Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
Sumter was a flash point. There were many problems to be resolved with the separation. Sumter wouldn't resolve them. But until that annoying spot in Charleston Harbor was eliminated as a problem, peacefully or otherwise, the other questions couldn't be addressed properly.
Neither side really needed it for other than politically symbolic reasons.
ole
I see First Manassas without any Fort Sumter, at all.
Beowulf,
By the phrase "voting accident" you mean, "Lincoln was elected president of the United States." You have a funny way of describing democracy.
Not really. 60% of the country voted CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRAT. Had there been one candidate, there would have never been a Secession, a Confederacy, nor any assumed
'Civil War'.
If Lincoln really wanted to preserve the Union, he could have seen what his recent presidency had done, resigned, and gone home...
This, more than anything, would have dissolved the newly-formed Confederate South... after awhile.
Beowulf said: I replied: There is one promise made, with maybe another two reiterations. Yet Mr. Beowulf has not yet produced that promise, who made it, and when.
What has been our reply? I think he knows very well who made the "promise," but to reveal it would be to expose the statement as riduculous hyperbole.
Just one statement. Just one source. Not too difficult, eh?
ole
Give me a day or two. I am busy with other things at the moment...
Not really. 60% of the country voted CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRAT. Had there been one candidate, there would have never been a Secession, a Confederacy, nor any assumed
'Civil War'.
Lincoln had more electoral votes than the other three put together. The splitting of the Democratic Party guaranteed defeat; it is not clear that keeping it together would have elected a Democrat.
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Beowulf said: I replied: There is one promise made, with maybe another two reiterations. Yet Mr. Beowulf has not yet produced that promise, who made it, and when.
What has been our reply? I think he knows very well who made the "promise," but to reveal it would be to expose the statement as riduculous hyperbole.
Just one statement. Just one source. Not too difficult, eh?
ole
State of S. Carolina
Headquarters April 9, 1861
To the President of the Confederate States:
MY DEAR SIR:
..." because rumors, well established, indicated to me that Mr. Fox (Captain Gustavus Fox) had violated his faith to me in visiting the fort, under the guarantee of Captain Hartstene, who went with him. The pledge was that he visited Major Anderson by authority, for pacific (peaceful) purposes entirely. You see that the present scheme for supplying the fort is Mr. Fox's. It is thought that the attempt will be made to-night, and we have doubled our steamboats on the harbor and the bar".
"I trust we are ready for them, and if they come we will give them a cordial reception, such as will ring through this country, I think..."
F W PICKENS (Governor of S. Carolina).
Don't have time to find and detail all the treachery now, but this is part of it.
Until they do that, the world would think of them as a province in rebellion against legitimate authority. That is also the way international law works.
Tim
The European nations recognized them as a belligerent power. This is a significant step ahead of what you describe.
Heh..heh...looking forward to your reply on that one...
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
No, you're not. You spend your entire post avoiding that type of inquiry.
As to recognition of nations, yes, a country pretty much does need to be recognized by others if they want to exist. Until and unless they do, they have no existence as a nation in the international community. This is just reality, and you appear to wish to deny it.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
..." because rumors, well established, indicated to me that Mr. Fox (Captain Gustavus Fox) had violated his faith to me in visiting the fort, under the guarantee of Captain Hartstene, who went with him. The pledge was that he visited Major Anderson by authority, for pacific (peaceful) purposes entirely. You see that the present scheme for supplying the fort is Mr. Fox's. It is thought that the attempt will be made to-night, and we have doubled our steamboats on the harbor and the bar".
I see no broken promise here. Fox visited Anderson to discuss the ramifications of re-supply which, at the time, was Lincoln's intention. Sounds to me like "pacific purposes only."
Pickens was seeing spooks under the bed. He was considerably miffed with Captain Hartstene for allowing Fox out of his sight. So he is imagining what kind of plot Fox and Anderson hatched during the 10 minutes Hartstene was not with them.
No broken promise. No Lincoln treachery.
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
The Confederacy was an independent and sovereign nation and exercised all the characteristics of a sovereign.
Nope. It tried to become one. It never made it. Nice try, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battalion
The European nations recognized them as a belligerent power. This is a significant step ahead of what you describe.
Battalion, this means they recognized there was a war in progress. It does not mean the Europeans recognized the Confederacy as a nation; in fact, it shows that they did NOT recognize the Confederacy as a nation.
But you will also note that my post specified this as the situation during the period from December of 1860 to April of 1861. There was no war then -- until the Confederacy started one -- and no nation had recognized any state of belligerency. Since the point I was responding to was the issue of the Confederacy firing upon US ships and attacking Ft. Sumter in that period, nothing you just said has any application to the point.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
