1. Welcome to the CivilWarTalk, a forum for questions and discussions about the American Civil War! Become a member today for full access to all of our resources, it's fast, simple, and absolutely free! If you aren't ready for that, try posting your question or comment as a guest!

A Challenge:

Discussion in 'Civil War History - Secession and Politics' started by dan_curtis, Jul 11, 2004.

  1. unionblue

    unionblue Brev. Brig. Gen'l

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    17,812
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    Which mean I gave an opinion on one thing and have not agreed to the above at all. Do not misconstrue my point of view by trying to force yours onto my own.

    ASK me if I think President Lincoln was authorized to call the Militia to suppress an unlawful insurrection.

    Rebellions are only illegal in the third person, B Peach, such as 'their rebellion.' They are not illegal in the first person, such as 'our rebellion.' :smile:

    Unionblue

  2. (Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
  3. unionblue

    unionblue Brev. Brig. Gen'l

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    17,812
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    Thank you for your input.

    Sincerely,
    Unionblue
  4. LT.J.H.McDaniel

    LT.J.H.McDaniel Sergeant Major

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,365
    Location:
    Rockytop,Tennessee
    I guess with that beeing said, the federals were doing what they were told to do, and in the unions eyes, the confederates were acting out a crime.
  5. unionblue

    unionblue Brev. Brig. Gen'l

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    17,812
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    Here you slide off the page.

    Unionblue
  6. LT.J.H.McDaniel

    LT.J.H.McDaniel Sergeant Major

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,365
    Location:
    Rockytop,Tennessee
    In my opinin the union saw confederates as acting out a crime. Confederates saw themselfs getting their enemy out of their "teritory". It all depends on wich side your veiwing the subject from..Just my thoughts..
  7. wilber6150

    wilber6150 Brigadier General Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    16,452
    Location:
    deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
    You insinuated that UB was changing the content of his older posts, he had every right to respond...
  8. wilber6150

    wilber6150 Brigadier General Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    16,452
    Location:
    deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
    Asked by who? Anderson had orders to defend the fort he didn't have the freedom of choice to surrander unless under certain circumstances.. A better question would be why did they fire on the fort when he gave them a date that he would surrander on...
  9. wilber6150

    wilber6150 Brigadier General Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    16,452
    Location:
    deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
    Inncorrect Bucannon gave no such orders, stop fabricating history....Anderson had permission to move his force to any of the forts that he saw fit to...
  10. wilber6150

    wilber6150 Brigadier General Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    16,452
    Location:
    deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
    The orders given to Anderson pretaining to his command at Charleston..



    Memorandum of verbal instructions to Major Anderson, 1st Artillery, commanding at Fort Moultrie, South Carolina:
    You are aware of the great anxiety of the Secretary of War that a collision of the troops with the people of this State shall be avoided, and of his studied determination to pursue a course with reference to the military force and forts in this harbor which shall guard against such a collision. He has, therefore, carefully abstained from increasing the force at this point, or taking any measures which might add to the present excited state of the public mind, or which would throw any doubt on the confidence he feels that South Carolina will not attempt by violence to obtain possession of the public works or interfere with their occupancy. But as the counsel and acts of rash and impulsive persons may possibly disappoint these expectations of the Government, he deems it proper that you shall be prepared with instructions to meet so unhappy a contingency. He has, therefore, directed me verbally to give you such instructions.
    You are carefully to avoid every act which would needlessly tend to provoke aggression, and for that reason you are not, without evident and imminent necessity, to take up any position which could be construed into the assumption of a hostile attitude. But you are to hold possession of the forts in this harbor, and if attacked you are to defend yourself to the last extremity. The smallness of your force will not permit you, perhaps, to occupy more than one of the three forts, but an attack on or attempt to take possession of either one of them will be regarded as an act of hostility, and you may then put your command into either of them which you may deem most proper, to increase its power of resistance. You are also authorized to take similar defensive steps whenever you have tangible evidence of a design to proceed to a hostile act.

    D. C. Buell, Assistant Adjutant-General.
    FORT MOULTRIE, S.C.,
    December 11, 1860.
    This is in conformity to my instructions to Major Buell.
    John B. Floyd, Secretary of War.

    http://www.lincolnstudies.com/archives/158

    Bucannon was going to order Anderson back to keep the peace but Confederate troops had already occupied his former position..

  11. LT.J.H.McDaniel

    LT.J.H.McDaniel Sergeant Major

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,365
    Location:
    Rockytop,Tennessee
    Thank you sir!!
  12. B Peach

    B Peach First Sergeant

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,338
    Fort Moultrie had fewer than seventy soldiers, and Anderson. Castle Pinckney had only one. Fort Johnson was the base of supply with the rest, also here the commands women and children of the command and the place all supplies were to be sent to from local and out of state sources. And Fort Sumter -- which was still being built -- had none. 4 forts, 3 of them manned.

    Full acount here:
    http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...=0CC8Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Fort Johnson&f=false

    http://myathenaeum.com/simpson/page118.html
    FORT SUMTER, Charleston, S. C, December 27, 1860.
    My dear Sir: I have only time to say that the movement of my command to this place was made on my own responsibility and not in obedience to orders from Washington. I did it because in my opinion it was the best way of preventing the shedding of blood. God grant that the existing condition of affairs may be adjusted without any resort to force.
    Truly your friend, ROBERT ANDERSON.
    The Hon. ROBERT N. GOURDIN.
    __________________

    "FORT SUMTER, South Carolina, December 29, 1860.
    "My dear Sir: No one will regret more deeply than I shall, should it prove true that the movement I have made has complicated rather than disembarrassed affairs. There is an unaccountable mystery in reference to this affair. I was asked by a gentleman within a day or two, if I had been notified by your Government that I would not be molested at Fort Moultrie, and when I replied that I had not been so notified, he remarked that he was glad to hear it, as it convinced him that I had acted in good faith, having just told him that I had not received such an intimation from my own Government. Now if there was such an understanding, I certainly ought to have been informed of it .
    But why, if your Government thought that I knew of this agreement, was everything done which indicated an intention to attack? Why were armed steamers kept constantly on the watch for my movements? The papers say that I was under a panic. That is a mistake ; the moment I inspected my position I saw that the work was not defensible with my small command, and recommended, weeks ago, that we ought to be withdrawn. I remained, then, as long as I could under the fearful responsibility I felt for the safety of my command, and finally decided on Christmas morning that I would remove the command that day; and it would have been attempted that day if the weather had not proved inauspicious. Not a person of my command knew of my determination until that morning, and only on that day. The captains of the lighters are, I am sorry to see, threatened by the Charlestonians for what they did. I do hope that they will not disgrace themselves by wreaking their wrath upon these men. They were employed to take the women and children, and food for them, to Fort Johnson, and were as innocent in the matter as any one. Another lighter was filled with commissary stores for the workingmen here, and her captain certainly is not blamable for bringing them. Not a soldier came in either of these vessels except the married men with their wives for Fort Johnson, and there was not an arm of any kind permitted to be taken on board those boats. Only one person on board those boats knew that Fort Johnson was not their final destination, until the signal was given that the command was in Fort Sumter. My men were transferred in our own boats, and were all, with the exception of those attached to the hospital, in the fort before 8 o'clock. So much in exoneration of the captains.
    I regret that the Governor has deemed proper to treat us as enemies, by cutting off our communication with the city, permitting me only to send for the mails. Now this is annoying, and I regret it. We can do without going to the city, as I have supplies of provisions, of all kinds, to last my command about five months, but it would add to our comfort to be enabled to make purchases of fresh meats and so on, and to shop in the city. The Governor does not know how entirely the commerce and intercourse of Charleston by sea are in my power. I could, if so disposed, annoy and embarrass the Charlestonians much more than they can me. With my guns I can close the harbor completely to the access of all large vessels, and I might even cut off the lights, so as to seal the approach entirely by night. I do hope that nothing will occur to add to the excitement and bad feeling which exists in the city. No one has a right to be angry with me for my action. No one can tell what they would have done unless they were placed in the same tight place. . . . I write this note hurriedly, as I wish to acknowledge the receipt of your kind note, and to assure you that I am firmly convinced that, had you been in my place, and known no more of the political bearing of things than I did, you would have acted as I did.
    I know that if my action was properly explained to the people of Charleston, they would not feel any excitement against me or my command.
    Praying that the time may soon come, etc.,
    ROBERT ANDERSON.
  13. B Peach

    B Peach First Sergeant

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,338
    War/secession was a forgone conlusion while a party held such views, and had a mandate to govern, when states still considered they were sov states with a right of secession, and or that slavery was to be limited to where it existed. By its existence and beliefs, and popular support, it made war a pratical certainty, becase it equated secession as treason, and denied the authority of congress.
    http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=149

    THIRD. That to the Union of the states this nation owes its unprecedented increase in population; its surprising development of material resources; its rapid augmentation of wealth; its happiness at home and its honor abroad; and we hold in abhorrence all schemes for disunion, come from whatever source they may; and we congratulate the country that no republican member of congress has uttered or countenanced the threats of disunion so often made by democratic members, without rebuke and with applause from their political associates; and we denounce those threats of disunion, in case of a popular overthrow of their ascendency, as denying the vital principles of a free government, and as an avowal of contemplated treason, which it is the imperative duty of an indignant people sternly to rebuke and forever silence.


    EIGHTH. That the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom; that as our republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no "person should be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law," it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the constitution against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any territory of the United States.
  14. dvrmte

    dvrmte Major

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Messages:
    8,984
    Location:
    South Carolina
    Surrender only if not resupplied. Come on Wilber, you're being misleading. If those supply ships made it in, Anderson would've stayed in Fort Sumter. Or if received other instructions he would stay.

    Fort SUMTER, S.C., April 12, 1861.
    GENERAL: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt by Colonel Chesnut of your second communication of the 11th instant, and to state in reply that, cordially uniting with you in the desire to avoid the useless effusion of blood, I will, if provided with the proper and necessary means of transportation, evacuate Fort Sumter by noon on the 15th instant, and that I will not in the mean time open my fires upon your forces unless compelled to do so by some hostile act against this fort or the flag of my Government by the forces under your command, or by some portion of them, or by the perpetration of some act showing a hostile intention on your part against this fort or the flag it bears, should I not receive prior to that time controlling instructions from my Government or additional supplies.
    I am, general, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
    ROBERT ANDERSON,
    Major, First Artillery, Commanding.​

    Why did the Confederacy require Fort Sumter? Beauregard will tell you.

    Beauregard had received his supply of powder, enough of this BS'n.

    HEADQUARTERS PROVISIONAL ARMY, C. S. A.,
    Charleston, S. C., April 11, 1861.
    SIR: The Government of the Confederate States has hitherto forborne from any hostile demonstration against Fort Sumter, in the hope that the Government of the United States, with a view to the amicable adjustment of all questions between the two Governments, and to avert the calamities of war, would voluntarily evacuate it.
    There was reason at one time to believe that such would be the course pursued by the Government of the United .States, and under that impression my Government has refrained from making any demand for the surrender of the fort. But the Confederate States can no longer delay assuming actual possession of a fortification commanding the entrance of one of their harbors, and necessary to its defense and security.

    I am ordered by the Government of the Confederate States to demand the evacuation of Fort Sumter. My aides, Colonel Chesnut and Captain Lee, are authorized to make such demand of you. All proper facilities will be afforded for the removal of yourself and command, together with company arms and property, and all private property, to any post in the United States which you may select. The flag which you have upheld so long and with so much fortitude, under the most trying circumstances, may be saluted by you on taking it down. Colonel Chesnut and Captain Lee will for a reasonable time, await your answer.​
    I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
    G. T. BEAUREGARD,
    Brigadier-General, Commanding.
  15. wilber6150

    wilber6150 Brigadier General Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    16,452
    Location:
    deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
    Well yes of course if not re-supplied thats kind of self evident isn't it :smile: He wasn't about to just give up the fort unless he had resons that fell under his orders... Anderson didn't get the message that the fleet was going to arrive by the 15th, so that was the date that he would consider his supplies being spent..He wasn't saying that trying to be sly...The Confederates wouldn't allow the courier carrying the message to meet with Anderson so he didn't know when the fleet would arrive...
  16. wilber6150

    wilber6150 Brigadier General Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    16,452
    Location:
    deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
    Andersons orders...


    WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, December 21, 1860.

    Major ANDERSON, First Artillery, Commanding Fort Moultrie, S. C.:

    SIR: In the verbal instructions communicated to you by Major Buell, you are directed to hold possession of the forts in the harbor of Charleston, and, if attacked, to defend yourself to the last extremity. Under these instructions, you might infer that you are required to make a vain and useless sacrifice of your own life and the lives of the men under your command, upon a mere point of honor. This is far from the Presidents intentions. You are to exercise a sound military discretion on this subject. It is neither expected nor desired that you should expose your own life or that of your men in a hopeless conflict in defense of these forts. If they are invested or attacked by a force so superior that resistance would, in your judgment, be a useless waste of life, it will be your duty to yield to necessity, and make the best terms in your power. This will be the conduct of an honorable, brave, and humane officer, and you will be fully justified in such action. These orders are strictly confidential, and not to be communicated even to the officers under your command, without close necessity.

    Very respectfully,

    JOHN B. FLOYD.

    [This letter delivered to Major Anderson December 23, by Capt. John Withers, A.A.G.]



    It wasn't as simple as being re-supplied thse orders would still hold true if he had vast supplies of food..
  17. unionblue

    unionblue Brev. Brig. Gen'l

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    17,812
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    Dan Curtis no longer posts on this forum or this thread.
  18. wilber6150

    wilber6150 Brigadier General Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    16,452
    Location:
    deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
    Huh ?:shrug:
  19. unionblue

    unionblue Brev. Brig. Gen'l

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    17,812
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    wilber,

    Post #92 of this thread.

    Unionblue
  20. matthew mckeon

    matthew mckeon Brigadier General Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    7,077
    I agreed. Lincoln had a union to preserve and Davis had a country to get started. The question really is: was the union worth preserving or the country worth starting.
  21. B Peach

    B Peach First Sergeant

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,338
    Lincoln had a Constition to preserve, not a Union, his oath is quite clear, to preserve the Constitution. That changes it somewhat, was the Constitution based on consent to be goverened to remain, or be replaced by one not based on consent of the parties to it.

    Viewpoint are all well and good, but Lincoln confusing the Union creating the states, rathe than the states creating the Union, was to much for many to see his viewpoint.

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

Share This Page