Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp; BroJoeK
You are really getting into minutia here.

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.

223 posted on 11/21/2017 2:00:43 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies ]


To: x
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?

You may have missed it, but I had mentioned previously that Lieutenant David Porter informed the President that anything going through official channels would be conveyed to the Confederates as fast as they could flash the message down the telegraph wires.

The military and presumably a lot of government departments were riddled with spies and sympathizers. Everything the Union was doing (except Lincolns critical secret orders) was being conveyed to Beauregard.

The Ships showing up at the designated rendezvous point merely confirmed what the previously leaked orders said.

If that was the case, then they would have gotten enough information to put the Scott order in its proper context.

When one is potentially on the receiving end of a hostile force, it is prudent to accept the worst case scenario as the one that will occur.

Did you really miss the "and myself" in Beauregard's message?

I missed that it was Beauregard's message. I got the sender and receiver reversed. Now that I think about it, Walker was likely in Montgomery at this time. So yes, You are correct, it was Beauregard there with Governor Pickens, and the Agent was Capt. Theo. Talbot.

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.

Of what use was the fort to them other than to threaten the entrance to Charleston and keep a thumb in the eye of the Confederacy? There was no real military value to the fort in the defense of anything but Charleston, and insisting on possessing it for no real purpose served only to create a conflict where no other reason for such existed.

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.

They beseiged the place since January. On what line of thinking would you have us believe they were going to relinquish their efforts to evacuate the fort in April? One would think three months of surrounding it with cannons would convince even the hardest head that they meant to see what they regarded as a foreign presence expelled.

Any rational man would take it as a given that they would not allow people to resupply the fort without a fight. Lincolns own cabinet made this point clearly when they were asked about the Fox plan. All but one said it would cause a war, and all but one said they would rather see the fort given up than trigger a massive and horribly bloody civil war.

226 posted on 11/21/2017 3:20:55 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson