Presumably for Boston to join their compatriots. I believe the larger Massachusetts contingent left from Boston for the capital the next day.
That's not my point, though. I'm just saying that John Andrew was prepared for different contingencies and the militia was readying before Lincoln even came on the scene. The same thing was going on in the South.
Lincoln wasn't necessarily driving the mobilization momentum across the country. It was going on before he even took office.
I am somehow reminded of LBJ and his minions interfering with military operations during the Vietnam War.
That is after a war has started. I was thinking about 1) delicate negotiations and 2) crisis or hostage or stand-off or emergency situations (Panay, Maine, Cuban Missile, Pueblo, Mayaguez, Entebbe, Munich, Teheran, Benghazi ... whatever).
Chief executives don't always handle those situations well, but sometimes Congressmen exploiting the situation for political gain can make things worse. Sometimes it can be a blessing to only have to deal with one adversary on one front, rather than having to answer every possible political objection.
Here I am reminded of Carl Schurz's April 5, 1861 letter to Lincoln.
Doesn't answer the question of why the special session of the Senate Buchanan called was adjourned when the nation was in the greatest crisis in its history. Was it really Lincoln's business to call Congress back into session after (one branch) had voted to adjourn after about 24 days?
Basically Lincoln had earlier told Schurz if Lincoln called an extra session of Congress, some in Congress might have called for peace and compromise.
Maybe he figured they had their chance and didn't achieve anything. That was certainly a plausible conclusion from the facts.
Bottom line on all this: Lincoln came out and said that he wasn't going to start shooting first.
In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors.
The secessionists started shooting. Then they declared that they'd somehow been "tricked" or "forced" into a war that it was fully in their power to avoid. I mean avoid on that day. They could have let the ship through and let Lincoln make the next move.
If Davis or Pickens had bothered to read or understand Lincoln's inaugural, they might have let Lincoln start the war that you guys are so certain that he wanted, and let him bear the consequences.
As lentulusgracchus has pointed out, war was the responsibility of Congress. Lincoln was clearly on the path that would result in war.
The Senate usually had special sessions every two years at the end of the regular session, sometimes longer, sometimes shorter. So, this special session was by no means unique. Doubtless, the new president had appointments he wanted to make, and some of the higher ranking ones required Senate confirmation. The new government needed to be set up.
In checking the minutes of this special session I see where Lincoln's secretary Nicolay would periodically bring in communications from the president, and the Senate would then go into executive session to discuss them.
The session had opened with Lincoln's inaugural address. There then followed quite a bit of discussion on what Lincoln meant in the inaugural and whether the Senate should print the inaugural speech, which was apparently not usually done. A number of other things were discussed including whether to expel Senator Wigfall of Texas since his state had seceded, but he was staying in the Senate until he was officially informed of the secession. There was discussion about forts in the seceded states and what the administration intended to do about Fort Sumter. One argument at that time was that Sumter should be evacuated as a military necessity. There were not enough troops to force their way in to the fort, which was apparently true if Scott's and Anderson's manpower estimates were correct.
Bottom line on all this: Lincoln came out and said that he wasn't going to start shooting first.
Could the South trust anything that Lincoln said? He sent Lamon to Charleston to say that Sumter would be evacuated. It wasn't. His Secretary of State similarly assured the Confederate Commissioners about Sumter, and they ended up accusing the Administration of gross perfidy concerning Sumter. Lincoln sent Fox down to visit Sumter, and Fox was allowed to visit Sumter for supposedly a peaceful purpose but in reality Fox was planning his Sumter relief expedition as became clear by some captured communication, IIRC. Lincoln said the Union couldn't stand half free, half slave, yet he supported a constitutional amendment leaving slavery alone in those states that wanted it. Which Lincoln was president?
What was to prevent a not-so-trustworthy Lincoln from reinforcing Sumter with men and ammunition instead of just supplying the fort with food? Until news began leaking out that an armada of war ships was being prepared by the North the Confederates had allowed Anderson to buy food in town for the fort. Anderson had earlier turned down an offer from the governor for free food; he insisted on paying for it.
The Richmond Daily Dispatch of April 5, 1861 said the following (I have no idea whether it was true -- it doesn't seem to match the story that the North/Anderson was putting out):
The Mercury has a correspondent who says:
Up to this time, two hundred pounds fresh beef, and three dozen cabbages, have been sent to Fort Sumter three times a week — besides potatoes by the barrel. Thus, both officers and privates have been allowed to have at least a considerable amount of wholesome provisions fer seventy men, and what cause is there for complaint? These facts are derived from the best authority, and are reliable. Let the Northern people do justice to Southern liberality.
As a Monday morning quarterback I would not have stopped food supplies and instead have widely publicized that the South was providing all the food that the fort needed, leaving no justification for Lincoln's supply-Sumter-with-bread Expedition.
If Davis or Pickens had bothered to read or understand Lincoln's inaugural, they might have let Lincoln start the war that you guys are so certain that he wanted, and let him bear the consequences.
I've seen it argued that there was a chance that one or more already-seceded Southern states might waiver about their secession if Davis et al. let Lincoln supply the fort. I don't know whether that was true or not. I doubt it. More probably Davis recognized that a confrontation with the North would drive more states into the Confederacy, just as Lincoln recognized that such a confrontation would firm up support for himself. Both things happened.