Fort Adams State Park History

DATE STATE ACQUIRED: May 1965                                                                               

TOTAL ACREAGE: 105

 

NAMES OF PREVIOUS OWNERS: William Brenton, Susanne Mumford, Benjamin Waite Case, Audley Clarke

 

ORIGIN OF NAME: In honor of the second president of the United States, John Adams

RECENT HISTORY: Situated at the mouth of Newport Harbor, Fort Adams State Park offers an exceptional panoramic view of both Newport Harbor and the East Passage of Narragansett Bay. For over a decade the State of Rhode Island has been working on the development of Fort Adams State Park. After serving the United States Army for over a century, the Navy for over ten years, the Fort was deeded to the State in 1965. 

     

Today, the State is still actively restoring the Fort but at a much slower pace with the property serving as a major public access to Narragansett Bay for thousands to enjoy. With recreation being a key factor in the Newport tourist industry, the Department of Environmental Management  has concentrated on improving the park's resources by  providing a more comprehensive program of activities geared towards the Newport Area.

 

Located within the parks boundaries are the Fort Adams Sailing  Association offering a  sailing facility with sailboat instruction, rental, drysail storage and hoist operations available to the public. The Museum Of Yachting has displays centered around "Yachting in Newport- The  Golden  Age", a show of photographs, models, costumes, boats and yachting memorabilia from the turn of the century. Also located at Fort Adams are two professional soccer fields, one rugby field, one saltwater beach staffed with lifeguards, two boat ramps,  picnic areas with 40 tables, fishing piers and one sailing regattas building with lockers and showers.

  

FORT HISTORY:

Construction of the Fort was begun in 1824 and took nearly 30 years to complete. Irish immigrant stone masons helped build it. The Fort was used by the U.S. Naval Academy during the Civil War, reverting back to the Army when the Naval Academy moved to Pelham St. in Newport. The Navy again took over the Fort in 1951....

 

Near the eastern entrance of Narragansett Bay, about three miles southwest of Newport, stands one of the oldest and most elaborately constructed forts in the United States. Its' massive wall of masonry with casemate ports for an armament of 500 guns of the type used for coastal defense in 1820-50, attracts the attention of all who enter this eastern passage of the bay.

As early as 1700, the strategic importance of Narragansett Bay was recognized and a fort was located on Goat Island as a protection for the town of Newport. This was done by recommendation of the Lords of Trade of His Britannic Majesty. This fort was named Fort Anne, then Fort George, and later Fort Liberty.

 

On April 29, 1776, the town of Newport unanimously voted  to enter into the defense of the town, and three days later, on  May 2, a large body of inhabitants repared to Brenton's Point, the present location of Fort Adams, and built a fort which commands the entrance to the harbor. On October 25,1779, the British, who had occupied the town of Newport and all of the island, burned the barracks at Brenton's Point before evacuating Rhode Island.

 

After the Revolutionary War the fort at Brenton's Point  was unoccupied  for military purposes until, in anticipation of war with France, Congress took measures for the construction of seacoast fortifications to defend Narragansett Bay. In this plan a permanent work was to be provided for at Brenton's Point, the construction of which was left to Major Louis Tousard.

 

On July 4, 1799 ushered in with a Federal Salute of thirteen guns, the company of John Henry of Artillerists and Engineers-U.S.Army, entered the fort marching at the head of a column composed of the Major General of the State of Rhode Island and his military staff, the Newport Ancient Artillery, the Newport Guards, and a large concourse of patriotic citizens. The gateway leading to the battery not having been completed, Major Tousard had constructed  a temporary arch decked with wreaths of evergreen and over its keystone was a tablet inscribed:

 

FORT ADAMS

"The Rock on which the Storm will Beat"

 

The fort was named in honor of President Adams, who approved of the plans for defending our seacoast.

 

Fort Adams Remodeled in 1906 and 1908:

Early 19th century fortress; two stories with terraplane, granite,heavy relieving arches at entrances, largest coastal defense works of its type in the United States.

Admiral's House: Early 20th century. One story with flared hipped roof and wide overhang, random ashlar granite, center entrance on land side.

 

Redoubts:  One story with terraplane, stone, two drawbridges provide access from the main work.

Warehouses: Buildings #73 and #94. 1878-1879- One and a half story with gabled slate roofs, red brick, segmental arched entrances. Mule Shed: 1878-1879- One and a half story with gabled slate roof and clerestory (originally two stories), painted brick, large square entrances at each end. Commanding Officers Quarters (Eisenhower House) George Mason and Sons, 1873-1875.  Two and a half stories with mansard roof; clapboard, pediment dormers with sawn trim; double door in the center of a front facade. Endicott Batteries:

Battery Belton, Battery Bunkhead, Battery Reilly, Battery Talbot. 1890's, One story with terraplane, reinforced concrete, central entrance with doorway and underground tunnel entrances.

 

Jail Redoubt: [1824-1850] One story with hipped  roof, granite ashlar, off center entrance with iron bound door. In days of wind driven vessels, because of  its  favorable orientation

for access during storms, Narragansett Bay was considered to be the best harbor in the country. It was therefore not only important to the American Navy, but also to an enemy who would direct strong expeditions to capture it in order to possess Rhode Island as a base. Consequently, perhaps the strongest fort in America to be designed for defense against attacks supported by smooth bore artillery was erected on Brenton Point. Designed by a talented French engineer, Simon Bernard, the fort incorporated theories on military architecture that had required centuries to evolve and that had been developed by the leading military architects of Europe.

 

The true significance of Fort Adams is within the field of architecture rather than historical events associated with the work. Nineteenth century engineers provided testimony on the significance of the fort. Joseph G. Totten, Chief of the United States Corps of Engineers from 1838 to1864 observed, "As a harbor, (the Narragansett) is acknowledged by all to be the best on the whole east coast of the United States, the only harbor that is accessible with a northwest wind...The defenses adopted for Narragansett roads must be formidable on the important points, because they will be exposed to powerful expeditions."

 

The  architectural significance of Fort Adams was  expressed several decades later by John G. Barnard, U.S. Military engineer when he wrote that the design of the fort "called for the application of most of these rules of the art and many of those special arrangements which form the themes or treatises upon fortification... He concluded that ...it has no parallel with us..."

Comparison of the armament and the garrison of Fort Adams with others in the country indicates Fort Adams was designed for mounting 468 cannons and for a wartime garrison of 2400 men. Fort Monroe-another fort incorporating some of the same design theories but not so many complex fortifications-was designed for 380 cannons and 2400 men. Fort Pulaski, now a National Park Service Monument commemorating a Civil War battle, was designed for 140 cannons. Including both the main work and the redoubt, Fort Adams is perhaps the finest statement of military architectural theory in America; in the main work are most of the French Renaissance elements of bastion fortifications commonly found in America and many that are unique in this country;: in the Redoubt are the essential elements of the German or polygonal system. The main work contains single-cannon casemates that appear commonly in the other seacoast forts of the first half of the nineteenth century, yet it has numerous double cannon casemates that evidently appear only at Fort Pickens in Florida. Fort Adams has an enceinte that incorporates tiers of cannon for seacoast defense that characterized  forts such as Pulaski and Sumter, yet has detached landward defenses comprised of massive earth ramparts that appear only infrequently at other forts, among them Fort Delaware.

 

While both Fort Adams and Fort Pickens had bastions that were countermand, the counter mines extending under the covered way and glacis are unique in the former as is the system of underground stairways  providing access to these and the counterfile rooms. The tenailles placed before the curtains on the land defenses are also unique. The Redoubt, a work without bastions, was based upon a different theory. The ditches were mainly defended from reverse fire rooms located  behind the counterscarp, rather than from flanks of bastions.

 

The fort was also the site of numerous architectural experiments under the direction of Joseph G. Totten. At the time the permanent seacoast forts were begun, relatively little was known in America about building material technology except by local craftsmen who had worked with traditional techniques. To develop data on the strengths and characteristics of materials, tests were conducted. According to John Barnard, military engineer, "It would be almost impossible to enumerate the various objects of Colonel Totten's researches while at Newport.

There is scarce a subject connected with the art or science of the engineer, civil or military, which did not engage his attention and of which he has not left some record." The thickness of retaining walls, the thrust or arches among the more important, and the composition of stuccoes, of paints, lackers, washes  for stone or brick work,...may here be mentioned. "Fort Adams" was considered to be the most advanced masonry work of its era. Without question, it is the most elaborate work of  its kind in North America. Thus Fort Adams must be considered one of the most important military works to be erected on the North American continent. Its' historical integrity should be preserved for the education and enjoyment of both present and future generations. This importance indicates that programs for Fort Adams State Park should be developed  respecting the 1824 military work as a high priority item. Activities should not infringe upon the character of this work.

 

HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION:

Early in the nineteenth century, President Monroe pleaded for national seacoast defenses. Noting the expense of the War of 1812 in lives and property loss and destroyed, he observed: The vast body of men which it was found necessary to call into the field, through the whole extent of our maritime frontier, and the number who perished by exposure, with the immense expenditure of money and waste of  property which followed, were to be traced in an eminent degree to the defenseless condition of the coast. It was to mitigate these evils in future wars...that the decision was formed to make the coast, as far as might be practicable, impregnable...In  response,  Congress authorized a comprehensive system of defense to be developed with the objective of not only serving the country in time of war but also with the "higher purpose of preventing war itself".

However, America had no highly skilled engineers to plan the required defenses. The United States Military Academy had only been founded shortly after 1800 and had not yet developed an expert staff to train officers with the expertise in military service that was essential to undertake the defense of an entire nation. Consequently, to obtain the best possible leadership, the country turned to France--traditional friend in military matters--to obtain an expert on the art of fortification. French officers had previously assisted  Americans with their needs for military engineers. As is well known, they played  key roles in the success of the War for Independence. Then, following the Revolution, French talents assisted in the improvement of American harbor defenses, serving at numerous locations along the North Atlantic Coast. For example, Anne Louis de Tousard (1749-1817) directed the reconstruction of fortifications on the Narragansett. Several  years earlier, Etienne Nicholas Marie Bechet de Rochefontaine (1755-1814) had been appointed an engineer and directed to fortify ports which included New London, Connecticut, and Marblehead, Massachusetts. Shortly after the turn of the century, Pierre Charles L'Enfant (d.1825) designed the formidable Fort Washington, Maryland.

 

However, with the exception of Washington, these works were incapable of strong resistance to attack and they had no mutual relationship. Needed was a large unified permanent system and an expert engineer to design it. To assist in the development of a national  system, President Madison,  "...reposing special trust and confidence in (this) valor, fidelity, and abilities..." enlisted the services of  the brilliant French military engineer, Simon  Bernard  (1779-1839), a graduate of  l'Ecole polytechnique and former aid-de-camp of Napoleon Bonaparte. In 1816, upon recommendation of the Marquis de Lafayette and by virtue of a resolution of Congress, Bernard was appointed "assistant" in the corps of engineers with a rank of brigadier general by brevet.

 

Bernard was placed at the head of a board of engineers charged with fortifying the maritime frontiers of  the entire nation. Also appointed  to the board was Lieutenant-Colonel  Joseph  G. Totten (1788-1864) and Lieutenant-Colonel William  McCree.  Although  McCree resigned after a short time, Totten, with the exception of a two-year period from 1817 until 1819,

served on the board from 1816 until 1838, when he became chief of the Corp of engineers.

With broad vision, the board developed a national unit of defense comprised of several large interrelated components. In total it consisted of an interior system of communication, a militia, the navy, and permanent forts strategically situated to control navigable bays and rivers. According to the board, the strength of the system was the manner in which all components were interdependent.

In an analytical manner, the maritime frontier was organized at first into four sub-systems: the Gulf of Mexico, extending from the Sabine River to Pardido River: the southern Atlantic, extending from Cape Hatteras to Cape Sable; the middle, extending from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras; and the northeastern, extending from Nova-Scotia to Cape Cod. Then, after 1819, when the territory was ceded to the United States, the shores of Florida were included. The earliest sub-systems were the work comprising the regional systems for Mobile and New Orleans. In 1817  Bernard was ordered to the Gulf Coast to survey existing  fortifications and  to project new forts, which included Fort Morgan, Alabama, and Fort Jackson, Louisiana. After completing this task, he surveyed other parts of the Atlantic Coast and with the assistance of his draftsman, Guillaume Tell Poussin (1794-1876), appointed to the service as a topographical engineer, he finally developed plans for Narragansett Bay.

Recognizing the significance of the bay, in their first official report on the fortification of Narragansett Roads written in 1820, the board noted multiple advantages contributing  to its importance to the northeastern coastal system: to begin, it was the only harbor accessible with a northwest wind--the directions of the most violent winter storms--since the harbors of Boston and New York could be entered with winds blowing from most other directions. Safe refuge could be found at one of these three places under most conditions. Other advantages of the bay included the protection of the navigation between Long Island Sound and  Martha's Vineyard and the command, from this station by the navy, of the coast from Hampton Roads, Virginia, past the curving coastline between Cape Cod and Cape Hatteras. Since it was a connecting link to coasts north and south, it was important to deny Rhode Island to an enemy as a base of occupation from which he could direct attacks on adjacent areas. Finally, Narragansett Bay, along with Hampton Roads, was the only harbor from Cape  Cod to Cape Hatteras which the board considered proper for naval rendezvous. Later Totten emphasized this importance when he warned, "...the same properties that make Narragansett Roads so previous to us, would recommend them to the enemy also...The defenses adopted for the Narragansett must be formidable...because they will be exposed to powerful expeditions."

 

The recommendations of Bernard reflected French training and European experience, yet were based upon considerations for American defense that differed from his homeland. In the United States, attack would come by sea rather than by land as was common in Europe. Therefore, instead of surrounding entire cities with fortifications as had been the practice in France--and  the intent for many colonial cities--Bernard  recommended fortifying the navigational approaches  to cities with works located as distant as possible from the city toward the sea yet far enough inland to control the expanse of the waterway with cannon fire.

 

Nature provided a key to the defense of the bay at the East Passage which was formed by the western extremity of The Neck and by Conanicut Island. From the eastern shore, the inlet could be commanded with artillery. Moreover, the site which was finally selected was isolated at the end of the extension of land forming Brenton Cove, thereby facilitating land defense by restricting the number of approaches an enemy might use. The engineers' respect for fortification by nature actually resulted in sacrificing a better location for sea defense farther southwest where the inlet was evidently the most restricted in favor of  the isolated site at the tip of the projection. This was also an economical measure since it reduced the number of massive fronts necessary to defend against a siege.

 

The Board of Engineers, after completing surveys of coastlines in other sections of the country, completed their survey of the Narragansett in August of 1822 which had been commenced

several years earlier. To defend this harbor they projected works for four positions: Brentano's Point, Dumpling's Point, Rose Island and the west passage into the Narragansett. The fortifications of Brentano's Point--the only works finally realized--originally were estimated to cost $575,514.00. The most expensive works in this system, those for Dumpling's Point comprised of several fronts of fortification, were estimated at $579,946.57. A small fort on Rose Island was projected to cost $82,411.74 and a dike across the west passage at $205,000.00. All were considered class A works, a designation reserved for the most important forts.

 

Although never realized, the work on Connect Island (Dumpling's point) would have been the largest of the fortifications projected with perimeter of 3,618 yards--over double the 1,739 yards of Fort Adams--and an armament of 386 guns.

 

The design of Fort Adams incorporated two distinct types of works for defense: sea and land. The former consisted of merely an array of cannons in sufficient numbers to deter passage of the point by enemy ships. The latter consisted of a complex system of fortifications based upon centuries old developments that had occurred in France. The objectives of these fortifications were as follows:

1)  They should be designed to resist a regular land based siege.

2)  They should be positioned to capitalize upon natural features.

3)  They should be planned so that every point within the range of cannon fire be defended from within some part of the works.

4)  They should be provided with sufficient bombproof enclosures to secure men, armament,  munitions and stores.

5)  They should be sufficiently strong to resist attack  by  open assault.

6)  They  should  incorporate easy means  of  communication  within the works and to the exterior.

 

For the new work on Brentano's Point, as at other locations in the United States, a formal system of authorization of  fort construction was followed. First a general report evaluating the importance of Brentano's Point to be fortified was submitted. Then detailed plans and estimates were prepared by the Board of Engineers. Following approval by the Chief of Engineers and the Secretary of War, the plans were approved by military committees of  congress.

 

Finally a law was enacted authorizing appropriations and construction. In 1823 Congress authorized the construction of new forts of the Northern Atlantic Coast with an appropriation of $50,000.00 each for the construction of permanent  fortifications at  Brenton's Point and New Utrecht, New York. In each case, a part of this amount was applied to the purchase of the site, with $22,500.00 paid for the site for the new Fort Adams. The remainder was applied to the collection of materials and foundation work, purchase of materials for the engineers" office and work on the wharf, all of which were commenced in 1824.

 

On August 10,1824 Officer Talcott, then stationed at Old Point Comfort, site of Fort Monroe, was assigned the duty of superintending the construction of both the forts at Brenton's Point and New Utrecht (Fort Hamilton). Assisted by Lt. Mansfield, he was directed to establish his headquarters in Newport. According to instructions, Talcott was to follow the plans which had been prepared and he was admonished to forward details of any alteration that he might see fit to make. Consistent with practice at all the forts under construction detailed annual reports illustrated with drawings of plans and sections were required as the work progressed--thus producing the large  number of  progress drawings of plans and sections were required as  the work progressed--thus producing the large number of progress drawings now in the archives.

 

After Talcott completed preliminary arrangements he was ordered to proceed to lay out the works and begin calculations for  the excavations of the ditches, taking care that the  deblai of the ditch would provide adequate material for the remblais of the papapets, ramparts and glacis. By the end of the fiscal year work was underway on the north and east scarps.

 

The  following year was devoted to preliminary operations. Wharves and cranes for handling materials were constructed. Meanwhile, the site was leveled while excavations and foundations of stone were commenced on the east, north and west seafronts. Some of the scraps on east and north reached a height of nearly five feet.

 

On February 22,1825 - Lt. Col. Joseph G. Totten was ordered to superintend the construction on Fort Adams--along with Fort Hamilton, on New Utrecht New York, replacing Talcott who was sent to Fort Delaware, which was also placed under Totten's direction. As a result of these new responsibilities, Totten was removed from the Board of Engineers for Internal Improvements, on which he had been serving, although he remained on the Board of Engineers for Fortifications. Shortly after arriving, Totten sent plans of proposed alterations in the trace of Fort Adams to Washington. Early in July 1825, these charges which simplified the trace of the west front, were approved by the Secretary of War and Totten was directed to incorporate the changes in the works. Shortly thereafter it was officially ordered that the new fort at Brenton's Point would retain the name of the work it replaced.

 

From 1825 through 1834 Congress made annual  appropriations for work on Fort Adams. During these years work proceeded in an orderly and systematic manner with a large labor force. As at all the forts then under construction, each year Totten prepared a projection for the work to be accomplished. The work and estimates prepared for the second quarter of the year 1831 give a typical example of the type of work carried on during the first decade of construction.

 

To perform the above work, more than three hundred men were employed. Based on a six-day work week, 52 masons worked at about $1.72 per day; 2 carpenters at $1.50; 1 wheelwright  at $1.23; 2 smiths at $1.23; laborers at quarry at $1.00; and 250 laborers at $1.00 for moving earth and stone.

 

By 1832 work was well along. The turning and roofing of  the casemate arches of the main work were progressing. The scarp of the east front was complete and the counterscarps of the southeast and southwest exterior fronts were underway. Several years later some of the casemates were roofed with lead and covered with earth.

 

The quality of work on Fort Adams was outstanding. In 1833 the official report of the Engineer Department published in the Congressional Document stated that the work "is in a good  state,

and exhibits some of the finest specimens of workmanship to be met with in our public works."

 

However, in March of 1835, work ceased on the fort. Since no appropriations were made for resumption, the horses and oxen that were used for work on the fort were sold .The  following year, believing "that the whole Union (was) interested in the effective defense "of Narragansett Bay, the Rhode Island General Assembly passed a resolution admonishing senators and congressmen to urge completion of the works. That same year the fortifications for Conanicut Island and the dike were dropped from the list of projected works. Later, work was resumed on the main body of the fort.

 

About a decade later the operations were centered at the Redoubt. In 1844, the supervisor reported the following: Masons-Building arched passage across end of  interior ditch of Redoubt--building gun platforms on Caponiere--building gap in breast height wall in curtain south east front. Carpenters-Machinery guides Redoubt--shingling  interior slope, bridges. Smith- Sharpening tools--shoeing horses and oxen. Laborers-Assisting  mechanics, applying asphaltic at Redoubt Embanking glacis at Redoubt--sodding on caponiere, Teamsters-Hauling materials to mason--carting sod earth and manure.

In 1838, Totten was elevated to the position of Chief of the Corps of Engineers. He then continued as a general supervisor of Fort Adams, but placed Lt. Mason in immediate charge of the work. During this period, from Washington, DC where his office  was located, Totten sent to Mason detailed instructions on  virtually every aspect of construction.

Progress continued during the ensuing years. In 1839 the superintending engineer reported that the entire scarp of  the north front was finished and that the glacis of the main work was approaching completion. In addition all the galleries for communication and for the countermines under the interior ditch, which were designed to provide secure communication between  the enceinte and the exterior fronts, were problematical from the very beginning. In 1842 Totten issued instructions for capping  pump holes for the removal of waste. These were to be provided with "a good cast iron pump."

 

Damp casemates were the sources of innumerable criticism. In 1843 a military board reported that the storerooms were damp, a problem that Totten first attributed to the climate. Subsequently, experiments were ordered with hygrometers. To reduce the dampness, in 1841 orders were issued to prepare to pave the terreplein with concrete. Shortly after the fort was garrisoned, the surgeon  recommended moving the hospital from the casemates. Among his complaints, he reported"...at one time, a fractured limb in the present  hospital was displaced by the concussion, caused by the discharge of one of the guns on the Ramparts."

 

Other problems, minor in nature, also appeared as the work progressed. In 1846 notes were made reporting that earth washed into the bottom of caponnier interfering with the operation of the gates. Moreover, the outer gates had been hung but cuts had to be made in the stone to allow the gates to swing open. In 1884 some modifications were made to the casemates of the land  fronts. To provide more light and better ventilation the brick cheeks of the embrasures and loopholes were removed, increasing the main openings from 5 2/3 square feet to 18 square feet.

 

Among the enigmas at Fort Adams are the shot furnaces. Today no traces remain and their location and number is uncertain. During the early years of work, numerous references to the shot heating ovens appeared. In 1841,  Totten recommended  to Mason  "...we should provide for one 15 pd furnace near east end of North Curtain--two 30 pd furnaces for West front and two 15 pd furnaces for communication with Redoubt. Five years later, evidently due to some error in construction it was noted that the furnace near the north positern should be lowered. It was believed that W. McGregor would do this work for "a reasonable sum.

 

While construction had been underway on Fort Adams, life  at the  fort was colored by numerous mundane difficulties. In  1836 the  Grand Jury for the Rhode Island District recorded  that  the card  playing and drunkenness within the fort were breaches of law. Although the sale of "ardent spirits" was  prohibited on U.S.property, "Houses or Shanties" had been set up just outside the property lines for sale of liquor to the laborers.

 

Several  years later problems with livestock owned by  Henry Batter were encountered. Officials at the fort noted that his sheep were trespassing and damaging the glacis. Following official reprimands, Battery replied, "...I am aware that my sheep are in the habit of jumping in your possession and no one can possibly regret it more deeply than I do or taken (sic) more pains to prevent it in as much as I have now sold my entire flock  because they had contracted a habit of so doing. During the antebellum years that followed various details were completed. As is well known, none of these fortifications was tested during the Civil War.

 

During  the war, all masonry seacoast  fortification became obsolete. It was demonstrated at Fort Pulaski and other forts that brick and granite was incapable of resisting the impact of missiles propelled from heavy rifled cannons. Thereafter, the history of Fort Adams became a story of adaptation.

 

During  the early years following the Civil War, little was done on Fort Adams except routine maintenance--relaying traverse circles, substituting cast iron hoppers for the open sinks in the southeast bastion for the use of the soldiers, repairs on the brick terreplein, refacing embrasures with cement, repairs on the parapets. Nonetheless two service magazines were constructed and some work on the exterior batteries was begun to accommodate large smoothbores and heavy rifled cannons. In 1869 it was reported that the guardhouse in the east place of arms was completed.

 

Finally, in 1871 a Board of Engineers--organized in 1869  to plan revisions for American coastal forts and dissolved a decade later--prepared  a formal proposal for the modification of  Fort Adams to improve its strength. Evidently intended as only  expedient  improvements, the plan consisted of modification of  the exterior barrette batteries. On the exterior section overlooking the channel, parapets were rebuilt, a new magazine was constructed, and traverses were installed. At the same time, new quarters for the commanding officers were built outside the old work.

 

In 1874 it was reported that the concrete of six magazine traverses was completed. The parapet in front of a space to contain fourteen guns was carried up to give a breast height of seven feet. Also, a large conduit for electrical cables and an underground drainage system were installed. In 1875 the foundations for the platforms for six heavy guns were laid and the earth of two traverses completed. Three years later, it was reported that the preparatory work for the construction of two batteries had been completed. However, no appropriations for new construction at any fort was made between 1875 and 1890. The following year an act was passed requiring that work on American forts be limited to protection, preservation and repairs.

 

In 1881 to waterproof the casemates workers commenced  finishing the terreplein with concrete and by 1883, it was reported that all the casemates containing quarters except  two on  the south face were covered with concrete. This proved to be satisfactory for a period, until cracks developed in the concrete. Officers quarters in Classical style were placed on the ridge extending between the redoubt and the south bastion. The casemates in the tenailles were converted into  non-commissioned officers' quarters. Many of the casemates in the enceinte continued to serve as barracks.

 

In 1841 the fort was nearing completion--most of the heavy work was done. To prepare for the mounting of cannons, Totten ordered superintending engineer Mason to lay the cannon platforms on the second tier of the west front. Shortly thereafter although the fort was yet incomplete, Lt. Mason must have been surprised to learn from an alarmed Col. Totten that two companies of artillery were to be ordered to garrison the fort. Immediately, Mason was directed to finish the barrack casemates east of the southeast postern, the bakery, storerooms, cisterns and rivies, all located in the southeast demibastion. Operations included paving the floors in the long casemate containing the privies with brick and covering  these with boards, paving the areas around the ovens, boiler, etc.,with firebrick and the remainder of the floor in the carronade gun rooms.

Thereafter, work continued on the fort for many years. In 1844 sketches were made for portcullises to be installed in the gates and posterns of the main work. Although the masonry was detailed to receive these, they evidently were never completed.  Presumably  they would have been similar to those used at Fort  Pulaski, Georgia.

 

During the 1850's under the direction of  Lt. Rosecrans, some details were finished. Other work included maintenance of the grass sodding and pointing of masonry. By 1860 it was reported that, with exception of modifications to some gun platforms to accommodate Columbiads, and that, with the exception of some small repairs, the fort was ready for all its armament and its war garrison. The garrisoning of Fort Adams was irregular. The first period of troop occupation came to an end in 1853 when the troops were withdrawn. The fort was not reoccupied until 1857--meanwhile the fort  had been in the care of a fortkeeper. The fort was again abandoned  in 1859 and in 1861 it was transferred to the Department of the Navy for the use of the Naval Academy. Subsequently the fort was returned to the Department of War, was regarrisoned in 1862 and was continuously occupied thereafter. In its completed form, Fort Adams was a sophisticated work of masonry incorporating features developed in Europe. It was a bastioned  fortification incorporating casemates--spaces covered with brick vaults about two feet thick under a terreplein and parapet. Developed as an essential element of military architecture by the French engineer, Marc-Rene Montalambert (1714-1800), these provided secure enclosures for men and stores. Men, armament and stores, the curtains and bastions contained casemates. At the time of completion, officers' quarters were in the casemates of the east front; enlisted men were housed in the casemates of the two interior fronts. Although the bombproof of the west front were primarily for cannon, they were fitted with doors and windows--which could have been removed rapidly--and were also used  for quarters. The main powder magazines were contained in three large casemates located in the northeast bastion; these supplied service magazines located at convenient points throughout the fortifications. Kitchen, food stores and mess halls were all located  in the southeast corner of the main body of the place.

 

Throughout the history of the fort, the casemates were used for a variety of functions some of which were foreign to the original intent. During the early years of garrisoning most of the

functions requiring enclosure were housed in these bombproof enclosures, rather than in any auxiliary buildings. For example, in 1843, the flank casemates of the northeast bastion were used to store wood. The principal magazine in this bastion served as a prison. On the north front, two casemates were occupied by  Lt. Mason, the superintending engineer. The "smith's" shop was in a

flank casemate of this front. In the west front casemates at the south end were also used for carpenters. A casemate in the south flank of the west front was converted into an ice house.

In 1885 the Board of Fortification known as the Endicott Board had been organized. The following year, in cooperation with the Board of Engineers,a new plan for national defense had been organized. Basic to the new system were the following:

1) Armaments of the heaviest rifled guns mounted on disappearing carriages, which...can concentrate their fire on the enemy's vessels...

2) A well developed system of submarine mines planted in the channels and roadways...

3) The protection of these mined areas...by batteries of rapidly-firing guns of small caliber.

 

Old works were still considered to be valuable adjuncts of this system since the barracks, cisterns and casemates were often usable. Although the production of the new armament awaited the establishment of a new gun factory at Watervliet, planning was commenced for the new works. By 1892 drawings and estimates for Fort Adams were prepared and approved by the Secretary  of War.

Approved was an armament of ten 12 inch guns on lifts, six 10 inch and  four 8 inch guns on disappearing carriages, eight 12 inch mortars and submarine mines to be operated from two mining casemates. Funds were allotted later in the year and  work was commenced. By 1897 negotiations were still underway over land need for batteries. However, during the 1896 fiscal year work was commenced in the construction of a mortar battery to contain sixteen 12 inch mortars--Batteries Edgerton and Greene located east of the Redoubt--to be built by hired labor. At the same time a contract was let for the construction of three emplacements of 10 inch guns on disappearing carriages. By July 1898, under the regular fortification acts, a battery of three 10 inch guns on disappearing carriages and the battery of mortars had been completed and formally transferred to the troops and a concrete cable tank for the storage of torpedoes had been constructed. Work on two emplacements for 12 inch guns on barbette carriages was finished shortly thereafter and the entrances to Narragansett Bay were closed by mine fields. Electrical  lighting  was  installed for the mortar battery. Much of this work was evidently given impetus by the Spanish American War. In 1898-1899 work was commenced on eight 12 inch mortar emplacements and plans and estimates were approved for the construction of two mining casemates, a cable tank and emplacements for four 3 inch 15 pounder rapid fire guns, two emplacements for 15 pounder rapid fire guns. In 1898 the mines were exploded.

 

In 1901, the disputed land was condemned and work was commenced on other fortifications.

Fortifications similar to the above were constructed elsewhere around Narragansett Bay. Included among these was Fort Wetherill, south of Jamestown, Fort Getty along the west passage and  Fort Greble, also along the west passage. All these were massive monoliths of concrete surrounded by earthworks. For these and other works including Fort Wetherill, Fort Adams was the  parent post. Unlike many other forts along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, at Fort Adams these new works were built outside the early eighteenth century defenses, thus leaving the original intact. This is an unusual feature, in many forts, the concrete works were incorporated into earlier works.

 

After the turn of the century, adaptive use continued at Fort Adams. Some casemates were used as music rooms; others were converted for recreational use.