Reply With QuoteSo just what should Lincoln have done?Originally Posted by Savez
Sumter Provocation
Originally Posted by ole
Justify the "provocation," please. Supplying a few small units of US troops, doesn't look much like a provocation.
Ole
I decided to start this as a seperate thread. I'm sure its been hashed out on here before but I wanted to answer Ole without highjacking a thread.
It wasn't just a few small units, there were also supplies and ammuntion. In my mind this is an act of aggression. I also lean toward the ideas of Charles W. Ramsdell thatLincoln did this purposely to provoke the Southerners into firing the first shot. Lincoln couldn't maintain the Fort because he didn't want to offend the upper South and Border States and those in the North that still wanted peace. He also couldn't just abandon the Fort because then he would look weak in European eyes and he would in essence be recognizing the Confederacy. Not a good a good place to be politically. He played it perfectly though. He put the ball in the South's court. Now you have to put yourself in their shoes. In their eyes this was an act of aggression. Now they had the chance of looking weak and illegitimate. I believe Lincoln was a shrewed politician and knew exactly what he was doing.
Having said all of this, I believe this idea of provoked or not will essentially boil down to an oft debated topic on this forum; Was secession legal/right/wrong/blah/blah. But, I decided to start the thread anyway.
The love of money is the root of this, as of many other evils. The quarrel between the North and South is, as it stands, solely a fiscal quarrel."
--Charles Dickens
So just what should Lincoln have done?
It is a classical maxim that it is sweet and becoming to die for one's country; but whoever has seen the horrors of a battlefield feels that it is far sweeter to live for it. - John Singleton Mosby
Oh, I think he did just exactly what he should have done. Provoke an attack.
The love of money is the root of this, as of many other evils. The quarrel between the North and South is, as it stands, solely a fiscal quarrel."
--Charles Dickens
Then it seems to me Jefferson Davis and crew ought not to have circled the fort with guns and put him in a position where he had to "provoke an attack".
It is a classical maxim that it is sweet and becoming to die for one's country; but whoever has seen the horrors of a battlefield feels that it is far sweeter to live for it. - John Singleton Mosby
In point of fact, it was Davis and the csa gov't that was looking to provoke a war. The attack was not the action of unbridled emotion. It was a cooly calculated ploy to draw the border states(especially Va.) into the csa fold.
Lincoln had his agenda and Davis, his. Both were successful in accomplishing their immediate goals.
The difference between the two agendas, was legality; Lincoln was justified by law and by custom in his reinforcing the fort, Davis had no legal sanction to fire upon the property and personnel of the United States.
When I go to Montgomery and look at the building that used to house the Telegraph office, now a legal firm's building, and think what one little telegram unleashed, I get very sad
Oooooh! Goood thread. There was a war knocking at the front door. Everybody knew that.Lincoln just made the Confederacy start it. There were some global exigencies.
Jeff Davis had to know what he was doing. To not open fire, he'd have looked like a kitty. (The real word won't get by the censor.) Kitties are cute and fuzzy and fun to pet, but JD couldn't very well be getting petted. The meow had to be much bigger --- more like a roar. There is the reality he was facing. Roar or listen to "nice kitty."
Life is not about waiting out the storm. Life is about learning to dance in the rain.
Felt the same way the last time I was in Montgomery. Such a waste. For what?I get very sad
Life is not about waiting out the storm. Life is about learning to dance in the rain.
For the benefit of us ignorant people out here, what telegram are you all talking about?
It is a classical maxim that it is sweet and becoming to die for one's country; but whoever has seen the horrors of a battlefield feels that it is far sweeter to live for it. - John Singleton Mosby
According to Wikipedia the Confederate Secretary of War sent General Beauregard a telegram concerning Fort Sumter.
"You will at once demand its evacuation, and if this is refused proceed, in such a manner as you may determine, to reduce it."
http://www.freeinfosociety.com/article.php?id=214
Last edited by Freddy; 02-24-2010 at 09:18 PM.
"Those who forget to remember the past are condemned to repeat it", George Santayana.
"Don't fire unless fired upon. If they want a war, let it begin here."
Attributed to Captain John Parker, militia captain, Lexington Green, April 19, 1775
Actually this is according to the Alabama Department of History which has erected a commemorative plaque outside the building.
The building is just down the street (Dexter?) from the Capitol..
"Lincoln was justified by law"
No he wasn't. The United States government was violating the purpose for which the fort was built.
POWER & MONEY
"The brokers of the Empire City are furious at the prospect of seeing their lucrative trade diverted to Charleston or New Orleans, and carried on with English capital. The lust of money has had ten times more to do with the sudden patriotism of the North than their love of liberty."
London Morning Herald, 1861
See, that's the thing. Would the colonials have let a British Fort Stand just off the coast? Like I said the argument will eventually come down to was secession right/wrong/legal/moral and the like.
The love of money is the root of this, as of many other evils. The quarrel between the North and South is, as it stands, solely a fiscal quarrel."
--Charles Dickens
If he was. It was a matter to be adjudicated in a proper legal authority.
The Constitution provides for disputes concerning the legal rights of the states in relation to those of the National gov't. That the south thought it had a better way, can only be justified, If secession was the Only option, the southern leadership were prepared to accept.
Through the various reads within cwt, I believe the majority of members believe the firing on Sumter mostly benefited the Union. Was there a prominent voice, that warned of 'waking the sleeping giant' within the confederacy, besides Sam Houston.
"Nearly al men can stand adversity,but if you to test a man's character, give him power." AbrahamLincoln
Post script; I think Battalion gets a kick out of trying to push quick buttons. I'll bite ;Which law prohibits the maning,and suppling of a federal fort.
Most famously Confederate Secretary of State Robert Toombs who warned Jefferson Davis against an attack on Sumter: ""Mr. President," he said, "at this time it is suicide -- murder -- and will lose us every friend in the North. You will strike a hornets' nest which extends from mountains to oceans. Millions now quiet will swarm out and sting us to death. It is not necessary. It puts us in the wrong. It will kill us!"
Foremost would be violation of a trust.
POWER & MONEY
"The brokers of the Empire City are furious at the prospect of seeing their lucrative trade diverted to Charleston or New Orleans, and carried on with English capital. The lust of money has had ten times more to do with the sudden patriotism of the North than their love of liberty."
London Morning Herald, 1861
Thank you; Allway's liked Toombs,would have been a better choice for confederate presidency,and give Davis a command. The Toombs bill had a chance with popular vote clause.
Great quote !
The love of money is the root of this, as of many other evils. The quarrel between the North and South is, as it stands, solely a fiscal quarrel."
--Charles Dickens
Whatever chance the Confederacy ever had at attaining a lasting independence from the United States was dramatically enhanced by the reduction of Fort Sumter. Without some kind of decisive event, the Southern Confederacy was but seven States loosely entwined. President Davis did not have a lot of options. Had the lower South been allowed to have been just left alone, they and their excitement about leaving the Union would have withered. Instead, they got the Yankee invasion and the power of the Upper South and a plainly apparent concrete devil to drive them into what amount of coherence the Confederacy finally achieved....instead of seven little states with buyer's remorse as the summer of 1861 advanced.
President Davis needed Sumter more thanLincoln .
This is true. And that's why Davis putLincoln in a position where he had to respond. Lincoln took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and that's what he did.
It is a classical maxim that it is sweet and becoming to die for one's country; but whoever has seen the horrors of a battlefield feels that it is far sweeter to live for it. - John Singleton Mosby
LOL !!! Lincoln upheld that oath only when it was convenient.
The love of money is the root of this, as of many other evils. The quarrel between the North and South is, as it stands, solely a fiscal quarrel."
--Charles Dickens
Lincoln upheld the Constitution throughout his Presidency. The Constitution gives the Chief Executive extraordinary powers during times of rebellion, and to preserve the Constitution Lincoln used those powers when necessary. But he always limited the scope of those powers and he always gave them back when no longer needed. When his Presidency was over the Constitution was alive and well.
If Lincoln was the tyrant that some people make him out to be, he would have ripped the Constitution to shreds and on his death Robert Lincoln would have ascended to the throne.
It is a classical maxim that it is sweet and becoming to die for one's country; but whoever has seen the horrors of a battlefield feels that it is far sweeter to live for it. - John Singleton Mosby
Posting Permissions
Bringing the American Civil War to Life.
Copyright © 1999 - 2010, CivilWarTalk.com.
Site Version 5.4
Subscribe to our Forum RSS Feed!
