AFFAIRS OF THE NATION: The Proposition to Evacuate Fort Sumpter; THE CONGRESS OF THE C.S.A.; Editorial-The Geographical Question of Secession (3/13/1861)

New York Times archives – Times Machine ^ | 3/13/1861

[Homer_J_Simpson]

WASHINGTON, Tuesday, March 12, 1861

FORT SUMPTER TO BE EVACUATED.

The impression prevails here that the Cabinet to-day decided on the issue of an order for the evacuation of Fort Sumpter, although, of course, nothing official is known on the subject. The best evidences to which access can be obtained lead me to believe it true. It is generally conceded among military men here of longest experience that Fort Sumpter cannot be reinforced without great loss of life and the expenditure of millions of money. In this opinion, Gen. SCOTT and Secretary CAMERON fully concur. It is understood that the President and Secretary CHASE have been strongly opposed to abandoning the post, and they are constantly receiving remonstrances from Northern radicals against the evacuation. Some of these even go so far as to threaten political retribution and the destruction of the party. Several letters and papers with marked articles upon the subject have been received by the President and Cabinet. All this, however, will have no effect upon the settled policy of the Administration, which I have the strongest reasons for believing is to avoid any collision at Charleston. Forts Pickens and McRea will not be disturbed, however, at present, as it is deemed necessary to have forces along the coast in case of an emergency.

Rumors about the evacuation of Fort Sumpter are at least premature. No such orders have yet been given, but nearly all consider it inevitable.

Secretary CAMERON is understood to favor the policy of collecting the revenues outside the ports, after Secretary CHASE shall have drawn requisitions upon the officers of the seceding States, and they have refused to comply.

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Free Republic University, Department of History presents U.S. History, 1855-1860: Seminar and Discussion Forum
Bleeding Kansas, Dred Scott, Lincoln-Douglas, Harper’s Ferry, the election of 1860, secession – all the events leading up to the Civil War, as seen through news reports of the time and later historical accounts

First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: Sometime in the future.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.

Posting history, in reverse order

https://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:homerjsimpson/index?tab=articles

To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.

Link to previous New York Times thread

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3941607/posts

[Homer_J_Simpson]

1

2

3

4

5

6

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Affairs of the Nation: The Proposition to Evacuate Fort Sumpter – 2-3
The Congress of the C.S.A. – 3-4
The Virginia State Convention – 4
Important from Texas – 4
General Political Intelligence – 4
Editorial: The Geographical Question of Secession – 4-5
Seedy Seceders Scrambling for Office – 5-6
Editorial: Haliburton on the Anderson Case – 6

[ecomcon]

Why is Fort Sumter spelled with a p added? Interesting.

[Homer_J_Simpson]

I don’t know. The Times started out spelling it correctly, then recently added the p. They must have heard from a source they thought authoritative and didn’t get it corroborated. Imagine the NYT being that careless!

They will remove the superfluous “p” before long.

[Stosh]

Interesting to note that Cassius Clay was appointed minister to Spain.

I guess Muhammed Ali wasn’t available.

[Stosh]

Apparently Clay ended up as ambassador to Russian, not Spain. It turns out that the original Cassius Clay was quite a character - it’s worth a trip to Wikipedia to check him out. One of the highlights:

“His anti-slavery activism earned him violent enemies. During a political debate in 1843, he survived an assassination attempt by Sam Brown, a hired gun. The scabbard of Clay’s Bowie knife was tipped with silver and, in jerking the Bowie knife out in retaliation pulled this scabbard up so that it was just over his heart. Brown’s bullet struck the scabbard and embedded itself in the silver. Despite having been shot in the chest, Clay tackled Brown, and with his Bowie knife removed Brown’s nose and one eye and possibly an ear before he threw Brown over an embankment.”

[Stosh]

Re: Cassius Marcellus Clay

Even better than the bit above, again from Wikipedia:

“In 1894, the 84-year-old Clay married Dora Richardson, the 15-year-old orphaned sister of one of his sharecropping tenants.”

and the very next sentence:

“Cassius Clay died at his home on July 22, 1903 of “general exhaustion.” “

Yeah, I can buy that.

[dfwgator]

“Cassius Clay died at his home on July 22, 1903 of “general exhaustion.” “

Fifteen was his limit on Schnitzengruben.

[Stosh]

In his 80’s and 90’s, nine years of Schnitzengruben with a wife in her teens and early twenties is not a record to be sneered at - I’m not sure Cleavon Little could have done as well!

[BroJoeK]

"Forts Pickens and McRea will not be disturbed..."

Fort McRea is a Civil War era post near Elephant Bute, New Mexico.

So this reference must be to Fort McRee just across the bay from Fort Pickens:

[BroJoeK]

"Affairs of the Nation: The Proposition to Evacuate Fort Sumpter – 2-3"

This is worth a second notice:

"HOW TO COLLECT THE REVENUE

Secretary CAMERON is understood to favor the policy of collecting the revenues outside the ports, after Secretary CHASE shall have drawn requisitions upon the officers of the seceding States, and they have refused to comply.
As the Southern Confederacy have no Navy to attack vessels laying outside their ports, the revenue, in his opinion, can thus be collected, and the rebellious States reduced to allegiance by actual necessity consequent upon trade."

In 1860 total Federal revenues were about $56 million, of which $53 million came from tariffs on imports (not exports).
Of the $53 million in tariff revenues, the following came from Confederate ports:

1. New Orleans: $2.1 million = 4%
2. Charleston: $300 thousand = .6%
3. Mobile: $118 thousand = .2%
4. Galveston: $92 thousand = .2%
5. Savannah: $89 thousand = .2%
   Total US revenues from original Confederate states = $2.7 million = 5% of Federal tariff revenues in 1860

So there was very little Federal revenue to be collected at Charleston, and certainly no need to go to war for it.

Another paragraph worth noting:

"TREASURY DISBURSEMENTS

The Treasure will probably disburse, tomorrow or Thursday, in payment of some of the obligations laying upon the Secretary's desk.
There are several millions of claims more than can be met.
The Treasury is very low, but drafts are due today and tomorrow which will reimburse it to quite a large amount."

The US national debt had doubled under Democrat President Buchanan, from $29 million to $64 million, and Congress was accustomed, however reluctantly, to authorizing more debt to pay our bills.
But Congress did not authorize debt before it was needed and so waited until the end of President Buchanan's administration to authorize enough.
The Treasury department never had a problem selling its debt (thank President Jackson, among others, for that!) but did sometimes have to scramble & juggle to keep our creditors paid.

[BroJoeK]

And still another piece worth noting:

Dispatch to the Baltimore American
WASHINGTON, Monday, March 11

"The battle of the Cabinet has been fought, and Mr. SWEARD has triumphed.
The Cabinet has ordered the withdrawal of Major ANDERSON from Sumpter , and thus have destroyed the hope of the Secessionists to cement in blood the destruction of the Union..."

So, secessionists were "disappointed" Lincoln's administration seems intent on surrendering Fort Sumter?
They hoped to "cement in blood" the Union's destruction?

Somehow I think they will, after all, get blood, but the Union's destruction, not so much.

[BroJoeK]

"Editorial: The Geographical Question of Secession – 4-5"

And yet more good stuff!
This editorial talks about the fact the "solid South" is far from, and that some Southern states, and large regions of others, have very few slaves and so are solidly against secession.

The editor does not know, seems not to have considered, how many of those now loyal to the Union will change their minds once shots are fired at Fort Sumter.