Early Naval Photography: Enrique Muller

1846: Enrique Muller was born in Germany, according to the 1900 U. S. Census records. His name is sometimes shown as Müller or Mueller.

1865, Enrique emigrated to the United States (same Census).

Around 1875: Enrique married Mary (again, 1900 Census, information taken on Twelth [sic] June 1900, showing they had been married 25 years) and soon started his family.

Mid-1894: He received payments for "Photographs in the matter of the Speedway and Fort Washington Park," according to the City of New York Law Department Report of 1895. The city was planning the development of the Harlem River Speedway at the time. This is the first mention I can find of Enrique's photographic work.

1898: Whether because copyright laws were changing or because he recognized the growing opportunity of stock photography, Enrique started registering some of his photos. This is the oldest I can find:

From the Catalogue of Copyright Entries for 1898. Remember the Maine!

Many photos of warships in The Story of the Spanish-American War and the Revolt in the Philippines (by W. Nephew King, (c)1898) were attributed to E. Muller. They may have all been taken in 1898, after the conflict was over. Another book using Muller photos of this time was The History of Our Navy From Its Origin to the End of the War with Spain 1775-1898. Presumably the war with Spain created an interest in the Navy and its warships.

1899: Muller took photos of the racing yacht Columbia, the current entry in the America's Cup race. The race took place in the New York harbor, not far from Muller's Brooklyn home. Some of these were published in Scientific American (October 14, 1899). Muller provided photo prints of the racing yachts to Kaiser Wilhelm, who thanked him with a pair of gold cuff buttons (mentioned in The Brooklyn Daily Eagle (February 6, 1902). Enrique is quoted mentioning his father, who had been employed 25 years in the post office in Kiel, Germany.)

1900: Muller had his wife and six children, aged from 17 to 25, listed in the Census as living with him. Son Theodore was 24, and second son Robert was 18. Both young men showed their occupation as "Photographer."

1901: Muller publishes an article entitled, Placing a Battleship in Commission in Camera Craft (May issue). The byline identifies him as "Official Photographer, U. S. Navy." I believe this was written by Enrique, as the wording is a bit stiff, perhaps because English was a second language. Check out this closing paragraph:
     "Now the tugs are leaving the ship, and the big vessel moves under her own steam. As she gains headway a sharp report thunders, closely followed by another, until the full salute of thirteen guns is fired, in honor of the admiral's flag in the navy yard. On the Cob Dock the shore battery answers the salute. One navy tugboat follows the battleship down the bay to bring back the pilot, and as the open sea is reached the government photographer is busy making the final official photographs for the Navy Department. The pilot signals for the tugboat to come alongside, he jumps on board, the tug gives three short whistles for bon voyage, the battleship gives three long blasts in response, and she is off."

Around this time, sons Theodore and Robert were working with or for their father. "Enrique Muller" was a family business. So much so that there is a lot of confusion about which Muller took which photos.

Robert apparently immersed himself completely in naval imagery, while Theodore had a small handful of photos printed under his own name in an article about the theater. (There was another Theodore Muller, who took photos of warships in San Francisco. No known relation.)

Over a hundred years later, without the glass plates and film negatives, we probably can't figure it all out. It doesn't help that many of the published photos attributed to Muller don't show in the Catalog of Copyright Entries, and that those entries present are a couple words or a short phrase, often only identifying a ship by name.

1903: The New American Navy Vol. 1, by John Davis Long is published. Over two dozen photos of ships and sailors are credited to E. Muller. These photos all appear to be posed, with the ships at anchor, except for one nice high angle picture of the Cruiser Brooklyn, taken as it approached the Brooklyn Bridge.

Publishers Weekly, May 7, 1904

Waldron Fawcett was a publisher. He probably wanted to beef up his naval product line by including Muller photos. It's also possible that Fawcett was the reason so many different types of Muller postcards exist. He may have been aggressive about marketing. It's likely most of these images were taken by father Enrique, based on his "many years" as photographer for the Navy. (There's some argument about whether "Official Photographer" was a real title at the time. The Navy hired (or otherwise made use of) several professional photographers in the New York area at the same time.)

Muller advertised himself as an artist as well as a photographer. Source: Blue Book of American Shipping, 1906.

Muller's work appeared on color postcards published by
- The American News Company, Mason Bros. & Co.
- The Jamestown Amusement & Vending Co. (as souvenirs of the Jamestown Exposition in 1907)
- The Valentine-Souvenir Co.
- Valentine & Sons' Publishing Co.

Black and white real photo postcards were published by U.S. Souvenir Post Card Co., and there were several attempts at self-publishing.

Rotograph, a postcard publisher known for buying photo lots (and smaller publishing firms), put out a series of Muller's ship photos. The cards show photo copyright dates from 1898 to 1904, and postmarks tend to be from 1905 to 1907. Some of these cards had the copyright information awkwardly blacked out (and often still readable).

A Rotograph card of the U.S.S. Pennsylvania

Muller's work was published in magazines including Leslie's Weekly, Marine Engineering, and Army & Navy Illustrated. For some of these publications, he was listed as a "staff" or "special" photographer, probably supplementing the income from his own store.

The Catalogue of Copyright and these magazines are useful to identify and date Muller's postcards -- when they were issued in sets or packs, most postcards went straight into collections, rather than getting mailed and postmarked.

1907: A busy year for "Enrique Muller," and I feel confident that son Robert was the reason. Robert E. Muller was 26 years old, with nearly a decade of experience as a photographer. One of the Muller family's most famous photos, of the U.S.S. Connecticut bearing down, was taken that year. The negative says the copyright belongs to Enrique Muller, but "E. Muller, Jr." claimed the photo in later years. The younger Muller was a more aggressive photographer, willing to sit in tiny boats as battleships approached, and climb masts to get overhead views, and this photo fit his style.

The U.S.S. Connecticut, with her nose badge and Great White Fleet paint scheme.

1908: Enrique Muller either sold negatives or licensed rights to Edward Mitchell, a West Coast postcard publisher. The Mitchells I've identified so far were "life in the navy"-type shipboard photos, and may have been exclusive to him. They show 1907 copyright dates.

Sometime in 1910, a partnership was apparently formed. Published photos and cards show "Clarke & Muller" as the copyright holder. This arrangement lasted only into 1911. I haven't found any information on whether Clarke was a photographer or an investor. One series of photo postcards with this copyright shows the destruction of the San Marcos as gunnery practice. I suspect these were purchased from a ship's photographer or a sailor that was assigned there.

Clarke & Muller used a different address than was used on other Muller prints or postcards.

Also in 1910, the New York Times Sunday Magazine for August 14 ran an article entitled Unusual Snapshots taken at Thrilling Moments. It discusses several such photos and photographers, then mentions Muller: "Characteristic of the pluck and presence of mind required in such [photographic] work is the story of Enrique Muller, the young photographer of Hoboken, who took a picture of the battleship Connecticut during her trial trip off the coast of Maine on Aug. 7, 1907." (And goes on to tell the tale of how the engine on his small launch failed as the battleship approached.)

Robert, not only a daredevil but a self-promoting one, had similar tales of near-disaster published in other newspapers and magazines. The stories are sufficiently alike that you wonder if he had really bad luck or just changed some of the details for each interview.

Though primarily based in New York City, Muller (probably both Enrique and Robert) travelled to San Francisco more than once. A note in an SF-based photography magazine is apparently talking about Enrique:

From Camera Craft, May 1913

The "great cruise" was the sailing of the Great White Fleet, which visited San Francisco in 1908. Muller got a lot of photos of ships in their white paint. I'm not sure about the "three years ago" thing with the Kaiser, ten or twelve years would be closer. (Unless this is a second "honor" that I can't find any other reference to.)

Many more photos were taken and published over the next seven years, but these aren't as confusing -- the published works show "E. Muller, Jr." or "Muller." By 1913, Enrique would have been about 67 years old, and probably retired.

The Muller name is on at least three small books: The Book of the United States Navy (The A. B. Benesch Company, Publishers, New York, 1905. "Over 200 Plates in this Book are reproduced from photographs taken by Enrique Müller, Official Photographer of the U. S. Navy."); Battleships of the U. S. Navy, from photographs by E. Muller, Jr., Photographer United States Navy (New York, E. Muller, Jr. (c)1912); The U. S. Navy, Pictured by E. Muller, Jr. (For Sale by Popular Mechanics Book Dept.(1917)).

Norbert Moser, another well-known marine photographer in the New York area, published a number of Robert's photos. These real photo postcards show "(c) E. Muller, Jr. for N. Moser, N.Y." Again, I can't find postmarks on them, but Moser didn't begin publishing from New York until about 1914.

In early 1915, Robert E. Muller declared bankruptcy.

1918: The first World War was over. Many of the ships that filled the Muller portfolio were destined to be scrapped as part of a peace agreement. The navy was downsizing, and probably didn't need as many photographs. Postcard collecting was losing its popularity. It was a tough time, financially, to rely on being a marine photographer.

The Catalog of Copyright Entries continued to show registrations from both Enrique Muller and E. Muller, Jr. (or E. Muller, Jr., Inc.) of New York, into 1919. Many of these are of the troop transports bringing home soldiers from Europe.

I haven't managed to find a date of death (or place) for Enrique Muller. Without that, it's hard to say if he was still working into his seventies. Or perhaps son Theodore was running the family business?

A very brief note appeared in Bulletin of Photography:

In an issue of the Bulletin of Photography, 1919

Though a crucial verb is missing, it appears Robert sold his photography business to his brother Theodore and some partners.

Robert, his wife and their child moved to California, where he died in 1921.

All images, magazine and newspaper articles whose images are used in this text are over 100 years old and out of copyright protection.

Vera Cruz Mexico - April to November 1914

The Vera Cruz (or Veracruz) intervention of 1914 was most likely one of those overreactions that can happen when tensions are high. The western world was boiling into war. Nine sailors, who had wandered into an area they didn't belong, got "dissed." (Admittedly, their commanding officer didn't use that word. But was demanding a 21-gun salute as part of the apology really appropriate? They were arrested and released. Maybe there was more to it than wikipedia is telling me.) Then there was a shipment of weapons that was contravening a US embargo, and a revolutionary leader that President Wilson didn't approve of.

So we sent in the Marines. And the Navy.

This is one of the earliest battles (or skirmishes or wars) where individuals could carry cameras and record events. A "pocket" Kodak took 3.25" x 5.5" images that could produce photo postcards without needing an enlarger.

Here are some that I identified by the Hotel Terminal (which was used as headquarters by the US military) and nearby buildings:

 

 This was just prior to the US entry into World War One.

Horses were still an accepted way to move officers and armament.








The next photo is similar to a photo from the Libary of Congress
where these guys who appear to be wearing horse collars are identified as Marines, freshly arrived.

There's a number, 72, in the lower right corner, suggesting this is part of a large set of photos. It's printed on Velox photo postcard stock.

This photo, of troops and horses moving through town, shows -No. 4. The hand appears to be non-American; the way the abbreviation is written appears spanish ("numero"). Another from this set:

This is the bombed out Naval Academy, -No. 38- 

These two photos were printed on Artura photo postcard stock.

The way the number is written, -#43-, suggests that this photo is from yet another set. It is also printed on Artura card stock.

The pale text on this faded photo postcard reads: "Mexican Cadets. This picture was taken from a negative found in camera in Naval Academy at Vera Cruz, Mexico. After being bombarded by Americans. Apr. 22nd 1914."

The next photo certainly looks to be from the same place and time. It came in an auction lot, along with a handful of the photos above. I just can't point to a specific thing for proof yet. I'm thinking the buildings in the background will help ...

And then there's this photo -

I don't know when it was photographed, and it certainly isn't a US warship. But Walter Hadsell worked in Vera Cruz at the time, and his Kodak shop (1911 - 1915) had front row seating to the activity. He used this signature around this time. [For more information about W. P. Hadsell, look into Witness to War- Trinity University Press (tupress.org) . I get no kickback or affiliate fees from mentioning this!]

Last revised: 11/25/21

N. Moser, photographer, in his early years

Let me start by saying that it's difficult to trace the actions of an individual, even a businessman, from the distance of over 100 years. A lot of this is guesswork, based on reviewing postcards, some old advertising and weighing the opinions of other researchers. If you disagree and can create a better reconstruction, please let me know.

1904: Enlisted in the Navy.

1910: The federal census shows him as a Chief Electrician aboard the USS Virginia, based at Hampton Roads, VA.

1911: He began taking pictures in earnest. In January, his ship was in Guantanamo Bay.

Around the end of March, he was present for the shelling of the USS San Marcos (ex Texas) off the Virginia coast. 

In May, he was photographing ships -- his own and others -- enduring bad weather around Cape Hatteras, NC. This is probably the deck of the Virginia; later printings show it titled as "A Foc'stle Flood":

Information about when Moser was where comes from the catalog of copyright registrations. I'm presuming he would copyright his works fairly quickly when he decided the picture was interesting enough to sell, subject to the difficulties of mailing photographs from his ship.

Norbert Moser's earliest attempt at selling his photos would have been onboard the Virginia. I imagine him posting photos on a bulletin board, or in the ship's store, with requests taken and printed up as soon as possible. He stamped these photos at the bottom, "Copyright 1911 N. G. Moser" in dark red ink. He likely received an enthusiastic response from his shipmates, most of whom wouldn't have their own cameras yet.

(Kodak was producing basic pocket-sized cameras at what looks like fantastic prices today, but photography was not a cheap activity.)

Moser's earliest photos were often of other ships in the fleet driving through high waves. You can almost see him, one arm wrapped around the nearest rail as his own ship rolled and dove through the water, camera focus set on infinity so he wouldn't have to adjust it (presuming he could -- I have no idea how basic his own early camera was). They were impressive shots of ships appearing swamped by the tremendous waves. Sailors could send these to their land-bound relatives and point out, "This is what we had to live with."

They must have sold well -- or he included them in more of his sets -- as they are the most common you can find on eBay.

1912: Baseball was a popular activity for sailors, played between two ships' teams or one ship and a local team. Guantanamo Bay had a baseball field and Moser experimented with panoramic photography:

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2013646987/

When he went into larger production (not certain as to date), he appears to have switched to marking the negative:

The images have a script-written 1911 copyright, but don't have a title.

The same basic card stock appears to have been used for these prints.

The back of the card may or may not have Photo Post Card by N. G. Moser, 207 Thames St., Newport, R. I.

The back may or may not be upside down too.

In his first attempt as a publisher, Moser may not have paid too much attention to consistency. Or perhaps he jobbed out the actual printing.






There is sometimes a hint of the early script-written copyright remaining on later printings, usually with the year scratched out:

Battleship in the Panama Canal

Someone, perhaps a sailor but more likely an experienced ship's photographer, took a series of photos of his ship as it passed through the Panama Canal in the late 1910s or early 1920s. The ship isn't identified.

Actually, this wasn't that unusual. The Panama Canal was fairly new, having opened in 1914. Sailors, like soldiers, went into war with the new pocket-sized cameras that Kodak was putting out, and took lots of photos. Amateur snaps tended to look like their name - an image that may have blurred or been poorly composed, but was proudly printed up on a real photo post card.

Back to my postcards. One identifies itself as No. 1 View of Culebra Cut, and the other is No. 12 Dreadnought in Culebra Cut. There may be more than 12 in the series; I've only seen a couple of the others, numbered 4 and 9. They may have been sold as a set.

I really wanted to know what ship these might be from. I started with the theory that both were taken on the same ship.

 The front or forward cage mast.

You might guess that from the bits of the deck that can be seen, but I'm still fairly new at this "guess the battleship" game and I can't take much for granted.


Not much information to be gained from this postcard, not yet, as battleships in general are identified as "World War One" era primarily because of a cage mast.


Actually, a single cage mast indicates a pre-WW1 ship, usually even pre-1910. The second cage mast was added to most battleships around 1910-1911.

This photo has a lot more detail to work with.

The forward guns are two over two. A real expert might be able to identify them by caliber, again, that isn't me.

We also see three anchor chains.

The stacks are not visible; sometimes counting them helps with identification.


I started with the turret configuration. Using online images at sites including NavSource, Haze Gray and Imperial War Museum, I decided that battleships numbered 14 through 35 were where I needed to concentrate. Earlier than 14, they had only two guns. After 35, they were two over three, or three over three.

I learned that the Navy briefly thought that saving space (and weight) was important enough to "superimpose" the upper turret onto the lower. The four big guns all turned at the same time in the same direction, which I would think limited a captain's options. This style turret was used on BB-14 through BB-17. Some magnification lead me to think the turrets on my postcard are not superimposed - the upper guns are behind rather than simply above - and I eliminated these four ships from further investigation.

The Navy sent a number of battleships through the Panama Canal in 1919, and a large number of ships were removed from service in 1921-ish, under a de-armament treaty. I used 1919-1920 images for my references.

From there, it took a fair amount of squinting at images.

Part of the challenge of identifying battleships: After damage or just after enough time had passed, they went into dry dock for repairs and upfit to improve function or armament; they could come out looking very different. Images available online may not be correctly dated. Sometimes they're misidentifed by ship name ...

The two ships that most closely matched the cage mast (the platform on the top can have different shapes), the turret configuration, the bridge's "wings" and the anti-aircraft gun mounts (visible just above and to the sides of the big gun turrets), were the BB-34 and BB-35. And, of course, I had been going methodically upward in BB numbers ... it's always the last ones you look at.

BB-34, the New York, and BB-35, the Texas, are almost twins. They were built from the same design. During their lives, they did develop some differences. For example, the first set of mast spotlights on the Texas were mounted one over the other, not side by side as on the New York. This was modified at some point, I think the early 1920s, so they matched again.

The Imperial War Museum has two images that are almost identical to my two postcards. They are identified as the New York, taken by a Royal Navy photographer. The gunnery "clock" is missing from the cage mast, the crew is in blue rather than white uniforms, and there is no sign of land around the ship. It's likely that a ship's photographer used the same vantage points at a later date.

There is also a deck hatch on the New York that I don't see in images from the Texas.

Close enough.

I believe I've identified these two photos as being taken on the New York as it approached and transited the Panama Canal.