Talk:Royal Tar fire

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Royal Tar fire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060923102510/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Footnotes to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Footnotes

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Royal Tar registry length and tonnage

Under General characteristics, in the article inbox, I am asking for a change to replace the length field of 160 ft (49 m) with 156 ft (48 m), and to replace Tons burthen field of 400 tons burthen, with 256 56/94 tons burthen.

The Port of Saint John Registry No. 23, Royal Tar, 1836, Provincial Archives of New Brunswick.DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 22:24, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Can you provide a copy of the record? It must be long out of copyright. We currently have sources for the claim of 400 tons and 160ft. Packrat3860 (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

The registry is an original document held by Library and Archives Canada. I do not own the document and therefore do not have permission to reproduce or distribute it here, thought I do wish I could.

The complete archival citation is: Library and Archives Canada, Department of Marine fonds, RG42, Series E-1, volume 1335, Port of Saint John Registry No. 23, Royal Tar, May 3, 1836.

The registry records the vessel’s length as “one hundred and fifty-six” feet and its admeasurement as “two hundred and fifty-six tons and 56/94.” This is the vessel’s original official registration and predates the later sources currently cited for the figures of 160 feet and 400 tons. I am therefore requesting that the infobox be corrected to reflect the measurements recorded in the original registry. ~~~~ DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 14:18, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Owners of the Royal Tar

Under the History portion of the infobox, concerning Owner, I am asking to replace the present three owner entries of John Hammond, Daniel McLaughlin and Mackay Brothers & Co. with the three registery names of: John Hammond, Daniel John McLaughlin and Hugh Mackay.

John Hammond — 40/64 shares. Daniel John McLaughlin — 8/64 shares. Hugh Mackay — 16/64 shares. The names specified and their ownership totals complete the 64/64 ownership of the Royal Tar as listed in The Port of Saint John Registry No. 23, Royal Tar, 1836, Provinical Archives of New Brunswick.DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 22:58, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Registered Name of the Royal Tar

Under the History portion of the infobox, concerning Name, I am asking to replace "PSS Royal Tar" with "Royal Tar".

This ship is named "Royal Tar", as found in the Port of Saint John Registry No. 23, Royal Tar, 1836, Provincial Archives of New Brunswick.DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 23:56, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Royal Tar route

Under the History portion of the infobox, concerning the Route, I am asking to replace the current St. John, Eastport and Portland, Maine, with Saint John, New Brunswick; Eastport, Maine; Campobello Island, New Brunswick; Portland, Maine.

U.S. House of Representatives, 25th Congress, 3rd Session, House Document No. 21, Steam-Engines, A4–A5, pp. 21–23, Joseph T. Sherwood to John Anderson, Portland, October 22, 1838.DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 03:21, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Wreck location and coordinates of the Royal Tar

42°51′53″N 68°56′29″W are the exact coordinates given above the infobox in the article of the Royal Tar. The Royal Tar did burn and was lost in Penobscot Bay on October 25, 1836, however surving evidence does not establish a precise final sinking location. Availble evidence also permits movement to be geographically bounded but does not support a fixing the wreck location to a single coordinate.

Remove the coordinates 42°51′53″N 68°56′29″W because the surviving evidence does not establish those coordinates as the wreck location.

Replace the infobox Fate description from "Burned and sank October 25, 1836 off Vinalhaven Island, Maine" with "Burned and was lost in Penobscot Bay, Maine, October 25, 1836"DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 04:50, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Response: 2026-09-28

Done Packrat3860 (talk) 04:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Final voyage departure point of Royal Tar

The "Last voyage" section of the article, begins by stating the Royal Tar sailed from Peter's Wharf, Easport, on October 21, 1836. The actual final voyage began at Saint John, New Brunswick, on October 21. The vessel next called at Eastport before continuing its journey south.

W.K. Reynolds, “The Loss of the Royal Tar,” The New Brunswick Magazine, Vol. 1 (1898), states that the Royal Tar arrived at Saint John from Portland on October 17 and sailed from its berth at PEter's Wharf on Friday, October 21. The same account then separately states that the vessel later left Eastport on the evening of the 21st.DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 05:05, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Response: 2026-09-28

Not done: states that the Royal Tar ... sailed from its berth at PEter's Wharf on Friday, October 21. this would mean the current state of the article is correct. Packrat3860 (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

The current article is not correct. Peter’s Wharf was in Saint John, New Brunswick, not Eastport, Maine. There was no Duke Street in Eastport at the time of the Royal Tar’s final voyage, and officially none to this day.

On page 83, Reynolds states that the Royal Tar arrived at Saint John from Portland on October 17 and “sailed from its berth at Peter’s wharf” on October 21. In the same account, he identifies the departure wharf as being “at the foot of Duke street.” See W. K. Reynolds, “The Loss of the Royal Tar,” The New Brunswick Magazine, Vol. 1, No. 2, August 1898, p. 83: scanned page.

The sequence is then made unmistakable on page 84. Reynolds first states, “When the Royal Tar left St. John,” and only afterward states that the vessel “left Eastport on the evening of the 21st.” See p. 84: scanned page.

These were two separate departures on October 21. The Royal Tar’s final voyage began at Saint John. Eastport was the next port of call. The opening of the “Last voyage” section should therefore be corrected to reflect that sequence. ~~~~ DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 14:33, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Royal Tar ship's safe and treasure

The “Treasure” section currently states as fact that the Royal Tar had a safe containing a large quantity of gold and silver coins and that the safe was forgotten during the rescue. The cited source is W. C. Jameson’s 1998 Buried Treasures of New England, a popular treasure-lore book.

While contemporary accounts do report that substantial amounts of money, including bills and specie, were lost in the disaster, they do not establish that this money was concentrated in a single treasure-filled safe. W. K. Reynolds, W. K. “The Loss of the Royal Tar,” The New Brunswick Magazine, Vol. 1 (1898), for example, describes a large amount of money in bills and specie as having been destroyed but does not identify a safe containing a large cache of gold and silver coins.

Jameson’s later account claims that $35,000–$50,000 in gold and silver coins and jewelry was contained in a purser’s safe, but his Royal Tar chapter does not identify contemporary documentation for that amount or inventory. The historical record supports substantial financial losses aboard the vessel, but not the present Wikipedia wording treating a specific treasure-filled safe as established fact.

Request that this section either remove the unsupported statement or describe it as a claim made by Jameson rather than a documented fact, and attribute it as a later treasure legend.DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 05:15, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Do you have a proposal for what you think we should put there in its place? It seems like the sources are in agreement that there was a large quantity of money and specie on the ship, which was not taken during the rescue and has not since been recovered. Jameson claims it was in a safe and maybe it wasn't (I may try to get a copy to see how believable the claim is), but the current copy conveys valuable information and has a source. I'm happy to rework it but I don't think it should be removed. Packrat3860 (talk) 04:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I propose replacing the existing paragraph with the following:

“An 1898 account reported that a large amount of money in bills and specie was destroyed in the fire. In 1998, treasure-lore author W. C. Jameson claimed that gold and silver coins and jewelry had been kept in a purser’s safe aboard the vessel, but his account did not identify contemporary documentation supporting the safe’s purported contents or value.”

The first sentence is supported by W. K. Reynolds, “The Loss of the Royal Tar,” The New Brunswick Magazine, Vol. 1, No. 2, August 1898, p. 87: [https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page.djvu/103 scanned page].

This wording retains the documented fact that substantial money was lost while accurately attributing the purser’s-safe claim to Jameson instead of presenting it as an established fact. ~~~~ DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Royal Tar as transporting a circus, description

The opening sentence of the article describes the Royal Tar as a passenger steamship that burned “while transporting a circus with its animals.”

The Royal Tar was a passenger paddle wheel steamer operating regular service between Saint John, New Brunswick and Portland, Maine. On its final voyage it carried a portion of a traveling menagerie or “caravan,” along with its animals, wagons and associated personnel. W.K. Reynolds, in “The Loss of the Royal Tar,” The New Brunswick Magazine, Vol. 1 (1898), he describes the passengers as including members of “Fuller’s menagerie, or ‘caravan,’” rather than describing the vessel as transporting a circus.

The distinction is important because the menagerie was additional traffic aboard a regularly operating passenger steamer, not the purpose of, nor the identity of the vessel. The surviving record also indicates that only a reduced portion of the traveling exhibition was carried aboard rather than the entire exhibition.

Request that the opening sentence be revised to describe the Royal Tar as a passenger steamer that burned while carrying passengers and part of a traveling menagerie, rather than as a vessel “transporting a circus with its animals.”DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 05:26, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Response: 2026-09-28

Done Packrat3860 (talk) 04:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Animals aboard Royal Tar on final voyage

The “Last voyage” section currently states that the animals aboard the Royal Tar included “an elephant, two camels, and a variety of captive beasts and birds.” The historical record permits a more accurate description.

Southworth Allen Howland’s Steamboat Disasters and Railroad Accidents in the United States (1843) identifies the animals aboard as including an elephant, six horses, two dromedaries, two lionesses, a leopard, and a Bengal tiger, along with other animals associated with the caravan.

The distinction between “camels” and dromedaries is also supported by the reconstructed record, which consistently identifies the principal animals carried aboard as Mogul the elephant, two lionesses, a Bengal tiger, a leopard, two dromedaries, and six horses.

Request a revision of the animal description to identify an elephant, two dromedaries, two lionesses, a Bengal tiger, a leopard, and six horses, rather than the present generalized wording “an elephant, two camels, and a variety of captive beasts and birds.”DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 05:32, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Response: 2026-09-28

Not done: We don't need to catalog every animal present, even if the sources do. We want to summarize. The summary in the current article seems fine. Packrat3860 (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for considering it. My request is not intended to turn the sentence into an exhaustive catalog. I was asking that the summary be as accurate as the available historical record permits. Thank you. DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 15:22, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Consideration of SJ23 Totality of the Circumstances for the Further reading section.

My name is Dennis Dorsey, the author of "SJ23 Totality of the Circumstances", with the subtitle "The Burning of the Royal Tar, 1836". I am asking for an uninvolved editor to consider whether the book is appropriate for this article's Further Reading section.

Author: Dennis Dorsey Title: SJ23 Totality of the Circumstances Subtitle: The Burning of the Royal Tar, 1836 Year of Publication: 2026 ISBN 979-8-9956653-0-4 342 pages

The book is devoted specifically to he Royal Tar and its 1836 loss, rather than merely containing a chapter or brief discussion of it.DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 13:46, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Response: 2026-09-28

Not done for now: Can you provide any external coverage that establishes this as a particularly notable history? It appears to be self published and I couldn't find anything about it except for your website. Packrat3860 (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to look into this. I appreciate the thought and direction behind your question. Examining the available information and looking for supporting evidence is exactly the kind of approach that shaped this book.

The book was published by DiveQuest Exploration in August 2026. Much of the underwater research was conducted using DiveQuest Exploration’s equipment and services, so publishing the completed work through the organization was a natural extension of that effort. The book has therefore been publicly available for only a relatively short time.

Since publication, historical and maritime organizations have hosted or scheduled presentations based upon the book and its underlying research. The following announcements come from the organizations themselves, not from my website:

• Eastport Arts Center, “The Royal Tar: Fire, Survival, and Eastport’s Overlooked Connection”
• Castine Historical Society, “The Burning of the Royal Tar, 1836”
• Maine Historical Society, “The Story and Tragedy of the Royal Tar”
• Steamship Historical Society of America Speaker Series, which lists “The Royal Tar, 1836: Reconstructing an Early Steamship Disaster” in its 2027 program

The Eastport announcement identifies me as the author and describes the eighteen years of archival, maritime, technical, underwater, and on-site research behind the book. The Castine Historical Society states that the investigation culminated in its publication. The Steamship Historical Society of America has also selected the Royal Tar research for its 2027 Speaker Series. Other presentations are currently being planned and finalized for the rest of the year and early spring of 2027.

The book is publicly available beyond my own website through established booksellers, including:

• Books-A-Million
• Amazon
• Strand Books

The bookseller listings establish the book’s public availability and distribution, while the institutional announcements demonstrate outside interest in the research and its contribution to the history of the Royal Tar.

I disclosed that I am the author because I did not believe it would be appropriate for me to add my own book to the article. I am asking only that an uninvolved editor consider whether this 342-page work, devoted specifically to the Royal Tar and its loss, would be useful to readers in the Further reading section. ~~~~ DennisDorseyDiveQuest (talk) 15:19, 28 September 2026 (UTC)