NATIONAL AFFAIRS: The Fort Sumpter Question Still in Uncertainty; SECESSION VOTED DOWN IN ARKANSAS; Editorial-The Future of Secession (3/21/1861)

New York Times archives – Times Machine ^ | 3/21/1861

[Homer_J_Simpson]

WASHINGTON, Wednesday, March 20.

CONCERNING FORT SUMPTER.

While the most prominent Republican Senators are unable to say definitely whether the order for the abandonment of Fort Sumpter has been actually issued, they all now concede that this policy has been definitely settled upon.

APPOINTMENTS MADE AND TO BE MADE.

The following nominations were sent to the Senate to-day:

ANSON BURLINGAME, of Massachusetts, Minister to Austria.
HENRY S. SANFORD, of Connecticut, Minister to Belgium.
RUFUS KING, of Wisconsin, Minister to Rome.
BRADFORD R. WOOD, of New-York, Minister to Denmark.
JAMES O. PUTNAM, of New-York, Consul at Havre.
FREEMAN H. MORSE, of Maine, Consul at London.
Gen. JAS. W. NYE, of New-York, Governor of Nevada.
THOMAS J. DRYER, of Oregon, Commissioner to the Sandwich Islands.

It seems probable that the latter will be warmly opposed in the Senate.

Mr. SANDFORD'S appointment delights the diplomatic corps and is warmly approved on all hands. The appointee is an accomplished linguist and an experienced diplomat. He was promptly confirmed and will leave for Brussels on Wednesday next.

Mr. BURLINGAME'S elevation to the third most important mission in Europe is also very gratifying to his numerous friends.

Gen. NYE, will doubtless be Senator from the State of Nevada in less than five years.

CARL SCHURZ will be offered and will probably accept the mission to Portugal, which it is proposed to raise to the grade of a full mission.

Hon. GEO. S. BOUTWELL, of Massachusetts, was tendered the position of First Comptroller of the Treasury, but declined for private reasons. He does not wish to leave Massachusetts.

R. H. DANA, Jr., is agreed upon for District-Attorney of Massachusetts. His nomination will be sent in in a day or two.

[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/3943753/posts

[Homer_J_Simpson]

1

2

3

4

5

6

[Homer_J_Simpson]

National Affairs: The Fort Sumpter Question Still in Uncertainty – 2-3
Our Washington Correspondence – 3-4
Secession Voted Down in Arkansas – 4
Important from Texas – 4
The Louisiana State Convention – 4
Reports from New-Orleans – 4
The Missouri State Convention – 4
Foreign Goods Free of Duty at St. Louis – 4
Enforcement of the Southern Tariff – 4-5
Editorial: The Future of Secession – 5
Secession and the People – 5
Climatic Division of the United States – 6
Editorial: The Harlem Bridge and the Third-avenue Railroad – 6
The Ice Embargo – 6
From Fort Sumpter – 6

[BipolarBob]

Arkansas demands a recount. The machines were hacked.

[bigbob]

Noting the price, I wonder, is this where the expression “putting your two cents worth in” came from?

At least newspaper opinions would have been more fairly valued.

I see the doggone climate was changing back then too...

[M Kehoe]

LOL.

5.56mm

[sauropod]

bkmk

[BroJoeK]

"Editorial: The Future of Secession – 5"

In this editorial the New York Times (aka DL's "Northeastern Power Brokers") argues against using military force to restore the Union.

"Force, as a means of restoring the Union, or of permanently preserving it, is out of the question.
It has its place in our system of Gevernment as in every other.
It may and must be used to repel aggression -- to hold public property and to enforce obedience to the laws, in every case where temporary disobedience would not be a less evil than the attempt to compel assent: and of this the Government itself must be the judge.
But no war -- no force can ever restore the Union..."

A noble sentiment, perhaps, but will it stand up to reality?

[DiogenesLamp]

The power barons are those controlling shipping, warehousing, insurance, banking, railroads, manufacturing and other large scale industries.

The New York Times is simply their mouth organ, same then as now.

The New York Times is today still running interference for the corrupt power structure controlling Washington DC, and so is the Washington Post. Almost all the modern media is nothing but propaganda apparatus for the Democrat party, which is today the party of corrupt fascist like collusion between government and modern day power brokers.

In 1860, that corrupt party colluding with big industry to put money in their pockets was the Republican party. All the protectionists policies of that era kept money flowing into the pockets of those people who had strong connections to Washington DC, same as today.

And this thread loads very slow, so i'm likely not going to respond any further in it.

[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: "In 1860, that corrupt party colluding with big industry to put money in their pockets was the Republican party."

In 1860 the party in political power in Washington, DC, since 1800 were Southern Democrats.
They made the laws, they passed out patronage, and they were as corrupt as Washington gets:

Plank #6 1860 Republican party platform: "6. That the people justly view with alarm the reckless extravagance which pervades every department of the Federal Government [Southern Democrats];
that a return to rigid economy and accountability is indispensable to arrest the systematic plunder of the public treasury by favored partisans [by Southern Democrats];
while the recent startling developments of frauds and corruptions at the Federal metropolis [by Southern Democrats], show that an entire change of administration is imperatively demanded."

In 1861 many of those DC Democrat Swamp critters moved straight from Washington to Montgomery to take up shop in their new Confederate government!

Republicans in 1860 did intend to "Put Americans First" and "Make America Great" by encouraging American manufacturers over foreign imports.
Their proposal was to restore the old Walker Tariff rates of 1846 -- which most Democrats had supported -- from the newer lower levels of the 1857 Tariff.
But even in early 1861 Southern Democrats were able to block passage of the Republicans' Morrill Tariff until secession removed Southerners from Congress.

Republican Congressman Morrill came from Vermont, made his money in banking, railroads & real estate, not in Washington, DC.
Morrill is also known for creating the Land Grant Colleges and the 1862 Anti-Bigamy Act.

Morrill was not accused of making money off his Washington, DC, or New York City, political connections.