So you're saying the South launched an armed rebellion and illegally seized the property belonging to the U.S.?
Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right—a right which, we hope and believe, is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit.
Yeah you all love dredging that quote up and twisting the meaning far from what Lincoln intended. But pleased as I am at you admitting that the Southern actions were, in fact, a rebellion I would point out that the South may have been inclined to rise up and shake off the existing government, they lacked the power and the desire to win.
Other than leading them to believe all the forts were to be turned over to them, then in the middle of the night, spiking all the cannon and burning all their carriages while creeping in the dark to the never before garrisoned fort and taking it over.
Acting in the face of hostile intentions on the part of the rebels in Charleston, denying them the use of arms they planned to steal, and moving to a fort which was part of Anderson's command.
The act of spiking and burning the cannons is something one does to an enemy.
So is threatening an assault on a federal facility. Regardless, they spiked and burned their own equipment, not equipment belonging to South Carolina. How is that something done to an enemy?
This was an overt acknowledgement that the Confederates were at that time viewed as enemies of the US Army. The confederates immediately saw it as a belligerent act.
It was acknowledgement of the hostile intent of the Charleston mob, which would be seen as a belligerent act as well. One predating the burning and the spiking.
The officers of the Union army also discussed turning Sumter's cannons on Charleston.
So you say. But did they?
It wasn't "batteries", it was a bunch of Kids with a single cannon at the Citadel on the one occasion, and on the other occasion, it also wasn't "batteries", and those responsible were redressed for it. Some of the blame for that needs to fall on the stupid captain of the "Rhoda H. Shannon."
Not the idiots in charge of the rebel batteries? All he did was sail into port. How was he to know that rebels were looking for an excuse to perform yet another belligerent act?
The Harriet Lane sailed at 10:00 on the morning of April the 8th. The letter to Governor Pickens was delivered after 6:00 PM on April the 8th.
The Baltic and Pawnee left on the 9th. The Pocahontas left on the 10th. They carried the supplies and the men.
But they were taking along six ships armed with cannons, at least 200 riflemen, Mortars, powder, shot, rifles, and various other reinforcements of men and material. (According to one source, it amounted to "two hundred eighty-five guns and two thousand four hundred men".)
Stephens also claims there were eleven ships. But of the ships headed for Charleston, the Pocahontas carried 6 cannon, the Harriett Lane carried 6 cannon, the Baltic was unarmed, and the Pawnee carries 10 cannon. Where were the other 263 cannon? Not to mention the 2400 men?
Winfield Scott's order explicitly states that the mission will be to reinforce Sumter.
Lincoln's orders were to land supplies.
You just keep trying to force truth to bend to your will.
What I am saying is that the legal authority of ownership for the property is the same for the Colonists as it was for the Confederates.
You would have us use one standard for the Colonies, and a completely different, made up standard for the Confederates.
If the Colonists were legally entitled to the Property that used to belong to King George, then the Confederates were legally entitled to the property that used to belong to their rulers in Washington DC.
Yeah you all love dredging that quote up and twisting the meaning far from what Lincoln intended.
I think Lincoln can speak for himself. He said he believed any people anywhere had a right to independence and had a right to the land which they inhabited. Trying to insert the meaning "except for South Carolina" is just another of your attempts to bend reality to your will.
But pleased as I am at you admitting that the Southern actions were, in fact, a rebellion
Now you are attempting to shove Lincoln's words into my mouth. I've long maintained that the "rebellion" was denying the fundamental foundation of our own government as outlined in the Declaration of Independence. Lincoln was the "rebel."
a rebellion I would point out that the South may have been inclined to rise up and shake off the existing government, they lacked the power and the desire to win.
I would point out that they put up a far greater fight, and with far greater sacrifice than did the colonists in their effort to get King George III to leave them alone. They just had a more dictatorial adversary than did the Colonists.
Acting in the face of hostile intentions on the part of the rebels in Charleston, denying them the use of arms they planned to steal, and moving to a fort which was part of Anderson's command.
When you tell them this material will be turned over to them, and then you burn it, "they" are not the ones doing the stealing.
So you say. But did they?
Why don't you read the messages yourself? You can start here. You'll have to go through them until you find it, but i'm not going to look it up for you.
The Baltic and Pawnee left on the 9th. The Pocahontas left on the 10th. They carried the supplies and the men.
The Harriet Lane was carrying some of the cannons, and it was the first to open fire on the other side. Also what need of 200 riflemen would a "resupply mission" require?
I believe the ordinary complement of the Powhatan was something around 300 men.
Stephens also claims there were eleven ships.
So far as I can tell, he is wrong about that, but given the fact that I keep getting surprised about details that have been ignored in the official narrative, I shall not be surprised to find out there is some basis for his statement. I suspect he is adding up the ships for the Pickens expedition with the Sumter expedition, but I don't know for sure. The List of potential ships originally supplied to Lincoln was far more extensive than what was actually used.
Lincoln's orders were to land supplies.
Oh, you've found Lincoln's order? Well then turn it over to "Irish Brigade" because he's been asking for it. The only order that came from Lincoln of which I am aware regarding those ships was the order relieving Captain Mercer from command of the Powhatan and the secret order giving Lieutenant Porter command of it.
So far as I know, all other orders issued to the ships came through cabinet members.
Those said to use force if necessary.