If you will see the records, without question Slemmer ordered Union Infantry to fire on duly authorized Florida militia......the first shots of the war.
Historians do not have any authority to make any “official” determination.
The United States Coast Guard historical documents state that the “Harriet Lane” fired the first shots at Ft. Sumter at incoming shipping on the evening of the 11th.
Impeding shipping with cannon fire under the authority of an executive is a blockade.
Later, Charleston authorities defended their property.
“If it is your contention that secession nullified federal law, then you would be in agreement with state authorities that the pile of rocks in question lay within the navigable waters of the state, and under state authority.”
I wasn’t stating that that was true. I was wondering. You just answered my question. All that besides, where did federal law state that forts are to protect the states? Or that the Feds cannot take territory? And what about the fact that the South Carolinian government turned Sumter over to the Feds? The legislation ceding the Fort to the government states otherwise.
“If you will see the records, without question Slemmer ordered Union Infantry to fire on duly authorized Florida militia......the first shots of the war.”
What records? I never found anything to substantiate that claim. According to the Pensacola Historical Society, Slemmer moved his forces out of McRee and Barrancas and into the US-controlled Fort Pickens two days before the militias of both Florida and Alabama showed up. It was those militiamen that attacked Ft. Pickens on the 21st, A Union owned fort.
I didn’t say that the Historians have any authority. That would be like saying that the historians who claim Shakespeare was gay are right because they are historians. I was merely stating that as what I’ve read. The US government believes that the Battle of Fort Sumter was the first battle of the war, whereas it’s historians believe that the events in Pensacola are the beginning of the war. As you said, historians have no authority in this matter. The official date of the start of the Civil War was at Fort Sumter.
“The United States Coast Guard historical documents state that the “Harriet Lane” fired the first shots at Ft. Sumter at incoming shipping on the evening of the 11th.”
The Harriet Lane was besieged by Confederate forces, after the Governor of South Carolina threatened military action if the Union did not surrender Ft. Sumter. Governor Pickens stated,”I regard that possession is not consistent with the dignity or safety of the State of South Carolina.” He states that the fort was owned by the US government. The Union forces were there to protect Union property. Who was the aggressor in that situation? As you say, the Union fired first, but it was in defense of government property. You seem to think that it was okay for the South to defend its property, but the North not to defend its property. If you read the legislation, there is no doubt that Ft. Sumter was Union property. You say that it was the Union that fired first, yet claim that the first skirmish of the war was in Pensacola. In Pensacola, it was the Confederates that fired first. At Sumter, it was the Union. So which one was it? If we go by the official reports, then Sumter was where it began, and it was in a defense of property. It wasn’t like the North waltzed in willy-nilly to take the fort. In truth, it was in the North’s possession. In both cases, the South was the aggressor, attacking forts owned by the US government.
So where are the supposed records of the blockades prior to Fort Sumter? I cannot even find any for Pensacola until May.