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

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 ]


To: GOPcapitalist
Incorrect. Charleston was a southern city in a state that had seceded from the northern union.

Incorrect. Charleston was a city of the United States. As a unit of the Revenue Service the Harriet Lane was within it's authority to determine the identity of ships entering or leaving the harbor, especially in the face of the budding southern rebellion. Your claim that it was one of the actions which pushed Beauregard into firing is ridiculous. By that time the orders to fire on Sumter had arrived from the Davis regime and less than 12 hours after the Lane stopped the Nashville the southern batteries opened fire.

733 posted on 11/18/2002 3:45:59 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 722 | View Replies ]

To: GOPcapitalist
EXACTLY!

free dixie,sw

764 posted on 11/18/2002 8:40:07 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 722 | 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