Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ought-six
Lets dispense with this foolishness about claims to Ft. Sumter. In order to ensure that the federal government complete construction of, and maintain Fort Sumter, the State of South Carolina passed a law giving title and all rights to the United States:
Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

        "The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

        "Resolved, That this state do cede to the United States, all the right, title and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

        "Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

        "Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

        "Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

This means that it wasn't South Carolina's to fool with. Pickens knew it (just like you do) but relied on a feckless Buchanan to steal what clearly didn't belong to him.

Anderson was charged with defending several garrisons, including Sumter. It was his responsibility. He was there by order. He didn't "seize anything because the fortification was in his charge. His orders came from Buell on Dec. 11, 1860:

... you are to hold possession of the forts in this harbor, and if attacked you are to defend yourself to the last extremity. The smallness of your force will not permit you, perhaps, to occupy more than one of the three forts, but an attack on or attempt to take possession of any one of them will be regarded as an act of hostility, and you may then put your command into either of them which you may deem most proper to increase its power of resistance. You are also authorized to take similar steps whenever you have tangible evidence of a design to proceed to a hostile act.

So, as you can readily understand, the Union troops that occupied Sumter were under orders to do so, and therefore had a perfect "preeminent right" or "duty" to be there. The rebels did not.


189 posted on 10/04/2015 3:27:12 PM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies ]


To: rockrr

Again, show me the deed or legal transfer that ceded to the federal government — in perpetuity — the land fill that became Ft. Sumter. I’m not talking about a federal takeover of any land or territory of a sovereign state, I’m talking about that sovereign state agreeing to any transfer.

According to your logic, the majority in Congress in 1860 — which was Northern — could just pass a resolution declaring that the Southern states were to be used as a compost pile for the refuse of the Northern states, and the Southern states could not say anything about it. Have you ever heard of the 9th and 10th Amendments?


194 posted on 10/04/2015 3:50:41 PM PDT by ought-six (Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies ]

To: rockrr
His orders came from Buell on Dec. 11, 1860:

Very educational. Always love reading specific historical quotes. Thanks for those. But your point is entirely irrelevant. Those orders were issued in 1860. It wasn't until 1861 that the Confederacy was created. Once it was, that was no longer Federal territory. Union troops abandoned every other fort and post in the South in 1861. Only Ft Sumter remained garrisoned. Only Ft Sumter's soldiers refused the repeated requests to leave this now-foreign territory... while located hundreds of miles from the rest of the Union. The Confederacy gave them MONTHS to leave. They refused. When you take new territory, and armed troops belonging to the former owners refuse to leave, even at threat of violence, then you eventually have to back up that threat.

But nice try at spin there.

195 posted on 10/04/2015 3:51:18 PM PDT by Teacher317 (We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson