34 Naval War of 1812 



even if uncontradicted. His account of the action is 

 grossly inaccurate as he has inexcusably garbled 

 Hilyar's report. One instance of this I have already 

 mentioned, as regards Hilyar's account of Porter's 

 loss. Again, Hilyar distinctly states that the Essex 

 was twice on fire, yet James (p. 418) utterly denies 

 this, thereby impliedly accusing the British captain 

 of falsehood. There is really no need of the corrob- 

 oration of Porter's letter, but he has it most fully 

 in the "Life of Farragut," p. 37: "The men came 

 rushing up from below, many with their clothes 

 burning, which were torn from them as quickly as 

 possible, and those for whom this could not be done 

 were told to jump overboard and quench the flames. 

 . . . One man swam to shore with scarcely a 

 square inch of his body which 'had not been burned, 

 and, although he was deranged for some days, he 

 ultimately recovered, and afterward served with me 

 in the West Indies." The third unfounded state 

 ment in James' account is that buckets of spirits were 

 found in all parts of the main deck of the Essex, 

 and that most of the prisoners were drunk. No au 

 thority is cited for this, and there is not a shadow 

 of truth in it. He ends by stating that "few even 

 in his own country will venture to speak well of 

 Captain David Porter." After these various para 

 graphs we are certainly justified in rejecting James' 

 account in toto. An occasional mistake is perfectly 



