the Supposition that Citizens will be less likely to betray secrets, and convey to the Enemy such information that will tend to the disadvantage of the U.S.”6 The Board allowed some shipyard employees to retain employment if they could provide a certificate of naturalization.  All shipyard commandants were required to examine the supporting paper work, although it is unclear as to how rigidly this was enforced.  While there was opposition from some anxious that many innocent men would be dismissed, the mandate that only citizens be employed remained in effect.7 In the 1830’s nativism  that is the fear and hatred of aliens , particularly  religious or ethnic minorities began to surface in American, politics this took shape in fear of immigrants. By the 1830’s, as immigration from Ireland and Germany swelled the Catholic population, anti-Catholicism increased along with suspicion of all those of foreign birth.  
      
The naval apprentice boy’s school remained the subject of contention; while some thought the Apprentice School would help the navy recruit, educate and retain competent enlisted personnel, others complained loudly, because many of the boys admitted were of foreign birth or parentage. Critics too frequently pointed to the fact that the vessels that housed young sailors, were receiving ships, set up house older seamen.  Detractors further charged these receiving ships exposed the young boys to the bad examples and vices of adult seamen e.g. rations of spirits and tobacco.  In response the Navy established school ships such as the Hudson and North Carolina in New York, the Columbus in Boston and the Java in Norfolk. However by 1845, the critics had the upper hand, the Navy Department reported to Congress that the apprentice plan was not completely successful and consequently program became dormant until 1855 when the program was again revived on more selective basis down to the Civil War.8 Author William Faulkner famously wrote, “The past is never dead. It's not even past.”  Today the issues of citizenship and loyalty of 1839 that so perplexed Commodore Warrington remains still central to our politics and the subject of intense national deliberation

Transcription: This transcription was made from digital images of letters and documents received by the Secretary of the Navy, NARA, M125 “Captains Letters” National Archives and Records. In transcribing all passages from the letters and memorandum, I have striven to adhere as closely as possible to the original in spelling, capitalization, punctuation, and abbreviation, superscripts, e.g. Do   same as, etc., including the retention of dashes and underlining found in the original. Words and passages that were crossed out in the letters are transcribed either as overstrikes or in notes. Words which are unreadable or illegible are so noted in square brackets. When a spelling is so unusual as to be misleading or confusing, the correct spelling immediately follows in square brackets and italicized type or is discussed in a foot note.   The names of all ships are italicized.

John G. Sharp, 8 February 2019                
==========================================                                                                                                                           
U.S. Navy Yard
Gosport June 7th 1839
Sir,
I have the honor to forward a monthly report of the progress of the apprentice boys in reading, writing &c &c – I take the occasion to call your attention to a circumstance of which I was until very lately ignorant, and to which the attention of the Commanding officers of the Rendezvous has not been given, viz the foreign birth of some – I make these remarks under the belief that the apprentice law was intended for our own boys exclusively, and beg to be understood as reporting it for your information only.
I am very respectfully Your Obt. Servant
L. Warrington    
The Honorable
Secretary of the Navy 
Washington
[enclosure]

Monthly Report of the School Composed of Apprentices and other Boys on Board the U.S. Receiving Ship Java, Captain Charles Whlennes, May 1839                

Endnotes

1 Commodore Matthew Calbraith Perry USN, (April 10, 1794 – March 4, 1858) commanded a number of ships. He served in several wars, most notably in the Mexican–American War and the War of 1812. He played a leading role in the opening of Japan to the West with the Convention of Kanagawa in 1854. Perry was very occupied with the education of naval officers and helped develop an apprentice system that helped later furthered the curriculum at the United States Naval Academy. With the advent of the steam engine, he became a leading advocate of modernizing the US Navy and came to be considered “The Father of the Steam Navy” in the U.S. He spent the years 1833–1844 as second officer and later Commandant of the New York Navy Yard.
2 A. B. Wyckoff  The United Naval Apprentice System http://navalapprentice.white-navy.com/history.shtml accessed 8 February 2019
3 Harold D. Langley Social Reform in the United States Navy, 1798 -1862(University of Illinois : Chicago 1967, 101-107
4 David Harry Bennett Nativist Movement  The Oxford Companion to United States History edited Paul S. Boyer (Oxford University Press: New York 2001), 543. Josiah Fox immigrated to Philadelphia in 1793, see, Merle Westlake Josiah Fox 1763-1847, (Xlibris Corp. 2003), 23.
5 NARA RG 45BNC Circular to Commandants  E 307, v1, 1 April 1817
6 NARA RG 45BNC Journal E303, v1, 1 April 1817 accessed 8 February 2019
7 The Gazette of Washington   May 17, 1817, 3
It may be said that to discharge a parcel of mechanics from public employment is a matter of no moment, is a subject of no interest but this is the language of torpor and indifference, The rights of the mechanic are as precious as those of a president and in this country to violate those of one is politically and morally a great offense. By presumptuous order they discharge from public service men guilty of no offence but that of having been born in foreign country. Those poor men thus shut out from public employment will be obligated to make monstrous sacrifices in the sale of the little property they possess.       A Citizen
8 Langley, 109