Again, show me the deed or legal transfer that ceded to the federal government — in perpetuity — the land fill that became Ft. Sumter. I’m not talking about a federal takeover of any land or territory of a sovereign state, I’m talking about that sovereign state agreeing to any transfer.
According to your logic, the majority in Congress in 1860 — which was Northern — could just pass a resolution declaring that the Southern states were to be used as a compost pile for the refuse of the Northern states, and the Southern states could not say anything about it. Have you ever heard of the 9th and 10th Amendments?
“Again, show me the deed or legal transfer that ceded to the federal government — in perpetuity — the land fill that became Ft. Sumter. I’m not talking about a federal takeover of any land or territory of a sovereign state, I’m talking about that sovereign state agreeing to any transfer.”
See:
Fort Sumter - Construction and Ownership
Discussion in ‘Battle of Fort Sumter’ started by amhistoryguy, Mar 13, 2007.
[....]
The Charleston coast was surveyed in 1821, however, a report of that survey was not presented until 1826. That report stated, “the shoal opposite Fort Moultre may be occupied permanently.”
[....]
Work on the Fort began in 1829 with Lt. Henry Brewerton, U. S. Corps of Engineers, in charge of the project. The 2.4 acre Island that the fort was to be built on did not exist, it was constructed from 10,000 tons of granite brought in from New England, along with about 60,000 tons of other rock.
[....]
In autumn of 1834, construction was halted when ownership of the site came into question. Mr. William Laval had secured from the state of South Carolina a vague grant to 870 acres of “land” in Charleston Harbor. Acting on this odd grant, Laval made claim to the site of Fort Sumter. This also raised a question in the South Carolina legislature as to what authority the government had acted upon to begin construction, despite the fact that
South Carolina’s representatives had been voting on appropriations for construction of the site for years.
[....]
Work on Sumter was halted for 3 years due to Laval’s
claim.
The South Carolina State Attorney General invalidated
Laval’s claim on December 20, 1837, but, other issues,
including the resumption of funding, continued to keep
construction halted. South Carolina’s Committee on Federal Relations had questioned the Federal government’s authority for a project in Charleston harbor.
The government had assumed that a deed to “land” covered by water was not necessary, and had begun
without a title to the “land.”
[....]
On November 22, 1841, all issues regarding ownership of the fort were cleared up as the Federal Government was granted title to 125 acres of harbor “land” recorded in the office of the Secretary of State of South Carolina.