Dawna,
I see that you have started down 'our' slippery slope here in your quest for information on the Civil War in general and Lincoln in particular.
I see that Thea has fired a mighty volley upon our poor 16th office-holder, (By her post on
Tuesday, August 24, 2004 - 11:20pm) bringing him to task for many ills and crimes. If I may, I would like to go down her numbered list and present you with a few alternative answers of my own.
1. I recommend that you go to the following web site and read for yourself the Republican Party Platform of 1860, along with the other political party platforms listed, and find out for yourself which Constitutional guarantees the people of the South were to be ignored.
http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/plat.html
2. Here is another link on the same web site that contains Lincoln's 1st inaugural address.
http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/linc.html
Again, I suggest that you read it in full, but I ask you to also read Lincoln's
1848 speech before the House of Representatives not the 1847 speech that Thea has mistakenly referred to. It can be found at this web site:
http://www.animatedatlas.com/mexwar/lincoln2.html
If you read the speech in it's entirety, you will see that Lincoln was speaking of
revolution, not secession, that people have a right to revolution. This one fragment of Lincoln's speech is often lifted out of context and presented as 'proof' that Lincoln at one time supported secession and then as President in 1860 he somehow goes 'back' on his early words. Not true.
Also, the idea that all 13 states who initially formed the Union did so with 'full knowledge' that they could withdraw from the Union at any time is simply not correct. Again, read the inaugural speech to see Lincoln's views on the subject.
3. Again, I recommend you go through Lincoln's 1st inaugural and you will see a BIT more than to "collect the imposts, or taxes" as it were.
4. Thea states that an armistice had been entered into between the State of South Carolina and the Federal government and a simular one between Florida, etc. Here I suggest you go to the library and check out the book
Lincoln, by David Herbert Donald, and read up on this period before the firing on Ft. Sumter. I also think the book
The Beginning And The End, by Dayton Pryor would be worth a look. In it Mr. Pryor lists all the happening and actions taken before Ft. Sumter was fired on concerning Southern actions against Federal troops and property before that unhappy act. In it you will find NO surprised Confederate government officials concerning the resupply efforts at Ft. Sumter or Ft. Pickens, but instead Confederate concerns and plans to take these two forts at a time before any Federal action had taken place.
5. The idea that Confederate leaders waited in suspense is almost laughable when one reads about their own debates on the taking of the two forts in question. As to acts of espionage by the North, I would ask what acts were done by the South before any Southern state declared secession, i.e., the shipping of arms and cannons to the South with the soul purpose of supporting rebellion there by the then Secretary of War. That would be called 'treason' would it not?
6. I wonder if any President actually needs the 'permission' of his Cabinet to go to the bathroom, let alone make a Presidential decision to reinforce a Federal fort. I wonder how many time Jefferson Davis ignored the advice of his cabinet? And oh, by-the-way, Lincoln had sent messengers to South Carolina telling them of his intention to reinforce Ft. Sumter, so no surprise there. As for the idea you, as a state in rebellion, will permit forty some odd soldiers to buy food from vendors in the city that is intent on your capture while trying to ignore the activities of militia companies and artillery preparing to storm your fort, seems a bit off track to me, and this practice did end when Anderson and his men were in Ft. Sumter after a period as it did in Florida. Charleston did not have a 'peaceable disposition' not after it had fired on ships bearing the US flag BEFORE the resupply effort announced by Lincoln to South Carolina.
7. When South Carolina was openly informed 'of this treachery' it had already been decided by the so-called Confederate government to take Ft. Sumter.
8. It is correct that this 'event' would be cause for Lincoln's call to arms for the United States. It was well received in the North as it was perceived as an act of open rebellion and an unlawful act. Even though the Southern leadership had been warned by one of their own that this act would produce this effect, the South went ahead and opened the war by firing first on Ft. Sumter.
Lastly, again, a President had done nothing wrong if does not follow the stated opinions of his cabinet. To state otherwise is to give an impression that somehow there is a law being violated or some such is again a bit misleading. Just as President Jefferson Davis did, Lincoln asked for advice and information, but he was not compelled to follow them, but had to take responsibility and decide what actions to take.
Dawna, the most important thing you can do is go to the source material, read and research, and decide for yourself. It is the best way to come to a conclusion, no matter what conclusion you come to. Thea and I can give you our impressions and our opinions, but that is exactly what they are.
Lastly, I would ask Mr Boothe to consider that the 10th Amendment is not the complete answer to the idea that the theory of secession is not contained within its words, that somehow a nation that struggles to be born and formed, will not in some mystical manner contain a self-destruct code by the very founders who wished to create a new nation.
Plus, I would like to see you list all of Lincoln's infractions against the Constitution, in the hopes I might be able to compare them to my own list.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
