[WhiskeyPapa]

What was the name of the superceding legislation?

The Ordinance of Secession.

And the ordinance of secession mentions Fort Sumter specifically?

Or even generally?

But if that were the case, why offer to pay for it?

Walt

[GOPcapitalist]

And the ordinance of secession mentions Fort Sumter specifically?

No need to. It dissolves all previous arrangements connecting SC to the union. That, by necessity, includes all laws pertaining to Sumter.

[PeaRidge]

"But if that were the case, why offer to pay for it?" (Ft. Sumter).

Well, they had been trying to pay for it since December of 1860. Why? To prevent hostilities from breaking out, and because the government of South Carolina and later the Confederate government knew they had a responsibility to pay the other states for mutual property forfetited by secession.

And, since the Confederacy wanted normal relations with the Union, it was the responsible thing for a new confederacy of states to do.

Specifically South Carolina Governor Pickens provided these instructions in writing to President Buchanan: that Isaac William Hayne had been given authority "to effect if possible an amicable and peaceful transfer of the fort (Sumter) and the settlement of all questions relating
to the property."

Later, others from the South stayed in Washington several weeks attempting to offer Lincoln the same thing. But the grand old statesman preferred cannon fire to negotiated repayment.