Dutch interest in the American submarine design Holland in 1899

The Dutch minister wrote in his letter dated The Hague 20 March 1899 that the experiments recently undertaken by some naval powers with submerged torpedo boats were quite successful. According to newspapers possessed some of these powers already some really useful examples of this kind of torpedo boat. The value of these boats as a tactical weapon at sea will increased depending on fulfilling the required demands. The minister also believed that these boats would be well serving as a maritime weapon for the Dutch defence. So he was really interested in the results of the abovementioned experiments. England which of course involved kept every thing top secret. France and the USA were more willing to supply details and he ought it possible that both cabinets would inform indeed the cabinet of the relative small Netherlands. Perhaps it was even allowed that a Dutch naval officer or engineer was allowed to be present at some trials. He asked his colleague minister of foreign affaires for his support. In the correspondence which is preserved is also the pamphlet titled The Holland Submarine available in the archive of the embassy. Remarkable is that while the ambassador wrote that it was more an advertisement it proves that a Dutch officer was allowed to visit trials. A paragraph mentioned a “Captain A. Tromp of the Royal Dutch artillery, a leading expert on the question of submarine boats, who carefully examined the boat, made the following statement November 26^th, 1898: “I had the pleasure of witnessing a trial of the Holland in August last. At that time she was perfectly controllable, dove and rose with remarkable quickness, turned with great rapidity and apparently functioned perfectly.”(1)

On 16 May 1899 send the Dutch minister of foreign affairs to his colleague of navy a copy of the letter written by the Dutch ambassador at Washington dated the 2nd no. 127/114 dealing with what was called submarine torpedo boats. In fact it were submarines. The ambassador was obvious ordered by his minister to collect more information dealing with the Holland submarines. He referred to a letter of his department dated 25 March 3481/31 I while answering the questions.

1. The US government still did not experimented herself with submerged torpedo boats.

2. The US government ordered some officers to attend the trials with the Holland torpedo boat owned by the Holland Torpedo Boat Company at Pinestreet no. 35 at New York. As the (Dutch) minister of navy probably would new was this company exploiting the invention of Mr. Holland.(2)

3. The reports of the above mentioned officers was not unfavourable although the government yet did not ordered a Holland boat while lacking to full fill comply to all demands

4. The ambassador asked for a copy of these reports which was refused, a common standard act of secret keeping policy.  Reason for the denial were the financial interests of the inventor included the market price of the shares.

5.The naval attaché of the German embassy told however the Dutch ambassador that an American officer who attended the trials was less enthusiastic about the while submerged supplied horsepower.(4) The same attaché which was also present at some trials made the some remark. The armament was in his opinion to complicated and further more needed this invention more improvements.

6. The inventor however understood himself also that improvements were necessary. He seemed to gave drawn a new enlarged and modified design of the temporary existing Holland boat. This new design however was not yet built.

7. The (US) Government also started with designing a modified model and her views are now been executed at the shipyard van de Columbia Iron Works at Baltimore where the submerged torpedo boat Plunger is being build.(3) This Plunger was said to the Dutch ambassador was even larger as the second design of Mr. Holland although the latter didn’t agree with the opinion that she was an improved model of his own designs. The Plunger was to be fitted out with five crews. The German naval attaché visited the shipyard at Baltimore but refused to supply any details at the moment.

8. A somewhat popular description of the Holland is to be found in the latest February edition of Mr. Clure’s magazine.

9. The ambassador intended to go himself to New York to speak with the Holland Torpedo Boat Company to obtain if possible more details dealing with the newest design model No. 2.

On 29 May 1899 send the Dutch minister of foreign affairs to his colleague of navy a copy of the letter written by the Dutch ambassador at Washington dated the 14^th no. 215/135 dealing with the topic. The Dutch ambassador spoke the Russian naval attaché about this subject. The latter answered to be aware of the invention made by Mr. Holland but in his opinion there was no doubt that she was useless in practice just like the other invention called the Plunger would be if she ever was to be completed. The French military attaché although being an army officer said similar words. As ordered by the French Department of navy he investigated the possibilities of the Holland-boat and the Plunger. The Dutch ambassador was quite negative about the value of these submarines just like the attachés of France and Russia. Far more important was the attitude of the US government. When the war broke out with Spain in 1898 feared the US government for a Spanish attack on her unprotected coasts. The result was that all ships and small vessels were bought which could be in any way used for the defence except for the Holland boats for which there was none interest!

On 27 June 1899 send the Dutch minister of foreign affairs to his colleague of navy a copy of the letter written by the Dutch ambassador at Washington dated the 14^th no. 260/163 dealing with the topic. The ambassador referred to his reports 127/114 and 215/135 dated 2 and 4 (or the14^th?) May dealing with this topic. Via his consul general Mr. Planten he asked the Holland Torpedoboat Company (HTBC) to supply him more details about the invention of Mr. Holland toe be able to inform the Dutch government. The secretary of the company send the latest edition of the The Forum magazine of June as reply which included the article Insurance of property against war risks written by a lieutenant commander Kimball and a pamphlet dealing with submarine boats. The secretary wrote in his letter “We do not give out any drawings of the boat and we have very little other than we send you, bearing upon the boat, When we get some photographs however, we shall be happy to send those to you. If any representative off your government desires to see the Holland, he can do so by communicating with this office”. The ambassador to his minister that it was obvious that he would not obtain what he mostly desired namely extensive drawings. In his opinion were the pamphlet and the magazine not worth to be sent to the Netherlands. The article of Kimball did not supply any details but was just pointing out the importance of a strong navy which should included submerged torpedo boats and the so-called pamphlet was not more as an advertisement without supplying technical details.

The result was that the Royal Netehrlands Navy did not order the building of a submarine. However the shipyard Koninklijke Maatschappij De Schelde of Flushing laid down on 1 June 1904 a submarine called Luctor et Emergo while using a design of the Holland received from the Holland Torpedo Boat Company/ She was launched on 8 July a year later and after successful tests bought by the Dutch cabinet and commissioned on 21 December 1906 as the Hr.Ms. O1 serving until 1920. She was the first submarine of the Dutch navy.

Notes

1. The USS Holland was laid down at the Lieutenant Lewis Nixon’s Crescent Shipyard, Elisabeth, New Jersey in November 1896, launched on 17 May a year later, bought by the US government on 11 April for 150.000 US dollars, commissioned on 12 October that year to be decommissioned on 7 July 1905. She was stricken on 21 November 1910 and sold on 18 June 1913. For the next coming years however she was preserved as placed on a display in Paterson, New Jersey until she was finally sold to be broken up in 1932. She was build on behalf of the Holland Torpedo Boat Company (later the Electric Boat Company nowadays General Dynamics Electric Boat) while her designer John Holland supervised her building. With a displacement of 64 long tons/65 tons (surfaced)-74 long tons/75 tons (submerged) were her dimensions 16,41 (over all) x 3,15 (maximum) x 2,59 metres or 53;10”x 10’4”x 8’6”. Her gasoline engine supplied 45 bhp and her electric motor 75 bhp allowing with one screw a speed of 8 (surfaced)-5 (submerged) knots/ Her crew numbered six men and she was armed with one 18” torpedo tube and a 8.4” dynamite gun.

2. John Phillip Holland (29 February 1840-12 August 1914 Newark, New Jersey) responsible for the first US navy submarine USS Holland and the first British submarine HMS Holland 1, the latter still existing at Gosport.

3. The Plunger was laid down on 21 May 1901 at the Lewis Nixon’s Crescent Shipyard at Elizabethport, New Jersey, launched on 1 February 1902, commissioned on 19 September a year later but already decommissioned on 3 November 1905. She was for the second time commissioned on 23 February 1907, decommissioned on 24 February six years later but not earlier sold to be broken up on 26 January 1922. She was renamed A-1 on 17 November 1911. With a displacement of 107 long tons/109 tons were her dimensions 20 x x 3,7 x 3,4 metres or 64’x 12’x 11’. Her speed was 9 (surfaced)-7 (submerged) knots. Her crew numbered 7 men and her armament consisted of just 1-18” torpedo tube.

4. In the pamphlet was the naval attaché of the Imperial German Navy at the Washington Embassy Lieutenant von Rebeur-Paschwitz mentioned. He wrote in his letter dated 4 December 1898 “It is in some way to be regretted that the ‘Holland’ was not used in the late war. If she had succeeded in entering Santiago harbor and had attacked the Spanish ships the moral influence alone of her presence might probably have forced them to leave the port at an earlier date, thus relieving the United States fleet of the duty of a hard and laborious blockade.’

Sources

Gewoon verbaal-archief van het ministerie van marine 1813-1900 (1930) inv.no‘s. 2736-2738 (Department of Marine, National Archive at The Hague).

Archief Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken. Gezantschap Verenigde Staten inv. no. 1146 (Archive Dutch embassy in USA, National Archive at The Hague).

http://www.wikepedia/ dealing with the USS Holland and the USS Plunger.http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hr._Ms._O_1