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

To: GOPcapitalist
Hardly. According to accounts of the time the Harriet Lane was doing exactly what she was supposed to do, protect the coast of the United States. An unidentified vessel was encountered and the Lane took action.

". . . an incident occurred, which I have never seen recorded, but which seems to me worthy of not. A vessel suddenly appeared through the mist from behind the Bar, a passenger steamer, which was made out to be the Nashville. She had no colors set, and as she approached the fleet she refused to show them. Captain Faunce ordered one of the guns manned, and as she came still nearer turned to the gunner. 'Stop her!' he said, and a shot went skipping across her bows. Immediately the United States ensign went to her gaff end, and she was allowed to proceed..."

668 posted on 11/17/2002 3:46:40 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 651 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
Hardly. According to accounts of the time the Harriet Lane was doing exactly what she was supposed to do, protect the coast of the United States.

Incorrect. Charleston was a southern city in a state that had seceded from the northern union. The Harriet Lane was a northern ship. It had no right to impede access to a port that was not its to guard. It was essentially in the same situation as the fort - blocking free access to a confederate port. The Harriet Lane's firing on a confederate steamer was also one of the events that pushed Beauregard to attack the fort - he knew that the yankees were there to do exactly what you have long denied they were there to do, that being to impede access to the port.

722 posted on 11/17/2002 9:14:03 PM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 668 | 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