Contradictions, Misleading Statements and Errors.

An Article by Terry Foenander.

An English gentleman had originally stated, in a letter, dated in March, 2001, to me, that he was the source of the crew members of the CSS Alabama, as shown in William Marvel's volume, and not Marvel himself. The claimant's exact words at that time were, "Can I first say that William Marvel was not the source of the crewmen from the CSS Alabama, I was." Other such claims were shown in a Message Board on the Internet, one posting dated June 6, 2004, when this person claimed that "You have contributed to the Marvel lie that he had knowledge on the Alabama crewmen," a July 22, 2004 statement, "If you wish to quote Marvel, so be it. He copied my work in '93, but I've long since updated it," and a further self complimentary statement in a message at the same Board, dated July 27, 2004, in which he states, "It's my work, under someone else's name." Later this same gentleman contradicted himself, when, on the Civil War Navies Message Board, he stated in a message dated Wednesday, July 28, 2004, "I have never stated that the full roster in Marvel's book is mine, but have fought for the information on the crewmen he included in it as being mine." As I have proven in my article on the source appraisal of the data in Marvel's volume, nearly all the data on the crew members shown in the roster was available from numerous other sources, and if this claimant is trying to claim credit, then he is obviously either a lunatic, or has not seen the data in these other sources. This claimant even went so far as to place, on an Internet site, the following sentence, part of a longer message criticising and condemning those whom he considered as being what he described as "so called U.S. Civil War researchers," "I would like to name those people who have plagiarized my hard work in the past, just to boost their own flagging research. So ----, ----, ---- and Terry Foenander, and many others, if your going to use my work, at least give me the credit for it." Firstly, I never even realised that my basic research was flagging or had even gotten off the ground. The first three names have been omitted to prevent further damage. The claimant accuses others of plagiarism, yet tries to claim credit for the data in the Marvel volume, the vast majority of which is shown in many published sources, and also available at repositories in the U.S. My checks on this have proven, beyond a doubt, that this claimant was only responsible for a very small amount of the data, and that most of the data is available at other published sources, as shown in Marvel's bibliography. And, as I have stated so many times before, I have never been guilty of plagiarism. The word means to take the information of others and claim it as one's own, but this claimant (and accuser) does not seem to understand the meaning of the word. Perhaps he never owned a dictionary in his life. As can be clearly seen at all my web sites, I have properly and correctly cited the sources that provided me with the data, namely William Marvel's volume, and the information provided by others who are correctly named. The claimant also seems unaware that it is quite customary for persons using material from a volume to cite that particular volume, and not the names and repositories used by the author in his work, otherwise all subsequent works will be massively filled with source notes, probably more so than the actual subject content of the book.

Another contradiction was when discussing Samuel Beard Risien, who is indicated as having served on the CSS Alabama. When I stated that it was shown as such in the Confederate Veteran magazine, in 1912, this English claimant stated thus, in a message on the same Civil War Navies Message Board, dated June 6, 2004, "The Confederate Veteran is not proof of a man's service." Note especially these last seven words in his statement, as, in another message at the same Message Board, dated July 26, 2004, he then states, "I doubt the service of Risien on the Alabama, Terry, I don't recall saying I doubt his naval service." A short memory causing a major contradiction. This same short memory is responsible for numerous errors and misleading statements throughout his works, at least one on a major figure of the CSS Alabama, which I have taken the trouble to point out in a previous web page.

A further contradiction is another statement from his March 2001 letter to me, in which he states, almost boastfully (he seems to practise this trait often in all his letters and messages), "Even I can make mistakes, but at least I haven't published my work and will only do so when I've crossed checked everything first." Mind you, this was long after he had already published at least two of his own articles, those on Clarence Randolph Yonge and William Param Brooks, both containing numerous misleading statements and errors. It certainly was a rather shoddy job of checking everything first, if he did so. Even in current articles on crew members of the CSS Alabama, several errors have already been located, and I am sure many more will be uncovered, once I am able to obtain all the proper documentation. The discovery of these further errors proves that he is not practising what he preaches.

On an Internet page, this claimant, who is obviously very desperate for much glory, states thus, in a message dated December 12, 2001, "I would like to name those people who have plagiarized my hard work in the past, just to boost their own flagging research," and then he goes on to name several persons, including this author. Some years later, in a message dated June 3, 2004, at the Civil War Navies Message Board, he makes the contradictory statement, "Terry, you are quick to give people credit when they write to you with information." My understanding of the word "plagiarism" is when one uses the material of another, without placing credit, and thus, claiming full credit for such material. His contradictory statements above indicates that he has no knowledge of the proper definition of the word, "plagiarism." I have always cited the sources of my information, and correctly so, thus absolving myself from any accusations of plagiarism. Anyone making such accusations does not have a proper grasp of the English language, and is obviously ignorant of the meaning of some words in the English dictionary.

This English claimant constantly maligns the name of William Marvel, trying desperately to indicate that Marvel was incapable of any research whatsoever on the crew of the CSS Alabama. [See especially, the claimant's own posting, on the Civil War Navies Message Board, dated June 6, 2004, which states, in part, "You have contributed to the Marvel lie that he had knowledge on the Alabama crewmen."] Yet, this very same claimant released part of a message sent to him by William Marvel, and dated July 11, 1993, which clearly states, in part, "I have two crew lists - one from Sinclair's Two Years on the Alabama and one from the National Archives, which differs slightly," thus proving beyond a doubt that Marvel already had (at that early stage) some data on the crew members, and was not completely clue-less. His attempt to completely deny Marvel any credit for the data on the crew members of the CSS Alabama was also repeated by a member of the UK research group on the American Civil War, thus showing that the claimant has chosen to spread around false information on Marvel.

The statement from the claimant, in another posting on the Civil War Navies Message Board, dated July 26, 2004, that, "You give credit to others, when they did nothing," shows his sometimes absurd disposition, especially since (as shown above) William Marvel himself had stated in a letter to the claimant that he already had the two crew lists of the personnel of the CSS Alabama. Furthermore, in a further statement to the claimant, Marvel had indicated that he was heading on to London and then to Cherbourg, France, for further research. If he did nothing, then Marvel obviously wasted a whole lot of money going directly to these cities, when he could have gotten the information by writing to the facilities at these cities.

The claimant makes numerous other contradictory statements throughout his messages, articles and notes on the Internet, too numerous to include all of them here. In addition, he includes so many misleading statements and errors, not only in his articles online, but also in his messages. Many of these are covered in my web site on the Clarence Randolph Yonge myths. Those covered in this article are only the ones I have been able to find out through the resource material I have at hand. How many others there are at that article, which I am currently unable to check through lack of additional resources is anyone's guess. However, it becomes apparent that these errors and misleading statements are not only at that article but at other sites from the claimant. His article on William Param Brooks includes at least three errors which I was able to spot immediately, through a basic knowledge of the service of Brooks. These include the fact that Brooks was definitely NOT appointed chief engineer while in France, but AFTER the CSS Stonewall had left that nation. When I tried to point out these errors to the claimant, he tried his usual, favorite diversionary and defensive tactics, attempting to throw readers off the track. One such tactic was then to scrutinize my own web pages for errors, and point them out to me. Yet, if he used his common sense, he would most certainly note that I have cited my sources, and a check of these sources would show the errors are at those sources, or from the people who originally supplied me with the information.

Another tactic was originally to blame the errors on other sources or persons. Such was the case with the errors at the Yonge article, which he originally blamed on the Arthur Sinclair publication, Two Years on the Alabama, but when I pointed out that certain dates at his article were incorrect, and that Yonge was never court martialled, but immediately dismissed from service, the claimant immediately claimed that his notes showed the correct dates and that, therefore, the errors were the fault of the web site administrator. Yet, a statement, in error, which indicates that Yonge was court martialled, is of major concern, especially if the web site administrator was at fault. Even his error about Brooks appointment as chief engineer (which he stated as having occurred in France, when, in fact, it occurred at sea) was blamed on a descendant of Brooks. Yet the official appointment papers of Brooks, which are in the collections of the Georgia Historical Society, clearly show when and where he was appointed.

I have found several other important errors and misleading statements, which are contradicted by official papers, such as affidavits of some of the crew of the CSS Alabama, and also by copies of documents which have been acquired through the English General Register Office, and which are already revealing several other important errors, such as the spelling of the surname of George Harwood (which the claimant seems to believe should be spelt as Horwood), his actual birth date, some data on George Yeoman, etc. It is quite obvious that many more errors and misleading statements will come to light as I slowly make acquisition of proper documentation relating to the crew members. Only a few days ago I received a copy of another death certificate which shows another error made by the claimant. All these errors have clearly shown that his data is rather unreliable, and for the correct information, one should instead rely on the official documentation.

Enlarged transcriptions of the names of George Harwood (at right), and his wife, Eliza, showing clearly the surname listed as Harwood, and definitely not "Horwood" as an expert on the crew of the "CSS Alabama" constantly refers to it as.

(Details from the death certificate of George Harwood, obtained from the General Register Office, Great Britain.)

The claimant has been trying to claim credit for much data, not only in the William Marvel volume, but also from the information I have on some of the crew members. For instance, in a message on the Board, dated July 24, 2004, he seriously states, "I may add though, Terry, your not giving credit where it's due on the source of the parents of Yonge in your listing. It either came from my article on the site or his relative, but you won't find his parents' names under the LDS (unless you had it already) or Alabama claims." This shows the claimant's thorough lack of knowledge about what is available on the Internet, what is available in published sources, and what is available at repositories everywhere. I immediately countered this absurd statement of his, by giving him directions to the Search facility at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints web site, where the names of the parents of Clarence Randolph Yonge could be clearly seen by one and all. Only a blind person would miss this altogether. It is fairly obvious that he often sees what is not there, and does not see what is clearly shown at a source, as this was not the first case of his passing over or missing data at a source. When his constant errors, misleading statements and contradictions were pointed out to him, he went so far as to state, in a message dated July 24, 2004, that he had purposely "sent it out with all its faults," and also that he had "sent it out regardless, not updated and possibly full of errors, in an effort to stop people claiming credit for it." All this, mind you, after his original, March, 2001 statement, "Even I can make mistakes, but at least I haven't published my work and will only do so when I've crossed checked everything first." Once again, a contradiction of his own statements. Later tactics of this person includes trying to divert attention by pointing out errors at my own web sites. Yet, even a blind person would see that these errors, if any, were orginally from the sources noted at all my web pages.

After my exposure of the numerous errors in his Yonge article, he stated, in a message dated July 22, 2004, "Now, now, Terry, your coming across like a scorned Sheila over the Yonge article," and mentioned the words, "sour grapes," and "childish." If this was the case, I wonder what his own interpretation of his own statements, placed on the Internet for everyone to see, in December, 2001, should be called: "out of frustration and annoyance, let it be known that I have grown tired of so called U.S. Civil War researchers pinching my 15 year study of tracing what became of the officers and crew of the CSS Alabama," then accusing several persons of plagiarizing his work, and stating that it was done "just to boost their own flagging research." To other correspondents he has made very uncomplimentary statements that others were "looking to ride on the back of Mars to make a name for themselves in the web world," and that they "were all a bunch of self serving egomaniacs, looking for a pat on the back." The statement about Mars was aimed at one other researcher and myself, yet, a thorough check of all my web sites will show that I do not have any particular web page dedicated to Michael Mars. I made queries about Mars, as I have done for several other individual sailors of the Confederate States, mainly because they are mentioned more often in some sources, than are most others.

The claimant often glorifies his work on the CSS Alabama, yet fails to realise constantly (after I had pointed it out to him on a couple of occasions), that there was only one Confederate States Navy vessel of that name. Any other vessel with the name Alabama was either a merchant vessel or an Army transport or troop carrier. None of these other vessels were in the Confederate States Navy, and therefore, to all those who realise the connotations, there was only one CSS Alabama. If he still fails to see the meaning of all these statements, then he should concentrate more on furthering his studies on the Confederate States Navy, instead of ranting, raving, lambasting, condemning, criticising and generally making enemies of everyone else involved in research on the Confederate States Navy. It is rather laughable when he himself states (as in the Board message dated June 4, 2004 to me), "You need to get out more, Terry, your clearly listening to the wrong people," and "You clearly don't know your subject." I certainly don't claim to be any expert on the subject, just an avid student, and very eager to learn more. When someone tries to claim to be an expert on the crew members of the CSS Alabama, and constantly brags and boasts of what knowledge they have on these crew, then rattles on with the names of some of the crew, they should be prepared for the eventual fallout from these statements, and to have their knowledge come under microscopic scrutiny, and, if numerous errors are found in the data submitted by this claimant, then his claims to be knowledgeable on the subject are rather suspect. One example of his numerous boasts was when I advised that I did know of the alias used by Henry Middleton Kernot, and that I had his affidavit showing his place of birth as Great Britain. The immediate boastful retort from the claimant was, "Kernot born in Great Britain. I've got it further than that, Terry." Mind you, this from someone who has admitted researching the subject for 15 years. His faulty memory fails to realise that I have only placed some effort on researching the crew of the CSS Alabama in recent months. Even with all his bragging and boasts he makes all the numerous errors, misleading statements and contradictions that show his mode of operation.

To try and impugn the name of William Marvel, and to try and spread the word around (even a colleague of the claimant had made such claims), that Marvel had "no record" as a researcher on the Confederate States Navy, when it was clearly shown in a 1993 letter from Marvel that he did indeed have at least two, and probably more sources on the CSS Alabama (the two sources mentioned were the Arthur Sinclair volume and the muster roll of the cruiser from the National Archives), is certainly throwing around statements blindly. Even the claimant himself admitted that up to 1995, he himself had no other published sources except for the Sinclair volume.

Finally, I would like to state that if anyone has doubts about the proper sources of the data on the crew of the CSS Alabama, as shown in William Marvel's volume, the bibliography shows the numerous sources used, and a proper check will reveal the correctness of Marvel's citation of his sources. The claimant was only responsible for a minute amount of data, in that volume, on the crew members, and cannot rightfully claim credit for all the data available from all the other published sources, as he has previously tried to do. Additionally, I would also challenge readers to check out the claimant's data, as included in his articles online, relating to Clarence Randolph Yonge, William Param Brooks, and others, from original source material, and it will be clear to all that much of his data is flawed, including some statements that are not shown anywhere else, but within the mind of this claimant. To constantly rely on the data put out by this claimant, as is being done by other study groups, the media and anyone interested in the proper history of the Confederate States Navy, seems to indicate that no one is bothered to verify the information, or to even check basic facts. The lack of citation of sources, perhaps intentionally, at his articles, further hinders such scrutiny. Let the reader beware!!

The current saturation of web sites relating to the Confederate States Navy and the examples of errors at the web page articles relating especially to Clarence Randolph Yonge and William Param Brooks should seriously serve as a major caution that when reading information at a web site, one should always attempt to verify the facts shown therein by also consulting the original sources. If no sources are shown, then the information is obviously quite suspect. Even when sources are shown it pays to go to these sources and check the appropriate data and anything beyond. As was shown by the discredited information at the Yonge article, although the author of that article had stated that Yonge was court martialled, a check of all available sources indicated that this court martial was shown nowhere else except within the fertile imagination of the author. Param Brooks' appointment as chief engineer in France was another example of the facts gone astray, as was the year of birth of George Harwood, and other bits and pieces of data on the crew. I repeat, one last time: "LET THE READER BEWARE."

© Terry Foenander.

August, 2004.