Did you write this?
Posted on 03/07/2010 1:18:34 PM PST by BigReb555
Do you remember the 1961 weekly television series, entitled “The Americans?”
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
State's right to do what?
Lincoln was ham handed, using the “save the union” response to suspend basic rights.
Those who complain about big government and suspension of civil rights under Lincoln would do well to read up on the big government policies and civil rights infractions that happened under Davis. If history did repeat itself then the confederacy would have more to fear than the U.S. would.
Considering that a month before the confederate congress had voted to raise an army of 100,000 men - five or six times the size of the U.S. army at the time - then it's clear that the aggressive acts happened in Montgomery and not Washington.
You would be.
Loosing faith in your ( struggle ) weaning off Lincoln's wiener, I am.
Good god!
Did you write this?
Hardly, but thank you for the compliment.
I will work up a reply to our new friend later. I'm off to an appointment this morning.
Like Yoda you sound. Ridiculous you are.
And your reply confirms you chose your screen name well. What relevance does your reply have to do with Mr. Lincoln’s intentions or motivations?
It goes more towards your misunderstanding of what Lincoln was saying. He was confirming the right of people everywhere to rise up and rebel against their current government if that government does not suit them. Nowhere in his speech, including the parts you left out, does he say that success in their rebellion is a right. He was not advocating secession as practiced by the Southern states, nor did he say or imply that the acts of rebellion were legal.
The South chose to rise up and try to throw off the U.S. government. They failed miserably in their attempt. Nothing more and nothing less.
“The South chose to rise up and try to throw off the U.S. government. They failed miserably in their attempt. Nothing more and nothing less.”
North 1
South 0
Halftime
Then you've been cowering in your locker room for 145 years. What's taking you?
Northern Self Disarmament is almost complete. Just tryin’ to save our civilians this outing. If you'd get rid of them torches - That be a plus.
Yeah, The Onion discovered the real reason a number of years ago:
Welcome to what has been termed a graduate seminar on the war. I apologize for the length of the reply below, but there are lots of things to convey about what was going on.
"The aggressor in war is not the first who uses force, but the first who renders force necessary" [Henry Hallam, The Constitutional History of England: From the Accession of Henry VII to the Death of George II, New York: W. J. Widdleton, 1871, Vol. II, p. 219]
If you don't believe that, I hope you are not in charge of New York Harbor security when a large uninspected Iranian ship approaches the harbor.
I believe that Lincoln tried to provoke the South into attacking first. He tried to provoke them more than once and ultimately succeeded. As you will see below, key people involved on the Federal side recognized that Lincoln's actions would result in war. Lincoln was a very smart man, and he was also cunning and tricky. He would have made a good used car salesman.
Lincoln's inaugural
If you looked at the link to my old inaugural speech thread above, you'll notice that most Southern newspapers and Northern Democrat newspapers interpreted the speech as a declaration of war by Lincoln. How else did Lincoln expect them to react? Time would shortly prove them right. Naive readers of Lincoln's speech who think the speech peaceful are like the New York Times that said back then that the speech would "exert a very happy influence on public sentiment throughout the country." The Times with its tin ear and slant had no idea what it was talking about.
Lincoln's speech caused the Confederate Congress to authorize Jefferson Davis to call up 100,000 troops if he thought he needed them (he didn't call them all up until sometime after Fort Sumter). The South was hoping for a peaceful separation, but they had to protect themselves. They saw what was coming:
Latest from Montgomery
War considered Inevitable -- The Standing Army -- The War Strength
Montgomery, March 5 -- Since the receipt of the Inaugural address of Mr. Lincoln, it is universally conceded here that war between the Confederate States and the United States is inevitable. Mr. Benjamin said last night, that in his opinion, there would be a clash of Arms within thirty days.
Mr. Conrad concurred in this view of the aspect of affairs. The standing army of the Confederate States will be fixed at ten thousand men. Congress is now engaged in organizing the army. Of course, in case of hostilities, the number of men put in the field will be greater. It is calculated that the States now composing the Confederacy can place 80,000 on a movable war footing. [Source: Gazette and Sentinel, Plaquemine, Louisiana, March 9, 1861]
I've characterized Lincoln's speech as being like a demand that he wants to sleep with your wife, and if you acquiesce to this, there won't be any trouble. And if there is trouble about it, you will be the aggressor.
Lincoln's first hostile action to provoke war
Eight days after his inaugural speech, Lincoln in secret ordered the ship of war Brooklyn sitting in Pensacola Harbor to reinforce Fort Pickens with the troops it held. In January, the Southerners had negotiated a truce at Fort Pickens with the US Secretary of War and US Secretary of the Navy (and laid before Buchanan) that Fort Pickens would not be attacked by the South if it was not reinforced by the North. The Secretaries had documented the agreement in writing. [Source: Lincoln Takes Command by John Shipley Tilley, copyright 1941] Up until Lincoln's action, both sides had strictly obeyed the agreement to prevent a clash. A violation of this negotiated truce without warning was likely to start the shooting war.
Adam's opinion
Fortunately, the US naval captain in charge of forces in Pensacola Bay, Captain H. A. Adams, did not obey the order because it came from General Winfield Scott (at the instigation of Lincoln) rather than Adams' superior in the Navy. Adams replied to Washington that:
While I can not take on myself under such insufficient authority as General Scott's order the fearful responsibility of an act which seems to render civil war inevitable, I am ready at all times to carry out whatever orders I may receive from the honorable Secretary of the Navy.
Lincoln repeats his order that Fort Pickens be reinforced
When Lincoln learned that his command to reinforce Fort Pickens truce by surprise had not been carried out, on April 1st or 2nd, he sent the ship Atlantic with orders to reinforce Fort Pickens, again in secret without alerting the opposing side. The reinforcement of Fort Pickens did not occur until after Fort Sumter was attacked.
Meig's opinion
Army captain Montgomery Meigs had helped Lincoln and Seward plan this second attempt to reinforce Fort Pickens (third if you include Buchanan's earlier attempt that was stopped in the last minute in Pensacola Harbor by the January truce agreement). Meigs was on the Atlantic in New York Harbor about to head for Fort Pickens when he penned these words:
This is the beginning of the war which every statesman and soldier has foreseen since the passage of the South Carolina ordinance of secession.
Decisions in Washington
During March and April, Lincoln ignored the offer of the Confederate Commissioners to negotiate on about the public property and indebtedness. A fair division of the property would have been in the South's favor given the huge amount of territorial land purchased in part with the South's blood and money. Lincoln was no dummy. He didn't want a fair division of that land.
The third attempt to provoke war
Lincoln's cabinet and military advisers tell him Gustavus Fox's plan to send a relief fleet down to Charleston will result in a shooting war. General Scott says an expedition to relieve Sumter would need 25,000 men. The President later sent a force decidedly too small to force their way into the harbor.
Lincoln's and his agents' duplicity
Lincoln sent two representatives to Charleston within a few days of each other in late March. Fox was allowed to visit Anderson in Fort Sumter on the promise that his visit was for peaceful purposes. Once there he spoke with Anderson about a federal effort to send relief, not a peaceful purpose. Anderson "earnestly condemned Fox's plan." [Source: Maury Klein, Days of Defiance, page 341 paperback version]
Lincoln then sent his personal agent and former law partner Ward Lamon to Charleston. Lamon met with the governor and told him that Sumter would be evacuated. Lamon says in his book that he conveyed the message to the governor that Lincoln "had directed me to say." [Source: Recollections of Abraham Lincoln, by Ward Hill Lamon, page 74 in my paperback version] The governor told Lamon any US warships would be fired on if they entered the harbor.
Seward was all along conveying to the Confederate Commissioners through a Supreme Court Justice the impression that Sumter would be evacuated. The Confederate Commissioners later charged the Lincoln Administration with "gross perfidy" over Sumter when they left Washington.
The special session of the US Senate ended on March 28, 1861. It's very last act was to check with the president to see whether he had anything important to tell them. From the Congressional Globe:
Mr. Powell, from the committee appointed to wait on the President of the United States and notify him that unless he has some further communication to make, the Senate is ready to adjourn, reported that the committee had waited on the President, and been informed by him that he had no further communication to make to the Senate.
That same day the president cut preliminary orders to send the battlefleet to Charleston, an action that was widely perceived to likely end in a shooting war. Wasn’t that important enough to inform the Senate about?
Who could trust such a devious man? If he said he was only going to supply food, would you trust him not to inject troops into the fort in the same operation?
Anderson's opinion of the Sumter expedition
Here is Anderson's reaction to the news that an expedition would be sent to the fort:
I had the honor to receive by yesterday's mail the letter of the honorable Secretary of War, dated April 4, and confess that what he there states surprises me very greatly, following as it does and contradicting so positively the assurance Mr. Crawford telegraphed he was authorized to make. I trust that this matter will be at once put in a correct light, as a movement made now, when the South has been erroneously informed that none such will be attempted, would produce most disastrous results throughout our country.
It is, of course, now too late for me to give any advice in reference to the proposed scheme of Captain Fox. I fear that its result cannot fail to be disastrous to all concerned. ...
... I ought to have been informed that this expedition was to come. Colonel Lamon's remark convinced me that the idea, merely hinted at to me by Captain Fox, would not be carried out. We shall strive to do our duty, though I frankly say that my heart is not in the war which I see is to be thus commenced. That God will still avert it, and cause us to resort to pacific measures to maintain our rights, is my ardent prayer.
Lincoln's opinion of the Sumter expedition's failure
After the Sumter expedition failed, Lincoln consoles Gustavus Fox saying basically the mission accomplished what we wanted [Link].
You and I both anticipated that the cause of the country would be advanced by making the attempt to provision Fort-Sumpter, even if it should fail; and it is no small consolation now to feel that our anticipation is justified by the result.
The result, of course, was war. Lincoln accomplished his goal.
What rendered the use of force necessary? In all that you posted, what was the tipping point? At what moment did Sumter change from a irritant to a threat to the confederacy's existence?
IMO, the decision to use force was reached when the South found out from contacts in the North that Lincoln was preparing to send a battlefleet down to SC territorial waters despite earlier promises to evacuate the fort from Lamon and intimations of that from Seward and leaks to Northern newspapers. Up until they learned Lincoln was preparing a battlefleet to sail, they allowed Anderson to buy food in the Charleston market.
As Anderson said when informed that the fleet was coming, "I trust that this matter will be at once put in a correct light, as a movement made now, when the South has been erroneously informed that none such will be attempted, would produce most disastrous results throughout our country.
I'm not sure what Davis and others thought about the threat the fort posed to the Confederacy's existence. My own guess is that they might have considered it a threat since the Confederacy's economic existence and balance of payments depended on export of cotton and tariff revenue from imports and the fort could be used to enforce Lincoln's announced intention to collect tariff revenue from Southern ports. Here Lincoln was sending a battlefleet down either provision or provision and reinforce (who could believe his promises by this point) a fort that could enforce that Lincoln's tariff collection scheme by threatening ships that entered the harbor without paying tribute to Uncle Abe. Winfield Scott's communications said the purpose of the expedition was to reinforce Sumter.
What was the old American saying, "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute?" Lincoln was fast becoming a Barbary pirate.
I've made the argument before that Lincoln instigated the war because he needed revenue to run the country and he couldn't do that without Southern exports that provided the great bulk (about 70-75%) of the United States balance of payments. So, in a key sense both sides fought the war over economic matters. Exports and imports were not the only reasons, of course. Slavery was the main reason the South seceded -- it was basic to their economy. Oops, that's another economic cause of the war.
How can that be? A supply effort had been attempted in January, and that was driven off in what was truly the first act of aggression on either side. Yet that hadn't been preceded or followed by a whole scale attack on the fort. And had Lincoln landed food at Sumter as he stated was his intention, what would have changed? Would the threat to the confederacy grown? No. If Sumter wasn't enough of a threat to bombard into surrender in January then how could that change in April? And had Lincoln lied and landed troops as well as supplies, would the confederacy been in danger? No. A few hundred men could not have taken the city, and while the forces in Sumter might, might, have blocked Charleston harbor, but that was far from the busiest port in the confederacy. New Orleans was five to eight times busier, and even Mobile exported more. Eighty percent of confederate exports and almost ninety five percent of their imports entered at ports other than Charleston. Exports could easily have been sent out through Savannah and the amount of imports was so small that even if those could not have been directed to Savannah or Jacksonville as well, the amount was a mere 1/20th of the total. So there was no economic threat had Lincoln kept the fort; the confederacy would have gone on without any problems. And as for Lincoln's pledge to collect the tariffs, how do you imagine he could have done that with Sumter alone? Ships didn't pay tariffs there, they paid them where they landed the goods. Lincoln could have blustered all he wanted, no tariffs would have been collected unless South Carolina allowed it. So your claim that an act of aggression on the part of Lincoln, real or perceived, caused the South to act in return just isn't supported. There was no threat that hadn't been in place for months. What really changed?
Nothing Lincoln did had to force the issue. The status quo worked more in the South's favor than in Lincoln's. The South acted because their attempt to starve the fort into surrender had failed. They attacked because every other attempt to force Lincoln to turn over the federal property had failed. They attacked because impatient and because the status quo no longer suited their purposes, and that Sumter was worth a war. It was that single act that doomed the confederacy. An independent South died on April 13, 1861. It just took 4 years for the body to hit the floor.
South Postpones Rising Again For Yet Another Year"
Non-Sequitur at it again,are you?
Isn’t that flasher wearing confederate butternut brown? How appropriate.
Nothing Lincoln did had to force the issue. The status quo worked more in the South's favor than in Lincoln's.
Only in the short term. The fundamental fact is that the South's largest states, containing most of its industry, had not seceded. And showed little indication that they intended to secede.
The free population of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas in 1860 was 2,556,789. Of Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia, 2,925,433. The border states, 2,707,560.
That's 2,556,789 free whites in slave states that had seceded, and 5,632,993 in slave states that had not. Where the slave states that had not seceded not only had 70% of the population, but 90% of the wealth, and 90% of the industry.
The South as it existed prior to Sumter would not have made a viable nation. The radicals in South Carolina knew that. And they knew that only war would get Virginia off the fence.
Lincoln may have secretly wanted war, he may have been trying to goad South Carolina into war. Doesn't matter. The South Carolina radicals needed war, and they didn't need goading.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.