The United States no longer had the right to maintain troops there, to occupy or garrison the fort, or to stand up a task force, which is what Lincoln sent (don't say "resupply" -- that's just an old Lincolnian lie: there were a lot of troops in that flotilla).
Sumter was no longer United States property, South Carolina having demanded its return. The United States no longer had title to any property on the territory of South Carolina, which had reclaimed her sovereignty under international law, as an exercise of the natural and sovereign rights of her People.
Under what rule of law?
Sumter was no longer United States property, South Carolina having demanded its return. The United States no longer had title to any property on the territory of South Carolina, which had reclaimed her sovereignty under international law, as an exercise of the natural and sovereign rights of her People.
Sumter was the property of the U.S. government, built on property deeded to it free and clear by the South Carolina legislature. They had no legal claim to it whatsoever, regardless of what ever legal sounding terminology you make up trying to justify the southern actions. Sumter was the property of the U.S. Army. The troops stationed there were there legally. It was well within the rights of the federal government to send food to its troops stationed in its fort.