[nolu chan]

[ns]How were any of these acts of war?

"April 11th at 9 P.M. the Brooklyn got under way and stood in toward the harbor; and during the night landed troops and marines on board, to reinforce Fort Pickens."

April 1

Captain Adams reported to the Secretary of the Navy as follows:

It would be considered not only a declaration but an act of war; and would be resisted to the utmost.

Both sides are faithfully observing the agreement (armistice) entered into by the United States Government and Mr. Mallory and Colonel Chase, which binds us not to reinforce Fort Pickens unless it shall be attacked or threatened. It binds them not to attack it unless we should attempt to reinforce it.

[Grand Old Partisan]

Sending federal troops to a federal installation, where they had every right to be, is not an act of war.

Captian Adams was referring to how the rebels would react, how THEY would take the federal troop transfer as an act of war. What rebels would think of the federal government's actions is irrelevant to patriots.

[capitan_refugio]

A naval blockade is an act of war. But when the Federal government poses to blockade its own ports or reinforce its own forts, it is difficult to believe the government was declaring war upon itself.

The insubordinate Capt. Adams could only reason this to be an "act of war" if the States in rebellion were considered independent countries.

[Non-Sequitur]

But again, how was it an act of war? Fort Pickens was a federal facility and the Lincoln administration was within its powers to resupply it. Same with Sumter. Neither act required any sort of congressional approval, and the fact that Captain Adams declared it to be an act of war is meaningless. It was not his place to decide what was war and what was not.