Replies

Among other things, you are glossing over the fact that Sumter, for all intent and purposes, was under siege. Anderson’s men where previously in the habit of procuring rations at the local grocery in downtown Charleston. Lincoln first learned that Sumter was about to run out of food on his first day in office.

They weren't supposed to be there at all. Had they been honest about their intentions, the Confederates would have seized Sumter first, and they would have had no other choice but to leave Fort Moultrie and surrounding environs.

They deliberately misled the Confederates into believing that the properties were to be turned over to them, thereby respecting their independence, but what Anderson did instead was seen as a bait and switch con.

After that they were unwanted guests who refused to leave.

Meanwhile, Beauregard had been slowly but surely, week after week, surrounding the Fort with artillery, cannons, mortars, mortars on barges and enough assorted fire-power to blow the Fort to smithereens.

Because a strongly worded letter just wasn't getting the point across. Of course he was bringing up artillery. How else did you expect them to put pressure on Anderson to leave?

So, your oft mentioned, personal interpretation of the situation (that somehow something fictitious would be trapped between the Great Northern Armada and the Fort) is nothing short of preposterous.

Beauregard only assaulted Sumter with a portion of his forces. He had held a large part in ready reserve to deal with the warships when they attacked. It was in fact the arrival of the warships that convinced him there was no more time for talk.

Whether the Warships presented that much of a threat is irrelevant to military planning. The enemy does not tell you how many forces it brought, and if you rely only on reports, you may get a nasty surprise. If the entire Union fleet had shown up, it would have been very bloody for both the defenders and the attacking ships, and Beauregard didn't know how much to trust what information he had at that time.

What he did know was that it was militarily stupid to allow a two front bombardment of his positions.

“They (who ever that was) deliberately misled the Confederates into believing that the properties were to be turned over to them, thereby respecting their independence, but what Anderson did instead was seen as a bait and switch con.

Anderson had no orders from his military superiors to abandon Federal property to the Confederates. The military on scene commander (Anderson) abandon Moultrie because he could not defend it with 110 men.

“Beauregard only assaulted Sumter with a portion of his forces. He had held a large part in ready reserve to deal with the warships when they attacked.”

Every gun that Beauregard possessed was pointed toward Sumter. The 6000 infantry that he had under his command would have been useless against ships steaming a couple of miles off shore.

“It was in fact the arrival of the warships that convinced him there was no more time for talk”

Nonsense. He had orders from Davis to reduce Sumter by all means at his disposal before the resupply force arrived.
He sent his last agents to the fort at 1 am in the morning to issue the final surrender ultimatum. That was refused.
He opened fire 4 hours later.

Beauregard open fire with total disregard for what ever naval force was to appear. Every gun at Moultrie, Morris and Sullivan’s Island was aimed at Sumter. Not a single gun that Beauregard had under his command was in any position to fire in “Lincoln’s attack armada” should it arrive. That was because he knew that 4 warships had little ability to change the situation at Charleston Harbor, once he obeyed Davis’s orders to fire on Fort Sumter.

“Among other things, you are glossing over the fact that Sumter, for all intent and purposes, was under siege. Anderson’s men where previously in the habit of procuring rations at the local grocery in downtown Charleston. Lincoln first learned that Sumter was about to run out of food on his first day in office.”

You are such a person that you would chop up the quote of a statement I made and present it as having been delivered by me as such? That is rather pathetic. But it does explain everything about you. If you must quote me DO NOT leave out complete sentences. No need to reply.

HD: Among other things, you are glossing over the fact that Sumter, for all intent and purposes, was under siege. Anderson’s men where previously in the habit of procuring rations at the local grocery in downtown Charleston. [They got shut-off.] Lincoln first learned that Sumter was about to run out of food on his first day in office. (ps Please note that I bracketed the sentence you chopped out)

DL They weren't supposed to be there at all. Had they been honest about their intentions, the Confederates would have seized Sumter first, and they would have had no other choice but to leave Fort Moultrie and surrounding environs.

Pure fiction. The fact is, Anderson displayed uncommon initiative when, after noticing an uptick in the patrols by the Confederates between Moultrie and Sumter, moved out of Moultrie (after spiking the cannons) and into the unoccupied Sumter, in the cold and darkness of Christmas Eve. He just beat them to it. Is it possible the Rebs didn’t have the nerve to occupy an empty Federal Fort?

DL: They deliberately misled the Confederates into believing that the properties were to be turned over to them, thereby respecting their independence, but what Anderson did instead was seen as a bait and switch con.

Seen by who (besides yourself)? You are screwing up the timeline. The “misleading” (by Seward and Seward only) would come later.

DL: After that they were unwanted guests who refused to leave.

They were being starved-out. They plainly stated that they would walk out of the Fort on the day they ran out of food.

HD: Meanwhile, Beauregard had been slowly but surely, week after week, surrounding the Fort with artillery, cannons, mortars, mortars on barges and enough assorted fire-power to blow the Fort to smithereens.

DL: Because a strongly worded letter just wasn't getting the point across. Of course he was bringing up artillery. How else did you expect them to put pressure on Anderson to leave?

Umm......how about by completely cutting them off from provisions? Anderson told Beauregard’s emissary that he only had enough food to last a day or two.

HD: So, your oft mentioned, personal interpretation of the situation (that somehow something fictitious would be trapped between the Great Northern Armada and the Fort) is nothing short of preposterous.

DL: Beauregard only assaulted Sumter with a portion of his forces. He had held a large part in ready reserve to deal with the warships when they attacked. It was in fact the arrival of the warships that convinced him there was no more time for talk.

On the contrary, it was Jeff Davis’ order that convinced him. Fact.

DL: Whether the Warships presented that much of a threat is irrelevant to military planning. The enemy does not tell you how many forces it brought, and if you rely only on reports, you may get a nasty surprise. If the entire Union fleet had shown up, it would have been very bloody for both the defenders and the attacking ships, and Beauregard didn't know how much to trust what information he had at that time.

There are a lot of “ifs” in your fictional account. It wasn’t any military decision by Beauregard at all. He was a pawn. It was a political decision by Jeff Davis. Jeff couldn’t afford to let the siege end without action. He couldn’t wait another day and let Anderson just stroll out under a white flag! Jeff had States to win over! He ordered Beauregard (through an emissary) to ATTACK!

DL: What he did know was that it was militarily stupid to allow a two front bombardment of his positions

What he knew or didn’t know didn’t amount to squat. The decisions were made in Montgomery by Jeff and his bankers/backers and their own self-interest. Have you ever wondered who pulled Jeff’s strings? No, I didn’t think so.

HandyDandy: "Among other things, you are glossing over the fact that Sumter, for all intent and purposes, was under siege."

DiogenesLamp: "They weren't supposed to be there at all.
Had they been honest about their intentions, the Confederates would have seized Sumter first..."

I was just reviewing the Fort Sumter timeline, some interesting tidbits:

On November 7, 1860 -- the day after Lincoln's election, Charleston SC authorities arrested a Federal officer for trying to transfer supplies from the US Army's Charleston Arsenal to Fort Moultrie.
Note this was before SC's legislature on November 10 called for a convention to declare secession, which they did on December 18.
This tells us that, unlike DiogenesLamp, 1860-61 secessionists really didn't care about legal niceties & justifications, that for them it was strictly "might makes right", and since they wanted to restrict arms transfers, that was plenty enough reason.
On November 13, still a month before its secession conference met, the SC state legislature resolved to raise 10,000 volunteers to defend the state.
This when the US Army totaled about 16,000 most scattered in Western forts.
It tells us secessionists expected war, and unlike DiogenesLamp, didn't care who started it.
On November 18, still a month before SC secession, Georgia's legislature voted $1 million to arm Georgia.
It shows that, unlike DiogenesLamp, Georgians expected violence, even before declaring secession.
On November 23, still weeks before secession, Major Anderson at Fort Sumter reported his small garrison was being "openly and publicly threatened".
It shows that, unlike DiogenesLamp, SC secessionists weren't concerned about legalistic niceties in exerting authority over Federal properties & officials.
Anderson requested reinforcements, a request frequently repeated.
On December 4, still weeks before any secession, outgoing Democrat President Buchanan announced the SC forts would be defended if attacked.
On December 8, still weeks before secession, a delegation of SC congressmen called on President Buchanan, telling him reinforcements for Maj. Anderson would cause what Buchanan wanted to avoid.
The congressmen asked Buchanan to meet SC commissioners to consider turning over Federal property to SC.
This tells us that, unlike DiogenesLamp, the SC congressmen consider Federal property to be Federal property, regardless of SC's secession status.
On December 10, still before secession, SC congressmen told Buchanan SC would not attack US forts in Charleston provided they were not reinforced.
They also hoped an offer would be made for amicable arrangements, thus recognizing, unlike DiogenesLamp, that 1) US forts did not automatically belong to SC on secession, and that 2) secessionists had no hesitation about attacking first, if the US did not respond to their demands.
On December 11 Virginian Democrat US Secretary of War Floyd (future Confederate general) ordered Major Anderson to occupy whichever forts he felt most defensible and to defend them if attacked.
On December 18, 1860, SC's convention voted 169 to zero for secession.
December 21, Lincoln wrote Missouri Republican leader Francis Blair that,
This shows us Lincoln's later actions were consistent with earlier thinking.
December 22, SC's convention named three commissioners to deal with the US regarding Federal property.
It also said the forts should now
This shows that, unlike DiogenesLamp, commissioners did not consider those forts to have automatically transferred ownership from the US to SC, and they intended to send commissioners to deal with US Federal properties.
That same day Lincoln wrote to Georgia Congressman (future Confederate VP of cornerstone fame) saying:
This shows that, unlike DiogenesLamp, Lincoln considered the root cause all about slavery.
December 24, Congress refused to recognize SC's secession.
December 26, Major Anderson moved his garrison from Fort Moultrie to Fort Sumter saying,
thus confirming secessionists' violent intentions, despite DiogenesLamp's denials.
In Washington, SC commissioners arrived to discuss the forts.
December 27, SC troops seized Castle Pickney, Fort Moultrie, and USRC William Aiken.
President Buchanan claimed to Southern representatives that Anderson's move to Fort Sumter had been against his orders, but in that he was mistaken.
Secretary of War Floyd (future Confederate general) strongly advocated removing all Federal troops from Charleston on grounds Anderson violated Washington pledges.
In that Floyd was mistaken.
December 26, President Buchanan met with SC commissioners for the only time and only as "private gentlemen" -- he could not recognize them as representing a sovereign power.
The commissioners demanded immediate Federal withdrawal from Fort Sumter but Buchanan refused.
General Scott opposed evacuation, as did Attorney General Stanton.
At a cabinet meeting Stanton & Floyd almost came to blows over it.
December 29, Floyd resigned amid charges of treason.
December 30, Buchanan's Secretary of State Black and Attorney General Stanton advised: 1) against giving up Charleston forts, 2) they must be defended, 3) no violation of orders by Anderson, 4) no meeting with SC commissioners and 5) warships should be sent to Charleston with reinforcements.
General Scott also asked for 250 troops as reinforcements.
December 31, President Buchanan told SC commissioners Congress must define relations between Federal government and SC, denied any pledge to preserve status of forts and noted how SC seized other Federal properties.
He refused to withdraw Anderson's garrison and issued orders for ships, troops and stores to sail for Fort Sumter.
This tells us that, unlike DiogenesLamp, Doughfaced Democrat Predsident Buchanan did not buy secessionists' claims that somehow Federal property magically became not Federal on SC secession.
January 1, 1861 Charleston secessionists preparations for war continued with general mobilization, night patrols & guards for wharves & vessels.
January 2, SC commissioners responded to Buchanan with your typical Democrat b*t-sh*t nonsense, claiming,
Buchanan read their letter at his cabinet meeting which agreed that reinforcement be sent to Fort Sumter.
January 3, SC commissioners gave up & left Washington for Charleston.
Georgia state troops seized Federal Fort Pulaski, weeks before declaring secession, thus demonstrating that, unlike DiogenesLamp, they cared nothing for legal niceties.
January 4, Alabama secessionists took over the US Arsenal at Mount Vernon, Alabama, a week before declaring secession.
January 5, Star of the West left New York for Fort Sumter with supplies and 250 troops.
General Scott substituted merchant ship Star of the West for the warship Brooklyn, thinking it might better sneak into Charleston harbor.
Scott was mistaken.
Alabama secessionists seized Federal Forts Morgan & Gains, still before declaring secession.
January 6, Florida secessionists seized the Federal Arsenal at Apalochicola, before declaring secession.
Democrat New York Power-broker, Mayor Fernando Wood, proposed to secede & make New York a free-city, trading with both North & South.
This shows that, contrary to DiogenesLamp's claims, "Northeastern Power Brokers" were not overly concerned to prevent Deep South secessions.
January 7, Florida secessionists seized Federal Fort Marion.
The US House of Representatives approved Maj. Anderson's move to Fort Sumter.
January 8, Mississippian US Secretary of Interior telegraphed Charleston advising of Star of the West's mission and resigned from Buchanan's cabinet.
Buchanan sent Congress a special message throwing the whole problem in into their hands.
At Fort Barrancas, Pensacola, Federal troops fired warning shots at about 20 men approaching them late at night.
This was before Florida's secession, so the incident cannot have been a civil war action.
January 9, Secessionists fired on Star of the West which retreated, its reinforcement mission not accomplished.
Major Anderson protested to SC Governor Pickens who replied that sending reinforcements was considered a hostile act and must be repelled.
This shows that, contrary to DiogenesLamp's claims, no Lincoln "war armada" was necessary for secessionists to begin war over Fort Sumter.
January 20, ex-Senator Jefferson Davis wrote his friend Doughfaced Northern Democrat ex-President Pierce,

These examples are intended to illustrate the point that, unlike DiogenesLamp, 1860-61 secessionists cared nothing for legal niceties, merely insisting, under threat of violence, the Federal government must turn over its properties in secession states.
And Jefferson Davis considered even Doughfaced President Buchanan's mildest of responses adequate to "inaugurate a civil war".

DiogenesLamp: "Because a strongly worded letter just wasn't getting the point across.
Of course he was bringing up artillery.
How else did you expect them to put pressure on Anderson to leave? "

Remember, at issue here is: who started Civil War at Fort Sumter -- was it Jefferson Davis by firing on Maj. Anderson's garrison, or was it Lincoln for sending his "war armada" to Charleston?
So why did Lincoln send warships to Charleston?

President Buchanan had already committed (on February 5) to SC Governor Pickens that Fort Sumter would be defended against attacks and not surrendered under any circumstances.
President Buchanan had already tried & failed to resupply & reinforce Fort Sumter with a single unarmed civilian merchant ship, Star of the West.
Confederates had repeatedly demanded Fort Sumter's surrender, threatening violence and firing on Union ships.
Jefferson Davis had ordered preparations for military assault on Forts Sumter & Pickens, if they didn't surrender.

Bottom line: military assaults are acts of war, resupply missions are not.
So, despite DiogenesLamp's repeated denials, Jefferson Davis intended to start war at Forts Sumter & Pickens, if Lincoln didn't surrender them first.
And that's just what happened.

DiogenesLamp: "They deliberately misled the Confederates into believing that the properties were to be turned over to them, thereby respecting their independence, but what Anderson did instead was seen as a bait and switch con.
After that they were unwanted guests who refused to leave."

But there was no "misleading" about US intentions to hold the Charleston forts.
If you review my post #1,037 you'll see that that:

Secessionists began threatening Union officials on November 7, the day after Lincoln's election.
By November 23, Maj. Anderson reported his small garrison was being "openly and publically threatened."
This lead to December 4, still weeks before any secession, outgoing Doughfaced Democrat President Buchanan announced the SC forts would be defended if attacked.
In response, SC congressmen told Buchanan reinforcing Maj. Anderson would cause war and they asked him to meet with SC commissioners to discuss turning over Federal properties.
Note this is still two weeks before SC declared secession!
On December 11, still a week before secession, the US Secretary of War (future Confederate General) ordered Maj. Anderson to defend the forts if attacked, and deploy his garrison as seemed best.
On December 27, President Buchanan claimed that Anderson's move to Fort Sumter had been against his orders, but in that Buchanan was mistaken.
Secretary of War Floyd (future Confederate general) strongly advocated removing all Federal troops from Charleston -- on grounds Anderson violated Washington pledges.
But in that Floyd was mistaken.
On December 28, SC commissioners demanded Anderson's withdrawal from Fort Sumter, but Buchanan refused.
On December 31, President Buchanan told SC commissioners Congress must define relations between Federal government and SC, denied any pledge to preserve status of forts and noted how SC seized other Federal properties.
Buchanan refused to withdraw Anderson's garrison and issued orders for ships, troops and stores to sail for Fort Sumter.

So there was no time under President Buchanan when the US promised to withdraw Maj. Anderson's garrison from Charleston, SC.
And from the beginning secessionists used force, plans & threats of force to compel Union withdrawals.
So Jefferson Davis' actions on April 12 were simply a continuation of previous Confederate tactics.