.
Feedback

eBay Tuesday: USS Roper In New London

Destroyer would go on to become the first vessel to sink a U-boat in World War II

There are plenty of cases of historical vessel making their way up the Thames River, and today's featured auction item shows one such ship in a New London port: the destroyer that would go on to be the first American warship to sink a U-boat in World War II.

This envelope commemorates the visit of the USS Roper to New London and is postmarked June 19, 1937. It is offered by Michael Hebert, a member of the Universal Ship Cancellation Society. This organization specializes in the collection of naval covers and postmarks from all maritime services.

The Roper was built in Philadelphia, launched in 1918, and commissioned in 1919. The destroyer measured just over 135 feet and was named for Lt. Commander Jesse M. Roper of the ship Petrel. When the Petrel's sail room caught fire in 1901 while it was in the Phillipines during the Spanish-American War, Roper twice went into the burning area - including once to rescue a trapped sailor - and died of suffocation.

The destroyer did not see much action at first, sailing in the Pacific and sitting in a berth for eight years after it was decommissioned just three years after it was commissioned. The destroyer came back to action in 1930 and this naval cover would have been produced shortly after the Roper was reassigned to the Atlantic fleet, sailing from California for the new duties in February of 1937.

The Roper was involved in exercises along the Atlantic seaboard and was assigned to New England patrols in March of 1940. In one October 1940 incident, the destroyer ran aground in the Groton harbor while conducting exercises with submarines.

After the United States joined World War II, the Roper became involved in patrol, escort, and convoy duties. It was on the evening of April 13-14, 1942, that the destroyer, under Lt. Commander H.W. Howe, picked up a vessel on its radar and surprised the surfaced U-85 off the coast of North Carolina. The Roper was able to put a searchlight on the submarine and open fire with its deck guns.

By some accounts, the first encounter sent some 40 German sailors diving for cover into the water and marooned them there as the U-85 submerged. They were killed when the Roper dropped 11 depth charges to ensure the destruction of the submarine.

The destroyer had an active service after that, sailing to numerous parts of the globe and earning four battle stars. The Roper would help land troops in Italy and France in 1944 before she was again ordered to the Pacific. A Japanese kamikaze plane damaged the destroyer on May 25, 1945.

That attack would help ensure that the Roper's work would end with the conclusion of the war. The Navy halted repair work upon Japan's surrender in August of 1945, decommissioned the ship again the next month, and sold it for scrap. The Roper was broken down in 1946.

Herbert says the cover is one of a kind, marked "#1 of one made" on the reverse. The asking price is $3.50 plus $1.50 for shipping. The auction ends at about 10:43 a.m. on Wednesday.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New London Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Carol Haley May 19, 2013 at 05:26 pm
I read that Malloy is hoping Monday but there are problems with the tracks and that has to beRead More repaired. Taking a guestimate, if it isn't Monday, maybe the end of the week.
John Martin May 19, 2013 at 02:42 pm
Of course, you are assuming that the government fund managers would be responsible. So far, this hasRead More been far from the case. The Federal government has plundered Social Security for decades, the teacher and state employee funds have been systematically looted. Of course they want to open this up to anyone with dollars in their pockets. I am not opposed to a program like this - in fact, economies of scale using voluntary contributions in a well-managed plan could be quite beneficial. If the government is going to be allowed to administer the program, there needs to be stringent safeguards, the funds must be untouchable, and there should be swift and significant consequences for mismanagement. Oh, but wait - this is Connecticut. Of course people will find their dollars funding the 'progressive' agenda with no regard for the state's fiduciary, legal, and moral obligation to the contributors.
Kathleen Mitchell May 19, 2013 at 10:45 am
If I read this correctly and, if not, I'm sure someone will correct me, the highlights of this billRead More are (1) It's designed for workers "who do not have access to a retirement plan through their employer" (2) "workers can take their investment with them as they move from job to job." (3) "whatever administrative costs are associated with the plan are charged to the participants themselves, not Connecticut taxpayers." I haven't read the bill yet but I don't see anything in this article by Richard Waselik regarding an employer contribution or match so what is the problem?
Sue P. May 19, 2013 at 10:20 am
Richard, Are you the same Richard that sent a letter to the city council when you became concernedRead More that people that did not work for the city long enough were contributing to the pension plan? I think I have a copy of it somewhere. I think you were concerned that people were getting vested and they were not suppose to be yet.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 07:44 am
Pretty funny Spencer. But you don't want a museum there. You need something that generates taxes.Read More Museums are mostly non-profit thereby not generating any taxes. I know you were being funny. I was disgusted to read the developer couldn't show financial backing.
Kathleen Mitchell May 17, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Who would haveever thought of Wasp Spray? When you get the case of spray, be sure and drop a can offRead More at my house;>)
Jeff Brown May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Good article, gonna have to pick up a case of wasp spray!
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Barbara, I agree with you. But it is probably a lot easier to get an illegal social security numberRead More than we would know. There are two ways of looking at this issue, but my resentment is that I have to pay for them.
Barbara Crocker May 17, 2013 at 07:52 am
But for state aid they would have to have a Social Security number. Bending and breaking laws isRead More how they got here in the first place. The fact that elected officials condone and encourage these laws to be broken is the biggest problem that I have with this whole debacle. "Undocumented residents" place a burden on all of us, and take jobs that could be worked by legal residents. Employers hire illegals (yes I prefer calling them what they are, to hell with being politically correct) because it saves them money, not because "no one else would work these jobs". This is a slap in the face to all of our ancestors who came to this country and followed the rules to become citizens.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 06:51 am
The way things have been going in the eastern part of the United States, as long as the illegals areRead More not breaking the law criminally (motor vehicle is different), they are not arrested for being illegal. Its the illegal immigrants who break the law, such as the large drug bust recently in the papers. As long as they are minding their own business, they get a pass. The only problem I have with illegals is their rush to get on state aid, food stamps, etc. I don't think we should have to support those that choose to live in this country illegally. Becoming a US citizen is not cheap. It is expensive, but it is something that they must work for.
Spencer May 16, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Perhaps because people who vote continue to vote the same way they have for years--and expect to getRead More different results when they do so?
Carol Haley May 15, 2013 at 05:05 pm
Sounds like a bunch of goobledygook to me. And Sue, the Democrats being divided isn't anything newRead More as well as the backstabbing and bs. It's been going on for years. That is one of the reasons I changed to independent a long time ago. I'm presently a Democrat, but changing back to independent as soon as I can get down there.
Felicia Hendersen May 15, 2013 at 09:00 am
Bravo Sue P. And Kathleen I changed the word from "her" to "his". Why shouldRead More people not question the motives of the city council president?
Sue P. May 15, 2013 at 08:53 am
Glad to here that Felicia, I sure hope that you are who you are and not the HE I was told you are.Read More Now is the time to work together and not pick each other apart like the Administration is doing to the Democrat Town Committee.You should see how divided they are and all the back stabbing and bickering that goes on. I say stay clear of that group.
William Desmond May 14, 2013 at 12:47 pm
I must say this has created quite a stir!
Luis Smart May 14, 2013 at 07:04 am
I agree Richard argyle sweaters would have really made it. It is really sad Michael Passero has goneRead More to the dark side and has aligned himself with the administration rather than the people of the city. The one time high vote getter will be all done in November.
Richard Cranium May 13, 2013 at 10:26 pm
I think it is pretty funny although they should be wearing argyle vest sweaters!