Alice Dollar incident explained

Conflict:Alice Dollar incident
Partof:the Yangtze Patrol
Date:July 20–21, 1920
Place:near Tang Chia To and Chongqing, Yangtze River, China
Result:United States victory
Combatant1: United States
Combatant2:Chinese rebels
Commander1: C. D. Gilroy
Commander2:unknown
Strength1:1 gunboat
1 steamer
Strength2:unknown
Casualties1:2 wounded
1 gunboat damaged
1 steamer damaged
Casualties2:unknown

The Alice Dollar incident was an affair involving a United States-flagged merchant ship and an American warship in 1920. Chinese rebels along the Yangtze River attacked the SS Alice Dollar on July 20, so the gunboat was assigned to escort the vessel out of the area. On the following day, during the operation, rebels attacked again but were silenced by American counter-fire.[1]

Incident

The Alice Dollar, of the Dollar Line, was steaming upriver to the treaty port of Tang Chia To in the day of July 20 when armed Chinese rebels, belonging to a local warlord, opened fire on the ship with small arms. The Americans were able to increase their speed and escape to port with minor damage and no casualties. Captain C. D. Gilroy, of USS Monocacy, was informed of the situation and asked to escort the merchant ship back down the river on the next day, July 21. While only four miles off Chongqing, Chinese rebels along the river again attacked from the north bank of the Yangtze. Due to other related incidents in the past, the crews of Monocacys 0.32NaN2 machine guns and 6inches cannons were immediately ordered to return fire.[1]

Within just a few minutes and after firing six shells, the Chinese were in retreat but 0.5miles downriver, they attacked once more. The Americans again returned fire and shot several more shells and hundreds of bullets into the surrounding hills, forcing the rebels to abandon their attempt. Captain Gilroy estimated that his ship was fired on 600 times though only 15 bullet holes were counted and two men were slightly wounded. After the affair, the U.S. consul in Chongqing demanded and received a Chinese apology but no restitution was requested.[1]

See also

References

Notes and References

  1. Tolley, p. 88–89.