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

To: rockrr; rustbucket; DiogenesLamp; Pelham
Your point: "The blockade of Charleston did not occur until after the rebels attacked the federal fort Sumter." .

That was not the case in Florida.

On March 12, 1861, eight days after his inaugural speech that was correctly perceived to mean war, Lincoln ordered that the troops on the Brooklyn, previously sent to station in Florida, be offloaded into Fort Pickens.

The order was sent by E. D. Townsend by the command of Winfield Scott. Reinforcing the fort, of course, would be in violation of the armistice and trigger an assault by the troops surrounding the fort, then maybe 5,000 in number.

It would mean war.

Lincoln’s Navy Secretary Gideon Wells knew of the armistice, certainly by communications from Pensacola dated March 18 that referred to the agreement made between Mallory and the US government and perhaps earlier from his predecessor when he took office.
Fortunately, however, the March 12 order didn't reach the Brooklyn until March 31.

The Navy commander of the vessels at Pensacola realized Scott’s orders were in direct violation of his orders from the Navy Department (which were to obey the armistice), and he declined to offload the troops.

At this point Lincoln through Welles reaffirmed the order to reinforce Pickens and orders more troops to be sent for that purpose. Like Anderson’s realization that Lincoln’s expedition to Sumter meant war, Montgomery Meigs, who headed the April effort to reinforce Fort Pickens, realized that Lincoln’s action at Pickens meant war.

Meigs put it this way: “This is the beginning of the war which every statesman and soldier has foreseen since the passage of the South Carolina ordinance of secession.” [Official Records, Series 1, Volume 1, page 368] and also from a post by Rustbucket on another thread.

238 posted on 06/27/2016 11:44:01 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies ]


To: PeaRidge

What “armistice”?


240 posted on 06/27/2016 12:45:03 PM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies ]

To: PeaRidge

That is good to know. Another piece of the puzzle.


247 posted on 06/27/2016 2:08:30 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies ]

To: PeaRidge; rockrr; rustbucket; DiogenesLamp; Pelham
PeaRidge: "Meigs put it this way: 'This is the beginning of the war which every statesman and soldier has foreseen since the passage of the South Carolina ordinance of secession.' "

I doubt if anyone seriously disputes the basic facts, though quotes may be revised later to better fit events.
But the argument here is: who is to blame for starting Civil War, those who first threatened and then did start it, at Fort Sumter, or somebody else?

I say, just as we don't blame FDR for Pearl Harbor, so we should not blame Lincoln for Fort Sumter.
In both cases it was an enemy military assault on US forces which started war, regardless of prior warnings.

See my post just above.

266 posted on 06/27/2016 4:11:27 PM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | 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