Lives and Legacies

Tag: Navy

  • Kenmore Goes to Sea: Ship Naming in the US Navy

    On July 22, 1942, Annie Fleming Smith wrote a letter. Smith was a prolific letter writer—her innumerable missives had helped raise the funds that saved Kenmore two decades earlier—so it is not surprising that she put pen to paper on that summer day. What is surprising is that the intended recipient of that letter was not a prospective donor, a fellow regent of the Kenmore Association, or a friend. Instead, she addressed her epistle to Frank Knox, the Secretary of the Navy. Smith wanted “confirmation of the fact of the naming of the U.S.S. KENMORE” after the home and “any other information you can release” about the ship.[1]

    Letter that Annie Fleming Smith sent to Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox asking for confirmation that the first USS Kenmore had been named after the historic home. Smith, Annie Fleming to Frank Knox, July 22, 1942. The George Washington Foundation.

    Although there is no record that Knox responded to Smith (there was, after all, a war on), the USS Kenmore was, in fact, named for the historic estate. The Naval History and Heritage Command ship-naming file on Kenmore I (AP-62) includes an April 13, 1942, memo to the Secretary of the Navy from the chief of the Bureau of Navigation and prepared by Louis Emil Denfeld, then assistant chief of the Bureau of Navigation, recommending that the President Madison be renamed Kenmore, in honor of the “[h]ome of Betty Washington at Fredericksburg, Virginia, sister of George Washington who married Col Fielding Lewis.”[2] The recommendation was approved on April 16 of that year, and the newly renamed vessel was “commissioned at Baltimore, Md., on 5 August 1942, Cmdr. Myron T. Richardson in command.”[3]

    USS Kenmore (AP-62) on trials in the Chesapeake Bay on August 14, 1942. Shipscribe

    Smith had learned of the ship during a mid-1942 visit to the estate from Lt. Commander William VanC. Brandt (USNR) of the Kenmore, who later wrote to “Miss Annie” to thank her for her hospitality.[4] “All the Officers of the Kenmore,” Brandt told Smith, “were most interested in learning the history and record of the beautiful estate for which our ship is named.”[5] Brandt planned to have framed and displayed in the ship’s wardroom photographs of the property given to him by Smith; later, the vessel’s captain requested a picture of the house for his room.[6] For her part, Smith was “thrilled” to meet Brandt and “to know about your ship,” although she was skeptical enough of the origin of the transport’s new name to write Knox.[7]

    The Arlington National Cemetery headstone of William VanC. Brandt, from whom Annie Fleming Smith learned that a Navy ship had been named after the historic home she had helped save from development in the 1920s.

    The Kenmore operated primarily in the Pacific until September 1943; she was then converted into a hospital ship and renamed Refuge.[8] The Navy must have liked the name Kenmore, as it was bestowed in October 1943 on another transport, originally called the James H. McClintock.[9] The Kenmore II also served in the Pacific Theater and, after “hostilities ended on 15 August 1945, [began] returning veterans to the U.S.”[10] She was decommissioned on February 1, 1946.[11]

    USS Refuge (AH-11), formerly the Kenmore (AP-62), photographed in February 1944 in Baltimore after her conversion from transport to hospital ship. Shipscribe.
    The second USS Kenmore (AK-221, ex AP-162) in San Francisco Bay around December 1945. Shipscribe.

    The Kenmores were not the only vessels named for properties associated with George Washington and his family. The Wakefield (AP-21) borrowed its name from the Westmoreland County birthplace of the first president, today owned by the National Park Service.[12] There have been five Mount Vernons; the first was built in 1859 and chartered by the Navy two years later, before they bought it later that year.[13] The most recent vessel named after Washington’s residence and plantation was a dock landing ship commissioned in 1972 and decommissioned in 2003.[14] The possible birthplace of Mary Ball, George Washington’s mother, lent its name to the Epping Forest, a dock landing ship launched in 1943.[15]

    The monikers of other ships are connected more tenuously to places tied to George Washington and his family. For example, a 1943 submarine chaser was rechristened the Abingdon in 1956.[16] The vessel’s new name came from the town of Abingdon, in Washington County, Virginia (named, yes, for George Washington).[17] According to the county’s official history, “myths claim that [the town] was named for Martha Washington’s ancestral home” in England.[18] While this may be a false etymology, were those who named the ship drawing on the tale when they chose to call the vessel Abingdon? Additionally, the many Arlingtons that have served the Navy over the years have each been named after Arlington County, which draws its appellation from Arlington House, built for George Washington Parke Custis, the step-grandson of his celebrated namesake.[19]

    Arlington Mansion was built by George Washington Parke Custis. Union soldiers posing on the lawn, June 28, 1864.

    The Navy’s infatuation with the commander in chief of the Continental Army has, of course, also been expressed by naming ships directly after Washington and his family, not just their properties. While a complete inventory of such vessels is beyond the scope of this post, it is worth noting that four ships have been named the George Washington, including CVN-73, an active nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, while several others have sailed under just his surname.[20] Martha, George’s wife and the nation’s first first lady, has inspired the names of at least two Navy ships: the Lady Washington and the Martha Washington.[21] Civilian shipbuilders have also found inspiration in the Washington family: the SS Mary Ball was a liberty ship active during World War II.[22]

    U.S.S. George Washington in Yokosuka, Japan in 2008.
    Four boats shared the name “Lady Washington.” The first was commissioned by the Continental Congress in 1776.
    USS Martha Washington inbound to Hampton Roads, Virginia, from Brest, France, 1918.

    Who was responsible for naming these ships? As hinted at above, while final authority for ship names was (and still is) the responsibility of the Secretary of the Navy, during World War II, it was the Bureau of Navigation (renamed the Bureau of Personnel on May 21, 1942) that researched and recommend ship names based on the traditional naming conventions associated with each class of vessels.[23]

    Typically, it was dock landing ships, or LSDs, that were named for “cities and places of historical interest of same name, or places of historical interest only.” [24] Epping Forest, Gunston Hall I (named for George Mason’s home), Ashland (for the boyhood home of Henry Clay), Carter Hall (after the Virginia estate), Oak Hill (for the home of President James Monroe), and Shadwell (for the birthplace of Thomas Jefferson) are all examples of LSDs whose names aligned with this convention.[25]

    But the Kenmores, the Mount Vernon IV, and the Wakefield were not LSDs; they were transports, classified AP, and anyone seeking consistency in the Navy’s naming of troop transports during World War II is bound to be disappointed. Some vessels in the AP class were named after celestial bodies, others after Revolutionary War heroes, and others, as we have seen, after historic estates.

    Dang it, Ben, you had one rule.
    One of the original six frigates whose construction was authorized by the Naval Act of 1794.

    This lack of consistency is not surprising. After all, when Benjamin Stoddert named the Navy’s sixth ship, a frigate, he chose to call it the Chesapeake, despite President George Washington’s agreement with the recommendation that frigates be named after “principles or symbols found in the US Constitution.” Therefore, “the very first naming decision by the very first Secretary of the Navy resulted in the ‘corruption’ of the established naming convention.”[26] This tradition of flexibility regarding ship names has endured, and ship names continue to excite interest (and occasionally strong feelings) from many parties, including those who propose denominations for new vessels. If you are such a person, here’s an idea: how about another Kenmore, or maybe a Ferry Farm?  

    Adam Nubbe

    Manager of School & Youth Programs

    [1] Smith, Annie Fleming to Frank Knox, July 22, 1942. The George Washington Foundation.

    [2] Naval History and Heritage Command, Kenmore I, ship-naming file, April 13, 1942.

    [3] Ibid; Cressman, R. J. (2020, March 31). Kenmore I (AP-62). https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/k/kenmore.html

    [4] Brandt, William VanC. to Annie Fleming Smith, June 30, 1942. The George Washington Foundation.

    [5] Ibid.

    [6] Ibid; Smith, Annie Fleming to William VanC. Brandt, July 10, 1942. The George Washington Foundation.

    [7] Smith, Annie Fleming to William VanC. Brandt, July 10, 1942. The George Washington Foundation.

    [8] Naval History and Heritage Command, Kenmore I, ship-naming file, April 13, 1942.

    [9] Cressman, R. J. (2020, March 31). Kenmore II (AP-162). https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/k/kenmore-ii–ap-162-.html

    [10] Ibid.

    [11] Ibid.

    [12] Cressman, R. J. (2022, April 1). Wakefield (AP-21). https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/w/wakefield.html

    [13] Naval History and Heritage Command. (2015, August 11). Mount Vernon I (Gbt). https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/m/mount-vernon-i.html

    [14] Pike, J. (n.d.). LSD 39 Mount Vernon. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/lsd-39.htm

    [15] Naval History and Heritage Command. (2015, July 8). Epping Forest. https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/e/epping-forest.html

    [16] Mann, R. A., & Cressman, R. J. (2023, November 27). Abingdon (PC-1237). https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/a/abingdon.html

    [17] Ibid; Hagy, J. W. (2019, June 10). A Brief History of Washington County, Virginia. Washington County, Virginia. https://www.washcova.com/history/

    [18] Ibid.

    [19] Parsons, L., & Cressman, R. J. (2023, December 13). Arlington I (AP-174). https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/a/arlington-i.html; Arlington, Virginia. (n.d.). History of Arlington. https://www.arlingtonva.us/Government/Topics/Welcome-Kit/History-of-Arlington; National Park Service. (2023, January 12). George Washington Parke Custis. https://www.nps.gov/arho/learn/historyculture/george-custis.htm

    [20] Naval History and Heritage Command. (2020, May 5). Washington VIII (BB-56). https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/w/washington-viii.html; US Navy. (n.d.). USS George Washington (CVN 73). https://www.airpac.navy.mil/Organization/USS-George-Washington-CVN-73/

    [21]  Naval History and Heritage Command. (2016, February 9). Martha Washington. https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/m/martha-washington.html; Naval History and Heritage Command. (2015, July 28). Lady Washington. https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/l/lady-washington.html

    [22] Jobrack, J. (2020, September 10). True or False? Test Your Knowledge of Mary Washington. https://livesandlegaciesblog.org/2020/09/10/true-or-false-test-your-knowledge-of-mary-washington/.

    [23] Calkins, W. F. (1958, July). Down to the sea in ships’–names. U.S. Naval Institute. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1958/july/down-sea-ships-names; Naval History and Heritage Command. (2020, June 29). Denfeld, Louis Emil. Louis Emil Denfeld. https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/research-guides/modern-biographical-files-ndl/modern-bios-d/denfeld-louis-emil.html

    [24] Department of the Navy, A Report on Policies and Practices of the U.S. Navy for Naming the Vessels of the Navy (2012, November), 63. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA569699.pdf

    [25] DANFS – Naval History and Heritage Command. Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships — Index. (n.d.). https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs.html

    [26] Department of the Navy, A Report on Policies and Practices of the U.S. Navy for Naming the Vessels of the Navy (2012, November), 7. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA569699.pdf

  • When George Washington Almost Joined the British Royal Navy

    Not long ago, we explored Three Military Adventures that Inspired George Washington and the influence that Lawrence Washington and his wartime service played in stoking George’s interest in military matters.

    Lawrence fought with the British in the War of Jenkins’ Ear in the early 1740s and spent time aboard the flagship of Admiral Edward Vernon, who commanded British forces during the Battle of Cartegena de Indias.  Lawrence returned to Virginia with stories sure to spark his 10-year-old brother George’s imagination and desire for adventure.  Lawrence’s military service and George’s interest in military things had a fascinating, if perplexing, practical outcome when, late in 1746, Lawrence proposed for 14-year-old George to join the Royal Navy.

    Lawrence Washington attributed to Gustavus Hesselius (c 1738)
    Portrait of Lawrence Washington attributed to Gustavus Hesselius (c. 1738). Credit: Wikipedia / Mount Vernon.

    This is a relatively little known and rather mysterious incident in the life of young George Washington.  Few documents survive that address the matter directly.  There are no documents written by George, Lawrence, or Mary Washington that reveal their actions or motivations in the matter.  The three letters that do address the incident were all written by secondary figures involved.

    It all began in the fall of 1746 when Lawrence sent two letters — one each for George and Mary respectively – to Fredericksburg via Colonel William Fairfax.  George was to deliver Mary’s himself and keep the one to him a secret from her.  We do not know what either of these letters said.

    What we do know is only what William Fairfax told Lawrence in a report dated September 9, 1746 and sent to Lawrence at Mount Vernon.  Fairfax wrote:

    “The weather being so sultry, and being necessarily obliged to go about this town to collect several things wanted, I have not yet seen Mrs. Washington.  George has been with us, and says He will be steady and thankfully follow your Advice as his best Friend.  I gave him his Mother’s letter to deliver with Caution not to shew his.  I have spoke to Dr. Spencer who I find is often at the Widow’s and has some influence, to persuade her to think better of your advice in putting Him to Sea with good Recommendation.”[1]

    The Dr. Spencer mentioned may have been William Spencer, who often was involved as a witness for land transfers to Lawrence.  The secretiveness of George hiding his letter from Mary and of Lawrence apparently enlisting his business partners to argue in favor of the proposal for George to go to sea emphasize the conspiratorial nature of Lawrence’s efforts.

    It appears that, for a time, Lawrence’s manipulations may have worked.  On September 18, 1746, Robert Jackson, a Washington family friend, wrote to Lawrence that “I am afraid Mrs. Washington will not keep up to her first resolution.”  This seems to indicate that she wasn’t against the idea immediately but she did change her mind.  Jackson reported that Mary “seems to intimate a dislike to George’s going to Sea and says several Persons have told her it’s a very bad Scheme.”  He condescendingly dismisses her concerns as “trifling objections such as fond and unthinking mothers naturally suggest” and expresses frustration that “one word against [George’s] going has more weight than ten for it.”

    Jackson noted that William Fairfax was inclined to visit Mary and, moreover, Jackson noted that he himself would “take an opportunity to talk with her and will let you knew her result.”[2]  While Jackson may have let Lawrence know the result, no document has been found to let us know the result of these specific discussions two centuries later.

    Action Between Nottingham and Mars, 1746 by Samuel Scott
    “Action Between Nottingham and Mars” (1746) by Samuel Scott depicts a British-French naval battle in October 1746 when the Washingtons were debating whether George should join the Royal Navy. Credit: Wikipedia/National Maritime Museum.

    At some point, perhaps feeling outnumbered, Mary decided to solicit the advice of her brother Joseph Ball in England.  Dated May 19, 1747, his reply, which is a disdainful rejection of the entire proposal, is worth quoting at length.

    “I understand that you are advised and have some thoughts of putting your son George to sea.  I think he had better be put apprentice to a tinker, for a common sailor before the mast has by no means the common liberty of the subject; for they will press him from ship to ship where he has fifty shillings a month, and make him take twenty-three, and cut and slash and use him like a negro, or rather like a dog.  And as to any considerable preferment in the navy, it is not to be expected, as there are so many gaping for it here who have interest, and he has none.  And if he should get to be master of a Virginia ship (which is very difficult to do), a planter who has three or four hundred acres of land, and three or four slaves, if he be industrious, many live more comfortably, and have his family in better bread than such a master of a ship can . . .  He must not be too hasty to be rich but go on gently and with patience as things will naturally go.  This method without aiming at being a fine gentleman before his time, will carry a man more comfortably and surely thought the world than going to sea, unless it be a great chance indeed.”[3]

    Mary must have ultimately and definitely rejected Lawrence’s plan, a courageous act for a woman in male dominated colonial Virginia.  George, of course, did not pursue a career at sea but turned to surveying instead.

    Like many incidents in young George Washington’s life, the historical record is elusive and often raises more questions than it answers.  What prompted Lawrence to make the suggestion in the first place?  What were George’s views on the proposal and the debate?  What were Mary’s specific objections?  None of these questions may ever be answered.  Of course, the greatest question raised by the incident is the also unknowable counterfactual one.  Would history have unfolded differently if the man who was supposed to have been the commander of the Continental Army ended up spending his life on the King’s ships?

    Zac Cunningham
    Manager of Educational Programs

    [1] William Fairfax to Lawrence Washington, September 9, 1746, quoted in Moncure Daniel Conway’s Barons of the Potomack and the Rapphannock, New York, Grolier Club, 1892: 238, available at https://books.google.com/books?id=zDESAAAAYAAJ&dq=barons%20of%20the%20potomac%20and%20rappahannock&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false [accessed August 26, 2017].

    [2] Robert Jackson to Lawrence Washington, September 18, 1746, quoted in Moncure Daniel Conway’s Barons of the Potomack and the Rapphannock, New York, Grolier Club, 1892: 239-40, available at https://books.google.com/books?id=zDESAAAAYAAJ&dq=barons%20of%20the%20potomac%20and%20rappahannock&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false [accessed August 26, 2017].

    [3] Joseph Ball to Mary Washington, May 19, 1747 quoted in Marion Harland’s The Story of Mary Washington, New York: Houghton, Mifflin & Co, 1893: 79-80 available at https://archive.org/details/storyofmarywashi00harl [accessed August 26, 2017].