This is factually incorrect. It was the arrival of a second ship at the rendezvous point that triggered the notification that if the fort was not evacuated immediately, General Beauregard was going to open fire with his batteries.
The Confederates waited to see if the ships were actually going to come before they started shooting.
And the reference to General Scott is confusing. Are you saying that Confederates had read his communique and not the orders of others in the administration? Otherwise, how does that explain the secessionists response?
I have little doubt that the Confederates read everything. Lieutenant David Porter told Lincoln himself that the Navy was full of Confederate spies and sympathizers and that if anything were sent through official channels, the Confederates would be informed of it as fast as a message can get down the Telegraph wires.
I have little doubt the Army was similarly filled with spies and sympathizers, and it too leaked like a sieve.
Lincoln used this fact to his advantage when he sent hand carried secret orders with David Porter handing him command of the Powhatan (which everyone expected to arrive and lead the assault) to make sure the Union ships would really never attack, all while leaving the Confederates to believe that they would.
The "agent" referred to was sent by Lincoln. Here's Beauregard's earlier message to Walker:
I don't think so. That "agent" was communicating with Governor Pickens, Not General Beauregard. The message sent by Walker says the agent was communicating with Beauregard.
"If you have no doubt of the authorized character of the agent who communicated to you the intention of the Washington Government...
.
.
This document which you did not site, gives a very different view of the situation from what you've said.
I didn't cite it because that agent was not communicating with Beauregard. Why should I cite it? Walker was with Governor Pickens (as noted in your message) and he was communicating with Beauregard by Telegraph. Presumably Beauregard was not in the room with Walker and Pickens, or they would have had no need to communicate by telegraph.
Presumably whatever "agent" to which Walker refers, was with Beauregard.
This is factually incorrect. It was the arrival of a second ship at the rendezvous point that triggered the notification that if the fort was not evacuated immediately, General Beauregard was going to open fire with his batteries.
Presumably the "rendezvous point" wasn't at the fort but about ten miles out, so do we really know which ships were to be sent to the fort and which were to be held back at sea? And if only two ships had arrived when Beauregard gave his ultimatum or order, how could he have gauged the true intentions of the fleet?
I have little doubt that the Confederates read everything.
If that was the case, then they would have gotten enough information to put the Scott order in its proper context.
I don't think so. That "agent" was communicating with Governor Pickens, Not General Beauregard.
Did you really miss the "and myself" in Beauregard's message?
I didn't cite it because that agent was not communicating with Beauregard. Why should I cite it? Walker was with Governor Pickens (as noted in your message) and he was communicating with Beauregard by Telegraph.
That makes no sense. Walker dates his message "MONTGOMERY, April 10, 1861" and he's sending it to "General BEAUREGARD, Charleston." Presumably, Pickens was also in Charleston which is why Beauregard wrote "An authorized messenger from President Lincoln just informed Governor Pickens and myself that provisions will be sent to Fort Sumpter[sic], peaceably, or otherwise by force."
Talk about the "fog of war." This is sort of like the game of "telephone" (or maybe "telegraph"). And so it was at the time. The message that a peaceful reprovisioning was sought by the US got lost as the Confederate leaders communicating with each other adapted it to their belief that a forcible attack was coming. That would have provided a pretext for war and that would have served their own interest.
The Confederate leaders interpreted the situation as they did because it created the opportunity for a shooting war which would finally and permanently sever the tie to the US, and which might eventually help draw other slave states into the Confederacy.
Did they have reason not to trust Lincoln? Maybe. Maybe not. But the more immediate and more important thing is that they weren't going to trust any union leader who didn't give them what they wanted. They were going to interpret any backbone on the part of the US president as a war-like move, either because they actually wanted war or just because they wanted to have everything their own way and would start shooting if they didn't.
And Lincoln? Did he really expect that the rebels would let him peaceably reprovision the fort without firing on the fort or the ships? Maybe. Maybe not. But before we conclude that he was conspiring for war and "tricked" Davis into starting one, consider that the question for Lincoln and the union was whether they were going to give in on everything -- to just lie down and let the Confederates roll over them -- or take a firm stand.
That was the choice they faced, and my guess is Lincoln gambled that Davis and Pickens, and Beauregard would take him at his word and let him resupply the fort. If they didn't, what happened would be on their heads.
Whether Lincoln left it at that, or somehow "knew" they weren't going to let the ships isn't something we can know for certain, though that won't stop people from forming opinions.
The choice and the argument was about taking action or not taking action, drawing a line or just giving up, and once Lincoln had figured that out I suspect he crossed his fingers and hoped things will work out for the best.