Lincoln holiday on its way out (West Virginia)

West Virginia Gazette Mail ^ | 9-8-2005 | Phil Kabler

[Heyworth]

That's a slightly different spin than what you described the first time.

[rustbucket]

Did US soldiers not fight the captain of a schooler, overcome him, and take the ship to Fort Sumter?

[Heyworth]

Did US soldiers not fight the captain of a schooler, overcome him, and take the ship to Fort Sumter?

I don't know, since there's only that one rather vague account of the incident. Tell me, did they then keep the ship, as the CS did with the ships I named?

[rustbucket]

Tell me, did they then keep the ship, as the CS did with the ships I named?

As far as I know the captain got the ship back from the hijackers.

Did the North pay the South for the South's share in the ownership of ships and forts retained by the North?

[rustbucket]

Speaking of seizing things owned by the other side, I remember seeing a very hard to read article about seizure in my stack of old newspaper articles. I found it, and, as best I can read it, it says the following [New Orleans Daily Picayune, February 10, 1861]:

New York Vessels Seized At Savannah

[By the American and Southwestern Lines]

Savannah, Feb. 9. -- Five vessels, owned in New York, and now in this port, were yesterday seized here by order of Governor Brown, of this State, in retaliation for the seizure of Georgia arms and munitions in New York.

[The rest of the article is illegible.]

This caused quite a stir in Washington. The arms and vessels were returned to their rightful owners. My guess is that the ships were worth more than the arms and munitions.

[Heyworth]

Did the North pay the South for the South's share in the ownership of ships and forts retained by the North?

Well, since the Union never legally recognized that the southern states had left, there was certainly no reason to pay them for their share. The states were still part of the United States, and the the ships and forts were retained by that government.

[Heyworth]

in retaliation for the seizure of Georgia arms and munitions in New York.

Do you know anything about this? That's what's interesting about these threads--you start poking around and all sorts of interesting things emerge. I now know far more about the approach channels to Charleston harbor as they existed in the 19th Century than, say, anyone else in my office.

Not that it comes up much.

[rustbucket]

Do you know anything about this? That's what's interesting about these threads--you start poking around and all sorts of interesting things emerge.

Here is what the microfilm looked like. This is one of the worst quality microfilm copies I have.

I've now been able to make out the bottom half of the article:

- - - - on - - - - - - State. It contained forty cannon, 9000 stand of arms, including Capt. Bragg's battery, and a large amount of ammunition. It is at present garrisoned by a company of 160 men.

So, it was a bigger shipment of arms than I had thought.

Three days later the Picayune says:

Washington, Feb 12. -- The seizure of New York vessels at Savannah, in retaliation for the seizure of Georgia arms and munitions at New York, has been the case of much sensation here. And notwithstanding the return of both arms and vessels, a formal call upon the president, for information on the whole subject, has been made in Congress.

Maybe the Congressional Globe has something on it.

Like you I love these threads when they surface historical information I wasn't aware of. Much better than name calling any day.

[Heyworth]

So, it was a bigger shipment of arms than I had thought.

I think there's some missing transition in the illegible part. For one thing, it wouldn't make sense that an arms shipment would be garrisoned by 160 men. Other sources indicate 38 cases of muskets. Here's what I found...

"The people of the North had been much aroused over the continual shipment of war material to the Southern States and an acrimonious correspondence over a question of this kind took place in February between the governors of New York and Georgia. The police of New York city were alert and had seized 38 boxes of muskets about to be shipped on the steamer Monticello to Savannah, and deposited them in the state arsenal in New York city. Gov. Brown of Georgia, on complaint being made to him by the consignees, citizens of Macon, Ga., made formal demand on the mayor of the city, and on Gov. Morgan, for the immediate delivery of the arms to G. B. Lamar, named as the agent of Georgia. There was some delay in adjusting the matter, and Gov. Brown, on Feb. 5, ordered the seizure of five vessels, owned in New York but then in the harbor of Savannah, by way of reprisal. Three days later they were released, but reprisals were again ordered on the 21st, when other shipping from New York was seized at Savannah, to be held pending the delivery of the invoice. Gov. Brown made renewed demands on Gov. Morgan for the arms and the New York executive replied: "I have no power whatever over the officer who made the seizure, and had ho more knowledge of the fact, nor have I any more connection with the transaction, than any other citizen of this state; but I do not hesitate to say that the arms will be delivered whenever application shall be made for them. Should such not be the case, however, redress is to be sought, not in an appeal to the executive authority of New York to exercise a merely arbitrary power, but in due form of law, through the regularly constituted tribunals of justice of the state or of the United States, as the parties aggrieved may elect. It is but proper here to say, that the courts are at all times open to suitors, and no complaint has reached me of the inability or unwillingness of judicial officers to render exact justice to all. If, however, the fact be otherwise, whatever authority the constitution and laws vest in me, for compelling a performance of their duty, will be promptly exercised. In conclusion permit me to say that, while differing widely with your excellency as to the right or policy of your acts and of the views expressed in your several communications, I have the honor to be * * * etc." The matter was finally adjusted by the delivery of the arms on March 16 to the agent of Georgia."

http://www.dmna.state.ny.us/historic/reghist/civil/MilAffairsNY.htm

Maybe it's the armory where the muskets were deposited that was garrisoned by those men.

Like you I love these threads when they surface historical information I wasn't aware of. Much better than name calling any day.

It's amazing how much research goes on in the name of one-upsmanship.

[rustbucket]

The names of the seized ships are listed on page 836 of the Congressional Globe, February 9. 1861. There were:

- The brig W. R. Kirby
- The bark Adjuster
- The brig Golden Lead
- The schooner Julia A. Halteck
- The bark Sarah Cotden Murray

You are right about there being a game of one-upsmanship. There is also a legitimate desire to correct historical errors and erroneous claims by posters for the other side. That's the reason I originally signed up on FreeRepublic.

I joined to correct history errors made by the infamous pro-Union poster Whiskeypapa. He'd go silent if corrected factually, then make the same incorrect claims on the next thread. When I called him on it, he explained that he was posting to the lurkers. I took that to mean he was posting to people who might see his current post but not know that it had been factually refuted in an earlier thread.

[stand watie]

wp was a "piece of work".

i do NOT miss his drivel.evasions/lies.stupidity on FR.

i also understand that he, #3fa, cvn76, modernman & a host of other former members of the DAMNyankee coven are on DU now. (fwiw, i do NOT go read that site.)

good riddence i say.

free dixie,sw

[Heyworth]

i also understand that he, #3fa, cvn76, modernman & a host of other former members of the DAMNyankee coven are on DU now.

Did you read that in "Yachts Against Subs"? Or was it in "The Annals of Old Missouri"? Was it a conversation with Dr. Lubar? Or the person who told you "on good authority" that I'd been banned? Or is is just one more example of your wishing something was so and then insisting to everyone that it is?

I notice you didn't respond to my list of simple actions that would make me apologize to you and never address you again. Here's the short version--prove that I'm a liar, or admit that you are.

[stand watie]

speaking of GLUTTONY, the Metro-DC SCV Christmas party last PM was HUGE & once more i participated in OVER-eating yet again.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

MERRY CHRISTMAS, yank!

free dixie,sw

[Non-Sequitur]

And to you and your family.

[stand watie]

!!!!!!!!!!!

[Heyworth]

To all the usual suspects on these threads, I'd like to wish you all a very merry Christmas or a happy celebration of whatever your cultural heritage celebrates this time of year. And that includes you, watie. Ya buzzard.

I'll be offline for a while, "making rather merry" in the words of Bob Cratchit, so don't you guys settle this argument while I'm gone...

[tkathy]

Merry Christmas, Heyworth. A lot of fun, all the BS here.

[Heyworth]

Where'd the picture go? Oh, well, here it is again (sourced from a different site)..

[rustbucket]

Merry Christmas back at you.

I figured out a little more about the Picayune article I posted above and the curiously large number of guns, cannon, etc., mentioned in it. There was a subheading that I never could make out clearly. Had something to do with the surrender of an arsenal. As best I can make out the subheading says: "Surrender of the Post/Fort? Rock/Hock/Hook/Nook? Arsenal." (The two words are hard to make out.)

I then googled: 'Capt. Bragg battery arsenal' and turned up the following March 1861 article about the surrender of the Little Rock arsenal which contained Captain Bragg's battery.

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1861/march/little-rock-ft-smith.htm, which says in part:

WE publish on page 148, from sketches by a Government draughtsman, a view of Little Rock Arsenal and Fort Smith, both in the State of Arkansas. The Battery shown in the picture of the former is the famous Bragg Battery which did such good service at the Battle of Buena Vista, and to which the famous " A little more grape, Captain Bragg," referred.

The account of the seizure of this Arsenal is given in the Arkansas State Gazette of 16th February. It is in substance as follows:

"The correspondence for the surrender of the Arsenal was opened by Governor Rector, who informed Captain Totten that he had received reliable information that a large force of citizens were then on the march to Little Rock, with the avowed purpose of taking possession of the United States Arsenal there. The Governor declares it to be his duty, under the circumstances, although the movement was not authorized by him, to prevent a collision between the people of the State and the Federal troops, and therefore demanded the delivery of the Arsenal in the name of the State of Arkansas, to be held subject to the action of the Convention, to be held on the 4th day of March next. This is the only way which can possibly prevent the effusion of blood and the destruction of property of the citizens and the government.

The Picayune article thus contained two subjects, the seizure of the vessels in Savannah because of the seizure of Georgia arms in New York and the seizure of the Little Rock arsenal. It was the contents of the arsenal that were listed by the Picayune.

That's my Christmas gift to you such as it is. It's fun to figure out historical puzzles.