Daniel Atwell (M)
#392851

     Daniel Atwell married Sarah (Unknown).

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Edith Anna Atwood (F)
#376157

     Edith Anna Atwood married Christopher Skagen.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Elctra Atwood (F)
#361644

     Elctra Atwood married Spencer Ketchum.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Ernest Ray Atwood (M)
(c 1894 - 11. Jan. 1968), #422068

     Ernest Ray Atwood was also known as Ray Atwood. Ernest Ray Atwood was born c 1894 at Utah. He married Mada W. Hampton, daughter of Nephi Joseph Hampton and Ethel May Whitehead, c 1929. Ernest Ray Atwood was a barber on 28. Apr. 1930.

Ernest Ray Atwood and Mada W. Hampton appeared on the census of 28. Apr. 1930 at Magna, Salt Lake County, Utah.
Ernest Ray Atwood died on 11. Jan. 1968. He was buried at City Cemetery, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah.

Last Edited=2 Apr 2007

Grace Iona Atwood (F)
(21. Aug. 1889 - Oct. 1961), #403637
Pop-up Pedigree

     Grace Iona Atwood was born on 21. Aug. 1889 at Spring Grove, Green County, Wisconsin. She was the daughter of Robert Evans Atwood and Nellie Iona Martin. Grace Iona Atwood was a civil engineer in 1914. She married Timothy Townsend Cortelyou, son of William Cortelyou and Anna Margaret Martin Jones, on 17. Jun. 1914 at Brodhead, Green County, Wisconsin.

Grace Iona Atwood and Timothy Townsend Cortelyou appeared on the census of 14. Apr. 1930 at Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas,
; real estate value 4,000.00. Grace Iona Atwood resided at at Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas, in 1935. She was the head of Cortelyou-Walz Construction Company in 1935. She died in Oct. 1961 at Pinellas County, Florida, at age 72.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Myrtle Elmira Atwood (F)
#334792

     Myrtle Elmira Atwood married Emmet VanDeventer, son of Andrew Oatha VanDeventer and Susan Anna Vance, on 13. Nov. 1912 at Petersburg, Boone County, Nebraska. Myrtle Elmira Atwood died at Portland, Multnomah County, Oregon.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Robert Evans Atwood (M)
#403686

     Robert Evans Atwood married Nellie Iona Martin.

Last Edited=21 Mar 2006

William L. Aubert (M)
(c 1845 - ), #323705

     William L. Aubert was born c 1845 at Ohio. He married Martha Alice Chapman, daughter of Nathan L. Chapman and Nancy J. Lewis, on 5. Sep. 1887 at Loup City, Sherman County, Nebraska.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Henry Aubley (M)
( - 30. Jul. 1895), #430678

     Henry Aubley married S. Ella Wikoff, daughter of James Wikoff and Rhoda Jane Sutphen, on 24. Jan. 1888. Henry Aubley died on 30. Jul. 1895.

Last Edited=19 Aug 2007

Elizabeth Aubrey (F)
(c 1833 - 14. Mar. 1913), #366717

     Elizabeth Aubrey was also known as Lizzie Aubrey. Elizabeth Aubrey was born c 1833 at Hardin Springs, Hardin County, Kentucky. She married John S Skeeters, son of John H Skeeters and Sarah Aubrey. Elizabeth Aubrey died on 14. Mar. 1913 at Hardin County, Kentucky.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Sarah Aubrey (F)
(c 1789 - bt 1861 - 1870), #366672

     Sarah Aubrey was born c 1789 at Virginia. She married John H Skeeters on 26. Apr. 1818 at Hardin County, Kentucky. Sarah Aubrey died bt 1861 - 1870 at Howe Valley, Hardin County, Kentucky. She was buried at Pleasant Grove Cemetery, Hardin County, Kentucky.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

William A. Aubry (M)
#400087

     William A. Aubry married Sarah Francis Gore.

Last Edited=10 Dec 2005

William Kenneth Aubry (M)
(2. Aug. 1903 - May. 1967), #158599
Pop-up Pedigree

     William Kenneth Aubry was born on 2. Aug. 1903 at New Jersey. He was the son of William A. Aubry and Sarah Francis Gore. William Kenneth Aubry married Jeanne Lockwood c 1921. William Kenneth Aubry married Eleanor Ridgway Taylor, daughter of Frank Edgar Taylor and Anna Ridgeway, in Apr. 1944. William Kenneth Aubry died in May. 1967 at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, at age 63.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Emma Auchenpaugh (F)
#168711

     Emma Auchenpaugh married Luman B. Fuller.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Allen Charles Audet (M)
#431508

     Allen Charles Audet married Rosemarie Gabriella Losch.

Last Edited=5 Sep 2007

Jacqueline Ann Audet (F)
#431511
Relationship=10th cousin 2 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=11th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

Last Edited=5 Sep 2007

Alice Auerbach (F)
#375493

     Alice Auerbach married Jack Hayes.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Jacob Lewis Auerbach (M)
#308258

     Jacob Lewis Auerbach married Crystal Mehetable Johnson, daughter of William Rufus Johnson and Harriet Aurelia Hollingshead, on 22. Nov. 1921.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

(Unknown) Auger (M)
#279799

     (Unknown) Auger married Judith Anne Hansen, daughter of Herbert Hansen and Anne Elizabeth Zisch.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Ellen A. Augspurger (F)
#271736

     Ellen A. Augspurger married John J. Rohman.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Jeanette Augspurger (F)
(15. Aug. 1908 - 12. Nov. 1962), #371709

     Jeanette Augspurger was born on 15. Aug. 1908 at Middletown, Butler County, Ohio. She married Thomas Hill Wilson, son of Howard Alexander Wilson Sr. and Mary Emma Shields. Jeanette Augspurger died on 12. Nov. 1962 at Sacramento, Sacramento County, California, at age 54.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Mary Morgan August (F)
(10. Jan. 1891 - 18. Dec. 1974), #370618

     Mary Morgan August was born on 10. Jan. 1891 at Tyrone, Blair County, Pennsylvania. She married Harry Thomas Eckert, son of William Constance Eckert and Sarah Elizabeth Aikey, on 13. Aug. 1917 at Tyrone, Blair County, Pennsylvania. Mary Morgan August died on 18. Dec. 1974 at Tyrone, Blair County, Pennsylvania, at age 83.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Hannah Augusta (F)
#447639

     Hannah Augusta married William Lockwood.

Last Edited=27 Sep 2008

Debra Augustine (F)
#25391
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=10th cousin 1 time removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=10th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Debra Augustine was the daughter of Sandra A. Burger.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Elizabeth Augustine (F)
#308818

     Elizabeth Augustine married Pieter Cozine, son of Peter Cozine and Willempte Wyckoff, on 18. Apr. 1801 at Readington, Hunterdon County, New Jersey.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Ethel Louise Augustine (F)
(11. Mar. 1892 - 17. Apr. 1990), #349159

     Ethel Louise Augustine was born on 11. Mar. 1892 at Dana, La Salle County, Illinois. She married Walter Augustus Van Wert, son of Clinton Augustus Van Wert and Louisa Potts, in 1915 at Edgewater, Jefferson County, Colorado.

Ethel Louise Augustine and Walter Augustus Van Wert appeared on the census of 6. Jan. 1920 at Denver, Denver County, Colorado.


Ethel Louise Augustine and Walter Augustus Van Wert appeared on the census of 9. Apr. 1930 at Denver, Denver County, Colorado.
Ethel Louise Augustine died on 17. Apr. 1990 at Englewood, Los Angeles County, California, at age 98. She was buried at Fairmont Cemetery, Denver, Denver County, Colorado.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Helen Virginia Augustine (F)
#320481

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Jane Lawrence Augustine (F)
#325060
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=8th cousin of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=9th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Jane Lawrence Augustine was the daughter of Nathaniel W. Augustine.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

John Adolph Augustine (M)
#325058

     John Adolph Augustine married Grace Hill.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

John Augustine Jr. (M)
#25392
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=10th cousin 1 time removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=10th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     John Augustine Jr. was the son of Sandra A. Burger.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Nathaniel W. Augustine (M)
#325057
Pop-up Pedigree

     Nathaniel W. Augustine was the son of John Adolph Augustine and Grace Hill.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Gertrude Augustus (F)
#407964

     Gertrude Augustus married Charles August Wuerffel.

Last Edited=13 Jun 2006

David Aukerman (M)
#385818

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Ermal R. Aukerman (F)
(13. Dec. 1900 - 18. Oct. 1972), #385814

     Ermal R. Aukerman was born on 13. Dec. 1900 at Darke County, Ohio. She married Alonzo Jobes, son of Cornelius Neal Jobes and Elnora Katherine Markley, on 22. Jun. 1920. Ermal R. Aukerman died on 18. Oct. 1972 at Darke County, Ohio, at age 71.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Dousw Aukes (M)
#188615

     Dousw Aukes married Maria Aroutse Viele, daughter of Aernoudt Cornelisen Viele Sr. and Gerritje Gerritse Vermeulen, in 1685.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Douve Aukes (M)
#95673

     Douve Aukes married Suster Bouts c 1690.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Elma Auldridge (F)
(c 1903 - ), #183818

     Elma Auldridge was born c 1903 at Missouri. She married Hobart Royston, son of Charles M. Royston and Florence M. Persinger, on 31. Jul. 1918 at Daviess County, Missouri.

Elma Auldridge and Hobart Royston appeared on the census of 30. Jan. 1920 at Benton Twp., Daviess County, Missouri.


Elma Auldridge and Hobart Royston appeared on the census of 7. Apr. 1930 at Salem Twp., Daviess County, Missouri.

Last Edited=22 Aug 2008

Carl Christopher Edman Aulick (M)
(17. Sep. 1760 - 1. May. 1817), #228176

     Carl Christopher Edman Aulick was born on 17. Sep. 1760 at Festenberg, Germany. He married Margaret Hoots on 1. Jan. 1784. Carl Christopher Edman Aulick died on 1. May. 1817 at Winchester, Frederick County, Virginia, at age 56.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

John Wiley Aulick (M)
(c 1834 - ), #228175
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     John Wiley Aulick was born on 26. Oct. 1831. John Wiley Aulick was born c 1834 at Washington, District of Columbia. He was the son of Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover.

John Wiley Aulick appeared on the census of 10. Jul. 1860 at with his parents, Washington, District of Columbia.

John Wiley Aulick was shown in the census on 10. Jul. 1860 as an engineer.


John Wiley Aulick appeared on the census of 28. Jun. 1870 at with father, Washington, District of Columbia.
He was serving in the U. S. Navy on 28. Jun. 1870. Aulick, John Wiley b. 26 Oct 1831 - d. 19 Nov 1882 51 yrs. R52/90
Aulick. Suddenly on the evening of November 19, 1882 at his residence, No. 911 18th street, J. Wiley Aulick, Esq. son of the late Commodore John H. Aulick, U.S.N. His funeral will take place from St. John's Episcopal Church on Wednesday the 22nd instant at 2 1/2 o'clock p.m. to which friends of the family are invited.
The Evening Star, February 1, 1883
Locals
An inventory of the personal estate of the late J. Wiley Aulick was returned to the probate court
yesterday mounting to $96,563.83.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Julia Aulick (F)
(c 1821 - ), #371554
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Julia Aulick was born c 1821. She was the daughter of Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Mary Aulick (F)
(c 1833 - ), #228172
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Aulick, Mary Cornelia d. 14 Aug 1839 6 yrs. R52/90
Aulick. On Wednesday morning, the 14th instant (Aug. 14), Mary Cornelia, daughter of Captain
J.H. Aulick, United States Navy, aged 6 years and 3 months. The funeral will take place this
morning (Thursday) at 11 o'clock, from the residence of her parents in the Navy Yard. The friends
of the family are respectfully invited to attend without further notice.

Mary Aulick was born c 1833. She was the daughter of Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Mary Aulick (F)
(c 1840 - ), #366571
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Mary Aulick was also known as Mary Dornelia Aulick. Mary Aulick was born c 1833. Mary Aulick was born c 1840 at Maryland. She was the daughter of Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover.

Mary Aulick appeared on the census of 10. Jul. 1860 at with her parents, Washington, District of Columbia.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Ralph Aulick (M)
(c 1840 - ), #228174
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Aulick, Dr. Ralph V. d. 3 Oct 1872 33 yrs. R52/88
The Evening Star, October 4, 1872
Dr. Ralph V. Aulick, aged 33 years, son of Commodore Aulick died suddenly yesterday afternoon
of heart disease. The funeral will take place at 5 o'clock on Saturday from the corner of 18th and I
streets.
The Evening Star, November 2, 1872
The Aulick Will Case
Today, in the case of the contested will of the late Dr. Ralph V. Aulick, the following issues were
made for a jury in the circuit court: 1st, Whether the said Ralph V. Aulick, at the time of signing the
said paper writing purporting to be his last will and testament, was of sound and disposing mind,
and capable of executing a valid deed or contract. 2d. Whether the execution of said paper writing
by the said Ralph V. Aulick was procured by artifice or under influence on the part of the said
Emma T. Aulick or any other person or persons.
The Evening Star, January 2, 1873
Romance in the Circuit Court
The Aulick Will Case
A Secret Marriage and the Husband's Sudden Death
With Will in Favor of the Wife Sustained by the Court
This morning in the circuit court, (Judge Cartter) the case of Aulick agt. Aulick was called. It will
be recollected that Dr. Ralph V. Aulick, a son of Commodore Aulick, died very suddenly at his
father's residence in this city, some months ago, the family believing at the time that he was
unmarried. On the following morning, a young lady, employed in the Treasury department, known
as Miss Oler, on hearing the announcement of his death read from a newspaper, fainted, and it was
soon made known that the deceased was her husband.
In October last the will of the deceased (made in Philadelphia in May last) was filed in the probate
court, by which he left his property--consisting of ten shares of Cincinnati Gas Light company's
as Miss Oler, on hearing the announcement of his death read from a newspaper, fainted, and it was
soon made known that the deceased was her husband.
In October last the will of the deceased (made in Philadelphia in May last) was filed in the probate
court, by which he left his property--consisting of ten shares of Cincinnati Gas Light company's.

Ralph Aulick was born c 1840 at Washington, District of Columbia. He was the son of Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover.

Ralph Aulick appeared on the census of 10. Jul. 1860 at with his parents, Washington, District of Columbia.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Virginia Aulick (F)
(c 1831 - ), #346682
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Aulick, Virginia d. 10 Jan 1852 21 yrs. R52/91
Aulick. On Saturday morning, the 10th instant, after a few days illness, Virginia, the youngest
daughter of Com. Aulick. The friends of the family are invited to attend the funeral on Monday at
12 o'clock from the house of Mr. Williams, on the avenue, near 17th street.

Virginia Aulick was born c 1831. She was the daughter of Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Commodore John Henry Aulick (M)
(28. Jun. 1790 - 27. Apr. 1873), #58008
Pop-up Pedigree

     Commodore John Henry Aulick was also known as J. H. Aulick. Commodore John Henry Aulick was born on 28. Jun. 1790 at Winchester, Frederick County, Virginia. He was the son of Carl Christopher Edman Aulick and Margaret Hoots. Commodore John Henry Aulick began military service on 15. Nov. 1809; entered the U. S. Navy as a midshipman from Maryland. He resided at at Baltimore, Maryland, in 1816. He was a lieutenant in the U. S. Navy in 1816. He married Mary Francis Conover, daughter of James Conover and Margaret Anderson, on 14. Sep. 1819 at Sussex County, New Jersey.
Commodore John Henry Aulick was shown in the census on 20. Jul. 1850 as a Captain in the U. S. Navy.


Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover appeared on the census of 20. Jul. 1850 at Ward 2, Washington, District of Columbia.

Commodore John Henry Aulick was shown in the census on 10. Jul. 1860 as a Commander in the U. S. Navy.


Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover appeared on the census of 10. Jul. 1860 at Washington, District of Columbia.
United State Official Register 1861
Naval List-Senior Flag Officer-Captains
Active List 4,500.00 per annum

Aulick, John H. Born Virginia, Appointed from Maryland Present duty or station Leave of Absence.

Commodore John Henry Aulick appeared on the census of 28. Jun. 1870 at Washington, District of Columbia,
; real estate value 40,000.00 personal property 100,000.00.
Commodore John Henry Aulick was shown in the census on 28. Jun. 1870 as serving in the U. S. Navy.
He died on 27. Apr. 1873 at Washington, District of Columbia, at age 82. Aulick, Commodore John H. d. 27 Apr 1873 81 yrs. R52/93
Aulick. On Sunday, April 27 at 12:10 a.m., Commodore John H. Aulick, U.S.N. in the 85th year of his age. The funeral will take place from his late residence, corner of 18th and I streets on Tuesday, April 29 at 12 m.
The Evening Star, April 28, 1873
Death of Commodore Aulick
Commodore John H. Aulick, U.S.N., died yesterday at his residence in this city, corner of 18th and I streets, in the 85th year of his age. The deceased was a Virginian by birth, but was appointed an officer in the navy from Maryland Nov. 15, 1809. In 1812 he served on the Enterprise in all her actions, and carried her captures, the Boxer, and the privateers Flyer and Mars, into port. He afterwards served on the Saranac, Ontario, Constitution, and Brandywine, and was in command of the Washington Navy Yard from 1843 to 1846. He returned from his last cruise in 1853, and has since 1864 been on the retired list. His funeral will take place from his late residence tomorrow, at 12 m.
The Evening Star, April 29, 1873
The Funeral of Commodore Aulick took place at noon today from his late residence, corner of 18th and I streets. There were present the Secretary of the Navy, Admirals Porter, Goldsborough, and Powell; Commodores Almy and Rodgers; Commander Kane, and a large number of naval officers at present in Washington, all in full dress uniform; General Sherman, Col. Audenried, of his staff; General M.C. Meigs, Col. Dunn, and many other officers of the army, besides a large concourse of civilians. The remains of the Commodore were encased in a magnificent burial casket, decorated with the American flag and an anchor of beautiful flowers. The Rev. W.F. Watkins, rector of the Church of the Epiphany, read the burial service of the Episcopal church, after which the procession moved down the avenue to the Congressional cemetery in the following order; Batallion of the marine corps, (headed by the full marine band) Capt. Tilton, commanding, with arms reversed and drums muffled; the hearse escorted by a guard of honor, consisting of eight sailors from the United States steamer Tallapoosa, under command of Mate C.H. Cleveland; carriages containing the pall-bearers, consisting of Admirals Porter, Goldsborough and Powell, Commodore Rodgers, Major Slack; and Dr. Eversfield, Maj. A.S. Nicholson, of the marine corps, had charge of the funeral arrangements.
The National Intelligencer, August 23, 1845
Letter from Captain Aulick, U.S. Navy
Navy Yard, Washington, August 19, 1845
Dear Sir: the accompanying lithographic likeness of our enterprising countryman, Mr. William Wheelwright, who first introduced steam navigation in the Pacific Ocean, was sent to me a short time since by an American gentleman residing in Valparaiso, with a request that I "would have it placed in some public institution of this capital, as that of a man who is an honor to his country, and who is likely to reap no other benefit from it than such fame as his countrymen may accord to him."
From the inscription beneath the likeness it will be seen that the portrait from which this lithograph is taken was obtained by order and at the expense of the commercial community of Valparaiso, and placed in the Exchange of that city as a testimonial of esteem for his character, and admiration of his merits.
Although Mr. Wheelwright has been for many years a sojourner in foreign lands, and was compelled to resort to foreign capitalists for means to accomplish his undertaking, after having failed in his efforts to induce those of his own country to engage in it, he has lost none of his native love of country. From a long personal acquaintance and intimacy with him, I think I can safely say that a more warm-hearted and patriotic American does not live in the land of his birth.
If you shall be of opinion with me that his likeness is not unworthy of a place in the "National Institute", I beg it may be so honored. With great respect, your obedient servant.
J.H. Aulick
F. Markoe, Esq.
Corresponding Secretary, National Institute.

Henry another son, was Commodore Aulick of the U.S. Navy during the early part of the 19th Century. He had several children, all dead, one being Richmond Aulick, who was Lieut. Comdr. in the Navy when he died. Frederick Aulick, the third son, lived and died in Winchester an old man. His wife was a Miss Smith. She was the mother of James and Alberta. The latter became Mrs. Kuhnert, the wife of a German professor of music. She survives her husband. George Aulick, the fourth son, married Mary Crebs (Crepts). Her father was Conrad Crepts. He was a native of Hesse-Cassell, Germany; and claimed that he was one of the Hessian soldiers connected with the British Army. Geo Aulick's children were Eliza, Cordelia, Edwin, George who married and went to California, was the founder of the town of Modesta, the citizens of which honored his memory by the erection of an imposing monument. The next son, Charles E., is Mr.
Eugene Aulick, the extensive florist, living in the handsome property on South Braddock Street. He married Miss "Reb" Kreemer, daughter of James and
Annie Kreemer. They have two children, Mary C. and Charles E. Another son of George Aulick was Hendren Aulick, generally known as Ernest, Surgeon in the U.S. Navy. He had won distinction for his services, when his untimely death in 1881 cut short his career..."



"Numerous and Insurmountable Obstacles":
John Henry Aulick on the Far China Station
A History Honors Thesis

By:
Midshipman 1/c Stephen D. Chivers, Class of 2001
Professor Craig L. Symonds, Advisor
U.S. Naval Academy
Annapolis, Maryland

"I should like nothing better then to be down on those fellows chop, chop!"
-Commodore John Henry Aulick, 1852

In February of 1852, Commodore John Henry Aulick arrived in Hong Kong in command of the new paddle-wheel steamer U.S.S. Susquehanna after an 18,000-mile cruise from Norfolk that had occupied a full eight months. In addition to taking command of the rather grandly-named two-ship East India Squadron, Aulick was preparing to lead his command to the mysterious island empire of Japan in the hope of opening that country to western trade. It was a mission he had proposed to Secretary of the Navy William A. Graham in 1850 and he now looked forward to its imminent fulfillment. But only a week after his arrival on station, Aulick received new orders from the Secretary of the Navy: he was to stand fast in Hong Kong and await relief as commanding officer.

Surprised, confused, and eventually angered by these unexpected orders, Aulick was further astounded by another set of orders that arrived a week later. These came via the State Department Consul in Canton, and they ordered him to proceed with his squadron to Japan as originally planned. Graham's orders bore a more recent date, but Aulick clung to the hope that he could clear up the confusion surrounding his proposed relief and proceed with his original orders.
For more then a year, Aulick fought the orders removing him from command --even as his physical health deteriorated- but in the end the struggle mastered him. In 1853 he surrendered his command and returned to America a beaten man. He achieved a pyrrhic victory of sorts when the Navy officially cleared him of any wrong doing in October. But that same year, Matthew C. Perry won professional acclaim and historic distinction by concluding a treaty with Japan.

Aulick's personal and professional dilemma, as well as his behavior, offers a window into the world of squadron command during the mid-19th century. On the one hand, it illuminates the near sovereignty of a naval squadron commander operating thousands of miles from his own country in the age before telegraph or radio. As commodore of the East India Squadron, Aulick dealt with various European rivals, foreign dignitaries, merchants from every corner of the globe, Manchu Chinese officials, and kept a weather eye out for Chinese junks (both compliant merchants and bloodthirsty pirates). In addition he received supplications from American diplomats overseas who tended to view him as their personal cop-on-the-beat, as well as from American merchants who expected him to respond to their nearly-continuous calls for protection.

But while the American Consul in Canton, a man with the unlikely name of Peter Parker was the putative representative of American authority in the Far East, it was Aulick's squadron that was the living embodiment of American power on the Far China Station. On the other hand, Aulick was considerably less sovereign within the highly personal and politicized world of the Navy's high command. In a service with 700 officers of all ranks, there was not only an understood set of professional values, there was also a fierce rivalry for command opportunities. This was especially true in a Navy which boasted only 34 ships and six squadron commands, but which had some 68 Captains and 97 Commanders to fill the available positions.¹ As powerful and sovereign as he seemed to local observers in Hong Kong, Aulick would be undone in part by the poisonous rivalry between senior officers of the navy. A forty-one year veteran of the U.S. Navy, Aulick had almost literally grown up in the service. Having entered the Navy as a Midshipman in 1810 at the age of 20, he accepted the value system of the nineteenth century officer corps which held personal honor in the highest regard. This was a value system in which personal honor was the most valued coin. As historian

¹Charles Oscar Paullin, History Of Naval Administration, (Annapolis, M.D.: U.S. Naval
Institute Press, 1968), 239. (first published as a collection of articles in U.S. Naval Institute
Proceedings)

Charles Oscar Paullin has noted:
"The sense of personal honor among the officers of the Old Navy was so excessive and extravagant that it was often absurd... On the Mediterranean, Brazil, and Pacific stations our officers often fought with foreigners, and especially with foreign officers. At home they sometimes engaged in bouts with civilians." As Aulick rose through the ranks, he fought numerous duels, particularly while serving as a young Lieutenant on the Mediterranean station in the 1820's. This was a decade in which "dueling was quite common," especially among junior officers. As Paullin has noted, "more duels were fought during these years than during all the others of the Navy's history." The value of personal honor was thus embedded in young Aulick during his formative years, and throughout the duration of his time on station in China it would prove his primary concern when dealing with higher authority.² Aulick also knew that the internal politics of the Navy Department were in complete disarray. Naval Secretary after Secretary were appointed by Whig and Democratic presidents from 1812 to 1852 solely to implement administration policies for expansion or retrenchment of the U.S. Navy. The Navy Department was too small and understaffed -the department's entire staff numbered only 30 men in the 1840's- to seriously examine the needs of the nation in terms of Naval policy. Because of this, "The navy was more or less run by cliques...the inferior officers accused their superiors of applying or withholding the laws of the navy according to the dictates

² Ibid, 193.
of convenience and prejudice." In a Navy divided against itself, it was these cliques that largely determined which officers appeared on the Secretaries' preferred list for command, and which were quietly deposited in shore commands and bureaus. Aulick knew that many of the younger officers in his own squadron looked upon him with contempt and believed that he was too old to exercise effective command, indeed, that officers of his age and rank impeded the flow of promotions. The quarter-deck, many young officers fondly pointed out, was not the place for the "lean and slippered pantaloon" of old age.³

Such views also hindered the Navy's ability to deal effectively with a Congress that grew increasingly interventionist throughout Aulick's career. In the early 1840's, Congress led a charge to discontinue the daily ration of alcohol aboard Naval vessels. Despite opposition from many in the Navy, in 1842 Congress reduced the alcohol rations for officers and seamen alike to only one- fourth of a pint. Another social revolution occurred in 1850 when Congress banned flogging in the Navy. Despite a fierce campaign of opposition from officers, administrators, and enlisted men alike -all of whom felt flogging to be a manly punishment from which a true seafaring man should not shrink- the House and Senate passed bills banning flogging in the Navy. For officers the effects were a devastating loss of discipline afloat and "numerous complaints reached the Navy Department of insubordination and serious irregularities among the seamen... The number of desertions increased, and many good seamen refused to enlist."4 This occurred just as Aulick was preparing to begin his cruise to the Far East, and in his view the ill-effects were made worse by the fact that Congress had not thought to implement other punishments in place of flogging.

3Ibid, 174-175, 191, 234.
4Ibid, 233-234.

The Navy had also changed in terms of its diplomatic role. When Aulick took command of the East India Squadron he was 62 years old. He had cut his teeth in a Navy that had known only sails and functioned mostly in single-ship operations. During his career, he had fought in two wars (1812 and Mexican), negotiated several treaties and diplomatic agreements, commanded numerous vessels ranging from schooners to frigates, spent nearly 24 years at sea, and endured many other tumultuous experiences. As his career progressed he saw the steady rise in involvement and prestige of the United States in world affairs. At the start of his career, despite some limited success against the Barbary states in the early part of the century, America had not attempted to project power overseas. National policy goals abroad consisted of promoting international commerce and defending established trading relationships. Yet by the 1850's, in the wake of the successful war against Mexico, America was already beginning to seek a more prominent role for itself in the international arena. After witnessing the success of the British and French in establishing favorable trade relations with China, the U.S. sought to expand its own export markets in Asia as well. Lacking the colonial assets or force of arms of the European powers, America relied on diplomacy to do this.⁵
American Naval officers were frequently used for diplomatic negotiations. In many respects, Naval officers represented America's principle diplomatic tool in the nineteenth century. Unlike their foreign service counterparts, U.S. Navy Commodores moved from nation to nation on a monthly or even weekly basis. This mobility required them to continually adapt themselves to new environments and cultures as they encountered them. Their training as mariners reinforced in them the ideals of reciprocity between host and guest, and the importance of maintaining an
⁵Thomas Bailey, The Art of Diplomacy. (New York: Meredith Publishing, 1968), 71-76.

even keel in the balance of power in a region. In the nineteenth century, it was therefore common practice for the Executive Branch to entrust delicate negotiations to naval officers abroad.₆ Prior to the widespread introduction of steam and the telegraph, these Commodores formed the backbone of American overseas presence. They had the firepower and mobility needed to deal with regional crises, and they knew it. Even their very title - Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Forces- lent them an air of legitimacy that State Department Consuls could only dream of. The notion of being a law unto themselves was the rule rather then the exception. As Commodore David Porter once noted a Commodore on station was,"the little tyrant who struts his few fathoms of scoured plank; a solitary being in the midst of the ocean."⁷ Old Naval Commodores had their own notions of dignity and proper conduct between superiors and subordinates. It was not uncommon for Commodore's to associate with officers through formal correspondence only, despite being present aboard the same vessel. The case of Commodore John Henry Aulick however exposes some of the practical limits on a Commodore's authority and illuminates the changing nature of naval command and American diplomacy in the 1850's. By the middle of the nineteenth century it was not nearly enough that an officer should be "a capable mariner...gentlemen of liberal education, refined manners, punctilious courtesy, and the nicest sense of personal honor." Naval leaders needed to be politically adept, connected, and opportunistic in their approaches to senior officials. The squadron commander's duties had grown to such an extent that it was not enough for him to be an accomplished military leader or diplomat abroad. In the new rubric, success required a high

6Ibid, 248.
7Paullin, 191.

level of technological competence and political shrewdness to overcome the fierce rivalries within the Navy Department. An officer without strong advocates in Washington could find himself quickly in disfavor and so far removed from the communications loop as to become expendable. When Aulick took command of the East India Squadron in April of 1851, it had but one vessel: the newly commissioned U.S.S. Susquehanna. This frigate was to usher in the era of dual steam and sail propulsion for the U.S. Navy in global operations. Her sails were equal to that of a Constitution-class vessel, but her boilers were designed to enhance her mobility in ship-to-ship combat. Her great length (some 257 feet) and displacement (nearly 2500 tons) were intended to make her ideal for long voyages. Yet there were severe limitations to the vessel. Despite her advanced design, the side-wheeled steamer could only make 3,500 miles on a full load of coal. In addition, no one had thought to design a better way to coal the ship then simply having the sailors hoist individual bags over the side and into the bunkers. It took some 10 days of heavy labor by the ship's compliment to coal some 380 tons into the ship. In Aulick's opinion Susquehanna was the wrong vessel with which to travel to east Asia; nearly half a world away from the nearest American port or secure coal supply.⁸ Yet the problems with the Susquehanna also extended below-deck into the steam propulsion plant. The organization and construction of the steam frigate's engineering spaces
were flawed. The boilers and engines were remarkably inefficient, her paddle-wheels were ill-⁸ Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, September 27, 1851, U.S. Navy Department, Letters Received by the Secretary of the Navy from Commanding Officers of the East India Squadron, 1841-1861. Reel
⁷. Naval Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library, National Archives, Record Group 45, Washington D.C. Hereafter cited as: CommandingOfficer's Letters.

constructed, and her draft too slight to allow the paddles the chance to remain submerged in heavy seas. Despite being some 30 feet of diameter, only six feet of the paddle-wheel ever reached the water! As early as June, Susquehanna's chief engineer was writing the department of the Navy complaining of ill-fitting pipes, leaky boilers, and poor condensers.9 Soon after the ship got underway with full steam, it was discovered that the boilers had been bolted together improperly and leaked steam directly into the engine compartment whenever the ship was cruising at high speeds (9 knots). Worse, the Susquehanna's main steam line was laid directly below her mainmast. Although the steady speed of nine knots through the water made Susquehanna faster
then the average frigate, the time required to coal the ship easily negated the gain in speed.¹⁰ Aulick's flagship was also in very poor shape in terms of personnel. Her large size meant that Susquehanna possessed not only a complex engine configuration, but also the sails of a full-size frigate. Yet Aulick was rather disturbed to learn that the ship's crew was short some 50 seamen and petty officers. A comparable frigate of the day would have had a full compliment of 430 sailors and 50 Marines. Yet Susquehanna had only 270 men and 40 marines.¹¹ Even when Susquehanna eventually received the requested additional petty officers, the sail-handling

9 Chief Engineer Archbold to Bureau of Construction, Equipment, and Repairs, June 8, 1851, Commodore John Henry Aulick Papers, 1810-1874. Box 5, Vol. 17. United States Naval Academy Special Collection, Record Group 336, Annapolis, M.D. Hereafter cited as: Aulick Papers.

10 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, August 2, 1851. Commanding Officers Letters, Reel 6. National Archives.
11 Captain Inman to Navy Department, January 23, 1851. Letters Received by the Secretary of the Navy from Captains, 1805-1861. Reel 347 Naval Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library, National Archives, Record Group 45, Washington D.C..Hereafter cited as: Captain's Letters.

department of the ship was only half the size of that found on a sail frigate. Yet the most serious problems with the steamer would reveal themselves upon the seas. En route to Rio de Janeiro, the Susquehanna encountered rough weather. Within a few days the topmasts began to show signs of giving way. Eventually the foremast and mainmast sprang free of their footings within the ship, due to the tremendous strain placed on the inferior materials anchoring them below deck. Problems with the ship's engines and boilers continued as well, with the added difficulty that the high seas in the South Atlantic often prevented the paddle- wheels from remaining submerged.12 By the time the ship reached Rio de Janeiro, Aulick found himself thousands of miles from U.S. territory in command of a technological monstrosity which could not reliably go to sea without serious repairs. In fact, Aulick's counterpart in command of the Brazil Squadron --Commodore McKeever- commented, "she [Susquehanna] is a total failure...I would not think of attempting to proceed around the Cape of Good Hope in her."¹³

McKeever's suggested that Aulick send Susquehanna home and await the sloop U.S.S. Plymouth to convey him to Hong Kong. Instead through the good graces of the Brazilian government the dry dock in Rio de Janeiro agreed to repair the ship. Unfortunately the best estimates put the time required for the
needed changes at six weeks. Aulick decided that the delay would have to be endured because the Susquehanna could not put to sea again safely in her disgraceful state. Yet as one of Aulick's problems was nearing resolution, another became untenable.

12Chief Engineer Archbold to Bureau of Construction, Equipment, and Repairs, September 27, 1851. Aulick Papers, Box 5, Vol. 17, United States Naval Academy.

13Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, September 22, 1851. Aulick Papers, Box 5, Vol. 17, United States Naval Academy.


It was during the stopover in Rio that Aulick's relationship with Susquehanna's commanding officer collapsed. By virtue of his posting as squadron commander, Aulick bore the rank of Commodore. The relationship of a squadron's flag officer with ship's commanding officers was somewhat ill-defined in the mid-nineteenth century. Conflict often arose because the ship's commanding officer was responsible for the vessel and personnel under his command, as
well as daily operations, while the Commodore was responsible for the execution of the mission and the overall welfare of the squadron. Yet if the two officers refused to uphold their ends of the arrangement, little could be accomplished.

The commanding officer of the steamer Susquehanna was Captain William Inman. A veteran of nearly 30 years naval service, Inman was many years Aulick's junior. He apparently resented the fact that Aulick's son Wily -himself a Midshipman-- was on board. But in addition, Inman found many other things to complain about. He wrote numerous letters to the Navy Department seeking lists of orders and manuals governing the duties of squadron commanders aboard embarked vessels. He felt it was his duty to inform the Department that Aulick had twice countermanded his orders in front of junior officers, thus severely hampering his command authority^.14 Inman also complained that Aulick had ordered him to appoint one of the coxswains as a musician, for the purposes of completing the ship's musical compliment. He therefore wrote a letter to "ask the department whether the ratings of the crew proper of this vessel are entrusted to my direction or to the order of the Commander-in-Chief [Aulick]."¹⁵

14 Captain Inman to Secretary Graham, July 22, 1851. Captain's Letters, Reel 348,National Archives.
15 Captain Inman to Secretary Graham, August 8, 1851, Captain's Letters, Reel 348,National Archives.

Two incidents in particular convinced Aulick that he could not trust Inman to execute his duties. The first was Inman's refusal to allow his own clerk -Mr. Heyvel-- to assist Wily in the execution of his duties. Inman reported to Aulick that if his son was to be embarked aboard in the assigned billet of Commodore's clerk he ought to be able to adequately perform the task without help. This response infuriated Aulick, who sent Inman a heated letter in which he reminded his
flag captain in no uncertain terms that the Commodore could give orders to any person under his command. Aulick also noted that Inman had several persons on board listed as 'supernumerary' whom he had not yet seen fit to train for proper billeting, which was all Aulick wanted for his son.¹⁶ The straw that broke the camel's back was not long in coming. In late September Aulick began to audit the ship's ledger, when he noted that a sum of $1,300 was missing from the accounts. Upon further investigation he discovered that Inman had distributed those funds to eighteen members of the ship's company who "were either in debt or had nothing due them at the time." Regulations specified that ship's funds could not be distributed in advance to crew members or officers. Given their strained relationship, Aulick decided he would not look the other way on such an impropriety. He wrote to Inman that he was relieved as the Susquehanna's commanding officer and ordered him to return to the United States. The Squadron sailed from Rio de Janeiro on September 27, 1851 without her flag Captain^.17

16Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, September 21, 1851, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives.
17Ibid.

After departing Rio for the Cape of Good Hope, Susquehanna was battered mercilessly by the elements. Aulick reported that due to the lateness of the season and the extreme southern latitude, the ship was hit with "seas higher then any I have ever known before- causing the ship to roll and plunge to such a degree that frequently one wheel was eight or ten feet entirely clear of the water."¹⁸ Yet thanks to the quality of the refit in Rio, no major damage ensued to the ship or her company. Susquehanna reached the Cape, where she took on more coal and Aulick was able togather more news about ports ahead of him from passing ships. Aulick's first diplomatic encounter was with the Caliphate of Zanzibar. He had been charged in his original orders to deliver a letter to the Sultan from President Fillmore and attempt to restore good relations. In many ways, Aulick's stopover in Zanzibar would be a dress rehearsal for his forthcoming mission to Japan. From the U.S.S. Dale Aulick learned that the political circumstances in Zanzibar were precarious. He wrote to the Secretary of the Navy that he was concerned his mission could not succeed because, "the chief of authority there is deemed untrustworthy."¹⁹ When coaling was completed at the Cape, Susquehanna departed with best possible speed to reach Zanzibar before the situation deteriorated further. While approaching Zanzibar up the east coast of Africa, Aulick received more news from a passing southbound mail packet that the Sultan of Zanzibar had not yet returned from a visit to Muscat. Although Aulick's orders specifically directed him to deliver a letter from President Fillmore to the Sultan himself, the Commodore decided that to delay his visit on a mere

18 Commodore Aulick to Secretary of the Navy Graham, October 17, 1851, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 7, National Archives.
19Ibid.

technicality would put American interests at risk in the region. The Commodore was facing a culture historically closed to the west without longstanding diplomatic relations with the United States, and he had no accurate firsthand information on which to base an initial opinion. When the Susquehanna arrived off the coast of Zanzibar on December 5, 1851, there was no formal recognition of her arrival: no salute, and no greeting party. Aulick learned that the American Consul had departed the station. Charge d' Affairs Ward had become so disgusted with the refusal of the local leadership to properly render honors to the American flag, that he had filed a letter of protest and returned to the United States. The Commodore immediately realized that this situation was changed dramatically and that his original orders had been overtaken by events. He drafted a letter to three American merchants ashore asking for their aid to determine the exact diplomatic conditions there. In their reply, the merchants informed Aulick that the U.S. Consul had returned to the United States over a dispute with the Sultan's eldest son -Crown Prince Kahlid- over when the colors of each nation should be saluted and when they should be hauled down. The merchants claimed "the sultan to be incapable of offering an intentional insult to our Country or flag...we have never been molested in any way and in all our personal intercourse with him, he is always kind and affable and we have ready access to him."²⁰ Although Aulick did not have any knowledge of the treaty obligations or agreements between the United States and Zanzibar (he would not obtain them until reaching Hong Kong in mid-February 1852), he decided the

20 American Merchants Association of Zanzibar to Commodore Aulick, December 5, 1851,Aulick Papers, Box 5, Vol. 17, United States Naval Academy.


uncertainty of the situation required immediate intervention on his part.²¹ Yet faced with conflicting reports of the conduct and intentions of officials ashore, Aulick decided that his only viable course of action was to land and determine them himself. Aulick therefore wrote a letter to the Prince of Zanzibar asking for a meeting aboard the Susquehanna for an exchange of formal diplomatic letters and courtesies. The Prince agreed, and when the two finally met on December 6, 1851, they established an immediate personal relationship. From the outset, Aulick instructed his officers and crew to be extremely attentive to all diplomatic courtesies and honors to be rendered. The size and smartness of the Susquehanna was not lost upon Prince Kahlid and he soon extended Aulick a gracious invitation to his personal palace in the hopes of "restoring friendly ties between our two great nations."²² Ashore, Prince Kahlid extended full honors to Aulick and offered him the gift of a fine Arabian stallion. The Commodore politely refused the horse, but did accept the fresh fruits and vegetables the Prince offered for his crew. After several hours of tours and visits, Aulick broached the subject of restoring diplomatic ties between the United States and Zanzibar. Kahlid told Aulick that the former Consul to Zanzibar had not been a very diplomatic person. He had insisted that the American colors be saluted by gunfire every morning they were raised, and he had refused to discuss any issue until that one was resolved.23 Eventually Kahlid's father had grown weary of these demands. Aulick explained to Kahlid that salutes and honors of the colors

21 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, February 20, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 7, National Archives.
22 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, December 8, 1851, Ibid.
23 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, December 11, 1851, Ibid.

is standard procedure among nations, but that daily cannon salutes were not necessary. Determined to restore good relations, Aulick proposed a formal exchange of national honors the next morning when colors were raised aboard the Susquehanna. The American flag would be raised first, followed immediately by Zanzibar's. The fort ashore and Susquehanna would exchange cannon salutes in alternate volleys until 21 guns had been fired by each side. The two men further agreed that on national days of celebration -July 4th for the Americans- each nation would fire a full salute to honor the other. In terms of naval honors, it was decided that Zanzibar would salute first upon sighting an American warship offshore, and the American warship would return the salute and await a visiting official from Zanzibar before taking any further action. In all these decisions, Aulick played the role of chief negotiator as well as squadron
commander. Aulick also appointed the senior American merchant, John F. Wells, as consul pro-tempore, for the purpose of establishing a diplomatic base in the capital. On the morning of December 7th, 1851 the salutes were exchanged without incident, and the American Consulate established ashore.²⁴

When some months later, Secretary of State Daniel Webster learned of these negotiations, he wrote to praise Aulick for a job well done. Webster was directed by the President to inform him "of his entire approval of the firm and judicious manner in which you have discharged the delicate and important trusts confided in your care."²⁵ Aulick's experience and diplomatic ability enabled him to smooth over a very rough situation and derive a positive result on behalf of his

24 Ibid.
25 Secretary Webster to Commodore Aulick, April 9, 1852. Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18.United States Naval Academy.

nation. In this instance Aulick successfully fulfilled his dual role as ambassador and military liaison. By virtue of his rank and authority, he had appointed an American Consul ashore and provided him with a small cannon and equipment for the establishment of a permanent diplomatic mission in Zanzibar. During the Susquehanna's voyage from Zanzibar to the Far East, Aulick concerned himself primarily with two issues: keeping the ship's coal bunkers well stocked, and showing off the Susquehanna to foreign representatives. In Ceylon he had to buy coal at a 25% markup from suppliers who recognized that he had no real choice; at Panay in the East Indies, he had to buy coal from the British East India Company since no local sources could be found.²⁶In addition however, Aulick enjoyed those occasions when he could show off the Susquehanna to visitors. He described the circumstances to Navy Secretary Graham: "We were...literally crowded every day...with all descriptions of visitors.

Such has been the case indeed wherever we have touched. All are received courteously, and properly attended to. Every part of the ship is thrown open to their inspection. She has been the admiration and wonder of every place--not excepting even the English ports. So large and splendid a war steamer they had never before seen. And it is easy to perceive that they leave us with more exalted ideas of our national power and greatness than they before entertained. The effect on our commercial interests alone of displaying this

26 Commodore Aulick to Mr. Touynam, Ceylon, December 26, 1851, and Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, December 26, 1851, both in Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.

noble ship in these remote seas will, in my opinion, be of more value to the nation then the cost of twenty such vessels."²⁷Indeed as the voyage progressed, Aulick's initial displeasure for taking the Susquehanna all the way from Norfolk to Canton faded. By the time the Susquehanna reached Hong Kong on February 5, 1852, Aulick was ready to perform his duties on station, and begin conducting the business of his nation. Along with three other American Navy ships in the region --the sloops Marion, Saratoga, and Plymouth-- and in firm control of his post as Commander-in-Chief of the East India Squadron, Aulick had a healthy crew and a refurbished flagship to augment these forces. In a sign of positive relations between the Naval and State departments, the US charge d' Affairs in Canton Peter Parker invited Aulick to "make the House of Legation my home on arrival."²⁸ From Parker, Aulick also received a
package of official documents from the President and Secretary of the Navy. These included letters from the State Department for Aulick to proceed to Japan "for the purpose of negotiating a treaty between the U.S. and that government" and a letter from the President dated 30th May authorizing him "to negotiate a treaty between the United States and the Emperor of Japan."29 Yet against this backdrop of ever-better news and increasing responsibility on his part, Aulick two

27Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, December 26, 1851, Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.
28Commodore Aulick to U.S. Charge d' Affairs Canton Peter Parker, February 10, 1852, Ibid.
29Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, February 20, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives.

stunning letters from Secretary of the Navy Graham that would end his tenure as Commodore of the East India Squadron and deny him the opportunity to fulfill his ambitions of opening Japan to American interests. The first letter was dated November 17, 1851 and arrived in February. In it Graham informed the Commodore that "very grave implications [have been] cast upon your character" by some person who had accompanied Aulick on his trip to Rio de Janeiro. Specifically, the unnamed accuser alleged that Aulick had misled a passenger on board, the Chevalier d. Macedo, top believe that Aulick himself was to pay for his travel and mess expenses onboard the Susquehanna, instead of the U.S. Government. Graham also implied that Macedo had not been afforded the appropriate care due a man of his rank while embarked. Although the letter did not name the source directly, it did mention that the complaint had first been received by Secretary of State Daniel Webster, and then forwarded to Graham. Aulick saw at once that the charges against him could have only come from someone on board the Susquehanna during the passage from Norfolk to Rio.³⁰ Commodore Aulick noted his "great surprise and regret that the department would have thought it proper to act in this matter upon exparte information...as if I were guilty of the conduct imputed to me." He noted that his command had "just succeeded against numerous and almost insurmountable obstacles in bringing the Susquehanna, on her experimental trip, to this distant part of the globe" only to find their commanding officer forced to stop all operations and address false accusations against his conduct.³¹ Aulick could not understand how the accuser's claim that

30 Secretary Graham to Commodore Aulick, November 17, 1851, Aulick Papers. Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.
31 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, February 17, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives.

Macedo had been led to believe that the Commodore was paying for his meals in order to curry favor could be thought truthful, and then be used against him in so drastic a fashion. It was particularly frustrating to Aulick's that while the Secretary knew the identity of the accuser, but refrained from relaying that information to Aulick. All his experience and training in the Navy taught Aulick to confront accusers in a straightforward fashion, and it was extremely frustrating and disgusting to him that he was denied this opportunity. Aulick immediately sought the support of his officers. In a series of letters to the wardroom Aulick asked each of them describe their understanding of the situation, and if they ever understood him to imply that he was footing the Chevalier's mess and lodging bills onboard the Susquehanna. All the officers affirmed that they knew that the Chevalier had been a guest of the United States Government and not Aulick's personal guest. The purser noted that he himself had filed the order with Aulick's signature stating that the Chevalier was a guest of the American government, but that he had also overheard Captain Inman addressing a rumor that Macedo was a guest of the Commodore's while in the wardroom sometime during Susquehanna's refit in Rio.³² Armed with these statements and his own righteous indignation, Aulick wrote an
impassioned eight-page reply to the Secretary's letter. The Commodore told the Secretary that "not only is it untrue, but...I cannot understand how it can have even the shadow of truth for its foundation." Aulick insisted that he did not recall discussing the subject of monetary compensation while underway, and denied that Macedo had ever suffered any discomforts while embarked. Aulick also forwarded the statements of his officers and the purser in which they

32 Lt. John Barry to Commodore J.H. Aulick, February 16, 1852, Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.

acknowledged that everyone on board knew the Chevalier had been a guest of the nation, not the Commodore. They insisted that Macedo never complained of experiencing any discomfort "except those necessarily incident to a sea life, and which are aggravated in the case of every person who suffers from sea sickness." Yet contained within the same envelope was the message that would signal the end of John Henry Aulick's career on the high seas.³³

The second letter, dated November 18th 1852, informed Aulick he was relieved of his command. Secretary Graham, having discussed the matter with President Fillmore, decided that Aulick must be recalled "in order to satisfy Brazil."³⁴ This letter -written one day after the first one- directed Aulick to restrict the movement of his flagship to either Hong Kong or Macao, and await his relief. Aulick's successor, the Secretary informed him, was coming "by the most speedy conveyance."³⁵ After only two weeks on station, Aulick found himself a lame-duck squadron commander chained to a very short leash; relieved on accusations made against him by an anonymous source. The effect on Aulick's pride and honor were devastating. Yet being the
senior officer in the region, he could not ignore his obligation to his nation and navy. After several days of stunned contemplation of his options, Aulick determined that his duty as a naval officer was paramount to his own personal or professional concerns. He consequently set out to effect whatever influence he could in East Asia by dispersing the other vessels under his command

33 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, February 17, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives.
34 Charles Oscar Paullin, Diplomatic Negotiations of American Naval Officers, 1778-1893, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1912), 250.
35 Secretary Graham to Commodore Aulick, April 23, 1852, Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol.18, United States Naval Academy.

to various ports in the region. Aulick hoped that this would give him at least reasonable access to information and some ability to influence events. Foremost, Aulick ordered the U.S.S. Marion home to Norfolk. Marion had been on station nearly two years and was in such a wretched state of disrepair Aulick felt the sloop more a liability then asset. This decision however, left Aulick with only two ships (the sloops Saratoga and Plymouth) whose movements he could control, his own flagship being restricted by the Secretary's orders. Fearing reports of "the frequent occurrences of acts of piracy along the whole Chinese coast," Aulick issued orders to Commander Walker to patrol up the East Coast of China and attempt to ascertain the situation at the various ports.³⁶ Unknown to Aulick, the increased disruptions along the Chinese coast were and indirect result of the most serious civil war in China of the nineteenth century. The war -known to the west as the Taiping Rebellion- began in earnest in 1850. The Taipings formed loose alliances with pirate consortiums that roamed the Chinese coast, and authorized them to attack western shipping.³⁷ It was with these pirates that western merchants and navies experienced the most difficulty. Throughout 1852 and early 1853, Aulick dealt with an ever-increasing level of piracy and violence against westerners on the Chinese coastline. United by either religious or financial zeal, the Chinese Taipings and their allies attacked western commercial houses, rioted in several coastal cities, and attacked merchantmen. Yet with the Susquehanna under orders to remain in the vicinity of either Hong Kong or

36 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, 24 February 1852, Ibid.
37 Philip A. Kuhn. Rebellion and Its Enemies in Late Imperial China. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970), 113-118.

Macao, Aulick had little real flexibility in the region. The few precious assets he had been able to dispatch were rendered nearly impotent by the seasonal weather changes. Unlike other vessels in the area, Susquehanna enjoyed freedom of movement in almost all weather conditions. With the March monsoon setting in, sailing vessels were unable to make any sort of movement against the strong winds. Commander Kelly of the Plymouth reported to Aulick that it took his vessel some forty days to make the passage from Batavia to Singapore - a distance of only five hundred miles! Despite his squadron's limitations, Aulick felt it his duty to provide whatever aid he could to American merchantmen and diplomats in distress around the region.³⁸
The first real challenge to the Commodore came in mid-April of 1852 when two American merchantmen wrote Aulick an impassioned plea for aid. The captains of the James Perkins and Clarendon pleaded that they were "in danger of being plundered by the Burmese...they say the British Governor has informed them that he will not give them protection if attacked and they ask me to send...vessels of this squadron."³⁹ The British and Burmese were about to go to war, and the merchants were threatened with attack if they tried to leave the colonial port of Maulmein. Aulick dispatched the U.S.S. Sword Fish to try to reach the British colonial port of Maulmein and relieve the trapped Americans. Although the Sword Fish was only supposed to be passing through Asia on her way from San Francisco to Norfolk, Aulick felt he had to order her to help because he could not go himself.

38 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, April 23, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives.
39 Commodore Aulick to U.S. Consul in Singapore William Shaw, April 18, 1852, Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.

Not all the problems arising in the region were the result of piracy or warfare. In Batavia the Dutch authorities were holding an American vessel and crew on undisclosed charges, and the US Consul in Batavia Edward Cramerus wrote Aulick to demand that he send a warship to indicate American concern. Aulick replied that although his own squadron was busy elsewhere, he would order the Sword Fish to stop at Batavia en route to Burma. Although this would leave the merchants stranded in Maulmein harbor for a while, Aulick felt the Flirt to be the more pressing matter. However Aulick wrote to both Cramerus in Batavia and Shaw in Singapore that the European authorities were "enlightened and magnanimous" governments and that their officials would no doubt aid the Americans in any way they could. It must have been galling, however, to ask American citizens to depend on Europeans for support when the huge
Susquehanna sat idle in Hong Kong.⁴⁰ Other pleas for aid continued to arrive in Hong Kong, along with requests from various U.S. Consuls for warships to convey them to various points along the Chinese coast. In many cases, Aulick wanted desperately to comply. His orders from the Navy Department however, severely limited his ability to help. Aulick -the Presidentially appointed Commander-in-Chief of U.S. forces in East Asia- quickly grew exasperated with the entire situation and he wrote a blistering letter of complaint to Secretary Graham. In it Aulick informed Graham that: "more then five months have elapsed since the receipt of your letter directing me to remain with this ship at this place...until the arrival of my successor...who you inform me will arrive by the most speedy conveyance. He has not

40 U.S. Consul Cramerus to Commodore Aulick, February 25, 1852, Commodore Aulick to U.S. Consul Cramerus, April 19, 1852, and Commodore Aulick to U.S. Consul Shaw, April 19, 1852, all in Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.

yet arrived and according to the news papers...his arrival seems likely to be delayed several months longer. I therefore deem it my duty to say to the Department that the services of this ship are greatly needed over a much wider field of operations...I have lately received applications from several of our citizens at different and distant points on the station, to come or send ships to them for the protection of their persons or property, which they consider in danger of lawless attacks."⁴¹ Aulick was also distressed that the news of his relief had been published in the local papers, and that in consequence he felt his authority and effectiveness -to say nothing of his dignity- had been severely undermined. With no ships to utilize, no freedom of movement, his reputation tarnished, and distressing news about his wife's health from home; Aulick was now "exceedingly anxious to return home."⁴² Unfortunately for Aulick, his earliest opportunity for relief was still months away. In the interim he had to confront the most serious event of his stay in East Asia: an act of mutiny aboard a U.S. merchant vessel. Peter Parker, the U.S. Charge d' Affairs in Canton, wrote to Aulick to inform him of a nearly successful mutiny aboard the American vessel Robert Browne. The vessel had been transporting Chinese Coolies from Amoy, China when the Chinese had tried to overthrow the crew and gain their freedom from forced indentured servitude under the coolie

41 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, April 23, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives.
42 Commodore Aulick to U.S. Consul Shaw, April 19, 1852, Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.

system. A lifetime mariner, Aulick was naturally horrified and appalled at the news. As a squadron Commodore however, he was even more disturbed to learn of the "fourth act of murder in Chinese waters the last 10 months." Without hesitation, Aulick ordered the sloop Saratoga to Amoy in order to address the situation there and bring the perpetrators to justice. Parker's letter informed Aulick that many of the mutineers had escaped the Robert Browne and gone hiding
amongst the islands off the Chinese coast^.43 Eventually the demands for aid grew so strident that Aulick felt compelled to exceed his orders. When, on one occasion, some 100 pirates had been captured Aulick decided it was a situation too serious to entrust to a sloop commander. He therefore sailed in the Susquehanna -in violation of his orders- to deal with the matter personally.⁴⁴ Eventually Aulick and the U.S. Consuls from Amoy and Canton convened a consular court to determine the facts of the case. After much testimony and translation, they determined that only seventeen of the accused had committed murder or piratical acts. Aulick decided that, "justice as well as humanity requires that they be sent back to the place whence they embarked onboard the Robert Brown."⁴⁵ The seventeen remaining mutineers were turned over to Imperial authority. Eventually additional aid for the beleaguered squadron began to arrive. The sloop U.S.S. St. Mary's from San Francisco arrived with the load of shipwrecked Japanese sailors to be

43 U.S. Charge d' Affairs Parker to Aulick, April 29, 1852, Ibid, and Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, May 3, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives.
44 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, May 28, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives..
45 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, June 20, 1852, Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.

returned to Japan. Aulick hoped that this was a sign he would soon receive permission to continue his suspended mission to Japan. His frustration level continued to rise. He still knew "nothing officially of the movements of my successor"⁴⁶ as of July. Initially he replied to requests for transportation from American diplomats very respectfully and cordially, even though he had to deny them. Eventually, Aulick became sarcastic in his letters to the diplomats, telling one "this is, to be sure, a quite modest request, asking for only one half of my squadron, for I have but two vessels at present [free to maneuver]."⁴⁷ Aulick was also annoyed when he learned in June that the British court in Hong Kong would not hear the case against the coolie mutineers because under British law, "a mutiny by coolies on a foreign ship is not piracy...therefore not justiciable by them."⁴⁸ Added to all this was the knowledge that Charles Gibson and the crew of the Flirt were still being held in Batavia without official charges, a serious embarrassment to the United States.
Then, in mid-November 1852, Commander Franklin Buchanan reached Hong Kong with orders from the Secretary of the Navy directing Aulick to place Buchanan in command and to consider himself as "detached from command of the United States Squadron in the East India and China Seas." By the same mail, however, Aulick also received another letter dated subsequent to Buchanan's orders. Issued by the new Secretary of the Navy, John Kennedy, it instructed Aulick "not to leave the China Seas until regularly relieved by an order."⁴⁹ Aulick therefore placed

46 Commodore Aulick to Acting U.S. Consul Shaw, July 17, 1852, Ibid.
47 Commodore Aulick U.S Consul Charles Currier, April 19, 1852, Ibid.
48 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, June 16, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 6, National Archives.
49 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Kennedy, November 16, 1852, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 7, National Archives.

Buchanan in command of the Susquehanna in compliance with the first order, but retained command of the Squadron in compliance with the second. Owing to the delicate situation in the region and the fact that two steamers had just reached Hong Kong and Macao with nearly 1500 tons of coal for the Susquehanna, Aulick hoped that his mission to Japan would yet come to pass.
Either way, Aulick felt Buchanan to be too junior to handle the deteriorating situation in China.⁵⁰ However, with the second set of orders in hand, Aulick now felt authorized to move more freely about the region. He sailed in the Susquehanna up the Chinese coastline in order "to see that our own flag has not been, and is not used, to protect those who have not a just or proper claim to its protection." Alas, while sailing up the coast of China, Aulick engaged in a
professional disagreement with Humphrey Marshall, the U.S. Commissioner to China. Upon hearing that Aulick was on the move in the Susquehanna from Hong Kong, Marshall wrote and demanded "that you [Aulick] will furnish me, at Macao, immediately, a suitable vessel of war from the naval force under your command on this station to carry me."⁵¹ After all he had endured on station, Aulick was in no mood to deal with impatient and self-important American diplomats. His curt reply to Marshall was that the movement of U.S. warships was under his discretion, and that his ships were not diplomatic ferries. After a series of heated letters to Aulick, Marshall eventually confined himself to complaining bitterly to the Secretary of State that, "I hope that the
Secretary of the Navy....will place me in possession of such a general and standing order as will

50 Commodore Aulick to Commodore Shubrick, Chief of the Bureau of Construction, Materials, and Repairs, November 18, 1852, Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.
51 U.S. Commissioner to China Marshall to Commodore Aulick, January 17, 1853, Correspondence Between the State Department and the Late Commissioner to China, U.S. Department of State, House Document 123, 33rd Congress, 1st Session, 1854.

shield me from the effect of...Naval Commander's hereafter."⁵² The requested order never came. While returning from a month-long excursion to Manila however, both the Susquehanna and Commodore Aulick suffered nearly catastrophic problems. For the steamer, it was the failure of a vital air pump in the engineering spaces. Without it, the Susquehanna was reduced to a mere sailing vessel. The search for replacement parts revealed that "they cannot be procured this side of England or the United States."⁵³ Without those parts, Aulick felt the Susquehanna to be too dangerous on the high seas during monsoon season, as her masts and rigging could break as they had in the Atlantic storms. But it was the illness that struck Aulick that finally forced him to depart China and return home. While in Manila, Aulick became very ill. By the time he reached Hong Kong in February, he was in terrible physical shape. He wrote Secretary Kennedy that "the state of my health being very low...I now weigh but one hundred pounds...I am now unable to write and am obliged to
dictate to my secretary." Aulick saw no other option but to surrender command of his squadron to his senior officer and leave the tropical station. Aulick was very bitter toward Secretary Graham for " I am not allowed to return in the ship I brought out but after upwards of forty four years in the Navy...I do not merit the harsh treatment which I have received." On March 13th 1853, Commodore Aulick formally gave command of the East India Squadron to Commander John Kelly of the U.S.S. Saratoga and departed the next morning on an English steamer for

52 Commissioner Marshall to Secretary Kennedy, February 8, 1853, Letters Received by the Secretary of the Navy from the President and Executive Agencies, 1837-1886, Naval Records Collection of the Officer of Naval Records and Library, Record Group 45, Reel 9, National Archives, Washington D.C.
53 Commodore Aulick to Secretary Kennedy, February 7, 1853, Commanding Officer's Letters, Reel 7, National Archives.

London^.54 The experience of Commodore Aulick in his brief command on the Far China station reveals a great deal about the demands upon Naval commanders on distant stations. Aulick's case is unique because it also shows how the role of diplomacy, the types of naval operations, and the kind of leadership required on distant station were changing in the mid-nineteenth century U.S. Navy. Aulick represented the old style of naval leadership of the type that Commodore Porter had described: older, inflexible in his ideals, gentlemanly, honorable, and possessing a high-degree of self importance. His eventual replacement --Commodore Matthew Perry-- was of the newer breed of naval leadership: smart, well-educated, technically informed, politically savvy, and more open to new ideas. Whereas Aulick was a man who honestly claimed to be of the opinion that, "my services...belong to the country and whatever disposition the department may see fit," his counterpart took a different attitude.⁵⁵ When Perry was offered the command of the East India
Squadron he originally declined by stating that he "would accept command....if the sphere of action and size of the squadron were so enlarged as to hold out well-grounded hope of conferring distinction upon its commander."⁵⁶ Perry knew that his career in the navy was far from over and

54 Ibid, and Commodore Aulick to Secretary Graham, March 10, 1853, Commanding Officers Letters, Reel 7, National Archives.
55 Commodore Aulick to Commodore Shubrick, November 18, 1852, Aulick Papers, Box 6, Vol. 18, United States Naval Academy.
56 John H. Schroeder, "Matthew Calbraith Perry: Antebellum Precursor of the Steam Navy," ed. James Bradford, Captains of the Old Steam Navy. (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1986), 14-15.

that he needed to accept assignments that were challenging and rewarding in order to continue to rise in the ranks. Aulick knew that his career was largely behind him, and his window of opportunity to command vessels at sea was rapidly closing. More importantly it was not in his nature to demand preferred commands or stipulations: Aulick viewed himself as a faithful tool of American policy to be wielded when and where he was needed. In this sense, the 1850's also marked a turning point for the U.S. Navy: a transition period from mostly sailing ships and sailing captains, to the new rubric of steam propulsion and hard
engineering knowledge. From 1843 to 1860 the number of sailing ships remaining in the U.S. Navy decreased from 59 to 44, while the number of steamers increased from 6 to 38. It was therefore no small coincidence that less then two years after Aulick left China, the Navy Secretary convened a board to forcibly retire some 200 officers of advanced years. Aulick was one of those placed on the retired list as a result of this board.⁵⁷ Although he was no stranger to command on distant stations, or to long deployments from home, Aulick proved unable to operate effectively in the role as Squadron Commander for a variety of reasons. Foremost, he was outdone by his own high standards. By relieving Captain Inman and sending him home, Aulick effectively doubled his own workload. He now had to fulfill the role of both ship's captain and squadron commodore. Although this was easy to do en route
to Hong Kong, once there it served to merely multiply his problems. Secondly, Aulick suffered from poor relations with and weak support from his superiors.
In the end, Secretary Graham ordered Aulick relieved because of one letter sent by a lone American diplomat aboard the Susquehanna. When he returned to the United States in June of

57 Paullin, Naval Administration, 219.

1853, Aulick learned that the author of the letter had been Mr. Richard Schenck, an American diplomat traveling with Macedo and also a familiar of Captain Inman. In spite of this, had the Secretary possessed more faith in Aulick as an officer, such an unsubstantiated charge might not have been fatal to his command tenure. Instead Aulick was relieved of command, and then abandoned by the Secretary's office for six months as the official correspondence made its tortuous way back and forth between Hong Kong and Washington. Ultimately, however, Aulick failed because he could not adapt to the world in which he
lived. Duty and honor-bound, Aulick downplayed political considerations when dealing with his fellow Americans. Although he had been successful in Zanzibar when dealing with foreign dignitaries, he was less successful when dealing with the demands placed upon him by other branches of the government or naval bureaus. With them he lacked both the tact and patience required to be an effective commodore on a distant station. Aulick ignored the context of the political environment in which he worked, instead believing himself to be a patriot beyond political reproach. Yet Aulick's actions in relieving Inman and allowing Macedo to gain such an erroneous impression showed an inability or unwillingness to confront the larger political issues of the day facing the U.S. Navy. Aulick's service had just lost two major political battles with the Congress for the reduction of the alcohol ration afloat and the cessation of flogging. When Secretary of the Navy Graham received the letter of complaint against Aulick via the Secretary of State, it was an embarrassing incident that rattled Graham's faith in Aulick as a naval officer who was capable of handling delicate diplomatic assignments. In dealing with Graham, Aulick himself was unwilling to make a firm stand -as Perry had done over command of the East India Squadron- for fear of removal and creating a scandal. In one of the painful ironies of history however, that is exactly what happened.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Lt. Commander Richmond Aulick (M)
(3. Dec. 1825 - 8. Jun. 1868), #228173
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     D. 8 Jun 1868 42 yrs.
** Removed to Oak Hill, November 30, 1897 **
Aulick. On the 8th inst. at 6 o'clock p.m., Commander Richmond Aulick, U.S. Navy aged 40 years. The Evening Star, June 10, 1868
The Funeral of Commander Aulick, U.S. Navy took place this afternoon from his late residence on 19th street west and was attended by a large number of navy officers and prominent citizens. The funeral escort consisted of a full battalion of marines under Major Graham headed by the Marine Band.
----------------------
The Evening Star, January 23, 1872
The Robeson-Aulick Wedding
The marriage of the Secretary of the Navy and Mrs. Ricmond Aulick took place at the Church of the Epiphany this morning. Very punctually after ten o'clock the guests began to assemble, while outside of the church there was a curious crowd waiting to see the distinguished bridal party as they entered the building. It was the express desire of both parties that the wedding should be strictly private, and the two sextons and two ushers--Lieuts. Emory and Mason of the navy--were given the following list of names of those to be admitted: Mrs. Aulick's family--Mrs. Penniman, mother of the bride; Mrs. Ogston, Miss Ogston, Mr. Frank Ogston, Miss M. Hetzell, Dr. R. Buckler, Dr. Thomas Buckler, Commodore Aulick, Mrs. Wily Aulick, Dr. Ralph Aulick, Misses Stout, Mrs. Dikeman and Mr. Dikeman.Secretary Robeson's family--Mr. Robeson, brother of the Secretary; Mr. and Mrs. Price, Master Price, Miss Robeson, Mr. Cattell. Other Guests--The President and Mrs. Grant, Secretary and Mrs. Fish, Secretary and Mrs. Delano, Secretary and Mrs. Boutwell, Postmaster General and Mrs. Croswell, Attorney General and Mrs. Williams, Secretary Belknap, Senator Stockton, Senator Frelinghuysen, Geo. W. Childs and wife, of Philadelphia, Associate Justice Bradley, the New Jersey delegation in the House of Representatives, Montgomery Blair, Gen. Cadwalader, Mrs. Rawles and Dr. Thomas Miller. The Christmas greens decorated the church, but no further decorations were used, no flowers anywhere. White ribbons divided the front seats from those at the back, but scarcely one-third of the seats reserved were filled, and besides those persons specially asked--whose names are given above--not more than half a dozen were present. Young Master Aulick came with his nurse and other of the family servants. The groom entered about half-past 10 o'clock, with his young friend. Mr. Cadwallader, of Philadelphia. The bride entered with Mr. Montgomery Blair, and when she approached the chancel the groom joined her. Those who stood at the chancel rail were Mr. Montgomery Blair and the bride, the groom and Mr. Cadwallader, and just behind the bride stood one of her nieces, a Miss Ogston, a girl apparently 14 years old, who assisted in removing the glove. Dr. Starkey read the service very impressively, and after pronouncing the blessing, congratulated the couple. A few others of those present followed with their congratulations, a few among them, the President, for one, kissing the bride. Then the married pair at once departed from the church for Mrs. Aulick's residence, and left the city at 12:45 p.m. for the north. The bride wore a handsome walking costume of silk of the new shade known as London smoke. It was trimmed with ruffles of the same, edged with black lace. The groom wore the conventional English morning dress, black frock coat and light pantaloons. Mr. Cadwallader and the users wore the same, as also did Hon. Montgomery Blair. All had white rosebuds and leaves in their button holes. Miss Ogston wore a blue silk, short skirt, with ruffles of the same, and a high white puffed waist. The ladies and gentlemen who attended were very simply dressed. On the whole, no wedding could possibly have been conducted with less display.

Lt. Commander Richmond Aulick was also known as Richmond Samuel Aulick. Lt. Commander Richmond Aulick was born on 3. Dec. 1825. He was the son of Commodore John Henry Aulick and Mary Francis Conover. Lt. Commander Richmond Aulick was born c 1828. He was graduated on 11. Jul. 1846 at United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, Anne Arundel County, Maryland; he was the first graduate.
Lt. Commander Richmond Aulick was shown in the census on 10. Jul. 1860 as in the U. S. N.


Lt. Commander Richmond Aulick appeared on the census of 10. Jul. 1860 at with his parents, Washington, District of Columbia.
He died on 8. Jun. 1868 at age 42.

Last Edited=14 Mar 2008

Becky Ault (F)
#319536
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=9th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=12th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Becky Ault was the daughter of George Wesley Ault and Renee Chipman.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Brian Chipman Ault (M)
#319537
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=9th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=12th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Brian Chipman Ault was the son of George Wesley Ault and Renee Chipman.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Constance Noel Ault (F)
#57543

     Constance Noel Ault married Samuel Evans Conover, son of Nancy Davison.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Francis Elizabeth Ault (F)
(c 1887 - ), #373214
Pop-up Pedigree

     Francis Elizabeth Ault was buried at Wyoming Cemetery, Wyoming, Stark County, Illinois. Francis Elizabeth Ault was born c 1887 at Illinois. She was the daughter of Ida (Unknown). Francis Elizabeth Ault married William Nelson Conover, son of Cornelius T. Conover and Mary L. Williams.

Francis Elizabeth Ault and William Nelson Conover appeared on the census of 2. Jan. 1920 at Peoria, Peoria County, Illinois.
Francis Elizabeth Ault and William Nelson Conover were divorced.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

George Wesley Ault (M)
#319533

     George Wesley Ault married Renee Chipman, daughter of Alva Stanford Chipman and Orba Seamons.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Kevin Wesley Ault (M)
#319534
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=9th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=12th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Kevin Wesley Ault was the son of George Wesley Ault and Renee Chipman.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Lisa Ann Ault (F)
#319538
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=9th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=12th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Lisa Ann Ault was the daughter of George Wesley Ault and Renee Chipman.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Stacy Ault (F)
#319535
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=9th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=12th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Stacy Ault was the daughter of George Wesley Ault and Renee Chipman.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

(Unknown) Aumack (?)
(1858 - ), #209342
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=7th cousin 2 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=7th great-grandchild of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     (Unknown) Aumack was born in 1858. (Unknown) Aumack was the child of William C. Aumack and Ada Dennison.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

(Unknown) Aumack (?)
#209343
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=6th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-grandchild of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     (Unknown) Aumack was the child of John Joseph Hoff Aumack and Elizabeth Stillwell.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Alida Aumack (F)
#209334
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=6th cousin 3 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=6th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Alida Aumack was the daughter of John Joseph Hoff Aumack and Elizabeth Stillwell. Alida Aumack was also known as Alice Aumack.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Antje Aumack (F)
(19. Jun. 1768 - 1848), #3851
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=4th cousin 5 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=4th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Antje Aumack was baptized on 19. Jun. 1768 at Dutch Reformed Church, Freehold-Middletown, Monmouth County, New Jersey. She was the daughter of Jacob Aumack and Geertje Covenhoven. Antje Aumack married John Bedle. Antje Aumack died in 1848.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Ariantje Aumack (F)
(30. Apr. 1764 - ), #3848
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=4th cousin 5 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=4th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Ariantje Aumack was baptized on 30. Apr. 1764 at Dutch Reformed Church, Freehold-Middletown, Monmouth County, New Jersey. She was the daughter of Jacob Aumack and Geertje Covenhoven.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Catharine Aumack (F)
(19. Jun. 1793 - 25. Jul. 1828), #273055
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 4 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=5th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Catharine Aumack was born on 19. Jun. 1793 at Middletown, Monmouth County, New Jersey. She was the daughter of Mathias Conover Aumack and Miriam Marsh. Catharine Aumack married Leonard Walling, son of Daniel Dunbar Walling and Helena Hoff. Catharine Aumack died on 25. Jul. 1828 at age 35. She was buried at James Hoff Cemetery, Holmdel, Monmouth County, New Jersey.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Catherine Aumack (F)
#174634

     Catherine Aumack married William Long Schenck, son of William Schenck and Caroline Hall.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Catherine Aumack (F)
(1794 - 1853), #209329
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 4 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=5th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Catherine Aumack was born in 1794. She was the daughter of William Aumack and Christina Hoff. Catherine Aumack married Richard I. Carhart. Catherine Aumack died in 1853.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Catherine Aumack (F)
(1799 - ), #209359
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 4 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=5th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Catherine Aumack was born in 1799. She was the daughter of Jacob Aumack and Lydia Ann (Unknown).

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Cornelius Aumack (M)
#391493

     Cornelius Aumack married Margaret Van Cleaf, daughter of Rev. Johannes Van Cleaf and Nelly Schenck, on 10. May. 1820 or 16. May. 1820 at Monmouth County, New Jersey.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Daniel Aumack (M)
(1789 - 1826), #209323
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 4 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=5th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Daniel Aumack was born in 1789. He was the son of William Aumack and Christina Hoff. Daniel Aumack married Sarah Waydock. Daniel Aumack died in 1826.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Elizabeth Aumack (F)
(5. Aug. 1733 - 21. Aug. 1807), #3826
Pop-up Pedigree

     Elizabeth Aumack was also known as Elizabeth Amack. Elizabeth Aumack was born on 3. Jul. 1733. She was baptized on 5. Aug. 1733 at Dutch Reformed Church, Freehold-Middletown, Monmouth County, New Jersey. She was the daughter of Tunis Aumack and Helena Lane. Elizabeth Aumack married William Covenhoven, son of William Covenhoven and Adriantje Bennet, c 1751. Elizabeth Aumack died on 21. Aug. 1807 at age 74.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Elizabeth Aumack (F)
(27. Mar. 1783 - 9. Jun. 1847), #77999
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 4 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=5th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Elizabeth Aumack was born on 27. Mar. 1783 at Keyport, Monmouth County, New Jersey. She was the daughter of William Aumack and Christina Hoff. Elizabeth Aumack married Thomas Bedle Jr. on 5. Feb. 1801 at Keyport, Monmouth County, New Jersey. Elizabeth Aumack died on 9. Jun. 1847 at Keyport, Monmouth County, New Jersey, at age 64.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Garret Aumack (M)
(10. Jan. 1773 - 1845), #3853
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=4th cousin 5 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=4th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Garret Aumack was baptized on 10. Jan. 1773 at Dutch Reformed Church, Freehold-Middletown, Monmouth County, New Jersey. He was the son of Jacob Aumack and Geertje Covenhoven. Garret Aumack married Mary Dean. Garret Aumack died in 1845.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Helena Aumack (F)
(22. Mar. 1761 - c 1762), #3846
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=4th cousin 5 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=4th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Helena Aumack was baptized on 22. Mar. 1761 at Dutch Reformed Church, Freehold-Middletown, Monmouth County, New Jersey. She was the daughter of Jacob Aumack and Geertje Covenhoven. She died young.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Helena Aumack (F)
(17. Mar. 1765 - ), #3849
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=4th cousin 5 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=4th great-granddaughter of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Helena Aumack was baptized on 17. Mar. 1765 at Dutch Reformed Church, Freehold-Middletown, Monmouth County, New Jersey. She was the daughter of Jacob Aumack and Geertje Covenhoven.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Jacob William Aumack (M)
(1787 - 1860), #209321
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=5th cousin 4 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=5th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Jacob William Aumack was born in 1787. He was the son of William Aumack and Christina Hoff. Jacob William Aumack married Synchy Fransica Stillwell. Jacob William Aumack died in 1860.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Jacob Aumack (M)
(21. Jun. 1727 - ), #3845
Pop-up Pedigree

     Jacob Aumack was also known as Jacob Amack. He was also known as Jacobus Aumick. Jacob Aumack was born on 21. Jun. 1727 at New Jersey. He was the son of Tunis Aumack and Helena Lane. Jacob Aumack married Geertje Covenhoven, daughter of William Covenhoven and Adriantje Bennet, c 1759 at Middletown Twp., Monmouth County, New Jersey.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Jacob Aumack (M)
(25. Jun. 1769 - 1849), #3852
Pop-up Pedigree
Relationship=4th cousin 5 times removed of David Kipp Conover Jr..
Relationship=4th great-grandson of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven.

     Jacob Aumack was baptized on 25. Jun. 1769 at Dutch Reformed Church, Freehold-Middletown, Monmouth County, New Jersey. He was the son of Jacob Aumack and Geertje Covenhoven. Jacob Aumack married Lydia Ann (Unknown). Jacob Aumack died in 1849.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006

Jane Aumack (F)
#217394

     Jane Aumack married (Unknown) Stymas. Jane Aumack married Job Throckmorton on 27. Feb. 1811.

Last Edited=3 Dec 2005

Jannetje Aumack (F)
(24. Nov. 1723 - ), #3070
Pop-up Pedigree

     Jannetje Aumack was also known as Jane Aumack. She was baptized on 24. Nov. 1723. She was the daughter of Tunis Aumack and Helena Lane. Jannetje Aumack married Cornelius Barkalow, son of Dirck Barkeloo and Jannetje Van Arsdale, on 10. Nov. 1743.

Last Edited=15 Oct 2006