Fort Sumter- What threats? More Defensible?

books?id=GH0FAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA47&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U3RTMoK91izJ9Tc2HEe5DpM10ZUfg&.png
 
g=PA46&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U34ODQmT7nhfHKTUeB3jT0_DK7D8g&ci=111%2C371%2C425%2C320&edge=0.png



To make it easier to read lol

On the twenty fourth of December an officer evidently the Major himself wrote a letter In which were the following words When I inform you that my garrison consists of only sixty effective men and that we are in a very in different work the walls of which are only about fourteen feet high and that we have within a hundred and sixty yards of our walls sandhills which command our works and which afford admirable sites for batteries and the finest covers for sharp shooters and that besides this there are numerous houses some of them within pistol shot, you will at once see that if attacked in force headed by any one but a simpleton there is scarce a possibility of our being able to hold out long enough to enable our friends to come to our succor
Letter from Fort Moultrie 3 C December 4 1860 In The Boston Journal January 3 1861 It may be found also In Frank Leslie's Pictorial History of the American Civil War i xv and In Appleton t Annual Cyclopedia for 1861 SIS
 
Two days afterward an officer of the garrison In a letter to his father said
At Fort Moultrie we could not fail to have succumbed before the large force that was probably on the point of being launched against us. Between batteries, a close fire of riflemen and a few columns of assault we must have been forced to have yielded although it would not have been without the loss perhaps of every man there.
Letter from Fort December 86 I860 In The Troy NY Timet copied The Richmond Va Whig Vol xxxvlli No iv 11 1861


This link is for the previous two posts...

Never mind the link doesnt get you to the right page.. Its page 46 of Dvrmtes link...

http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA140&lpg=PA140&dq=fort+moultrie+guns+turned+charleston&sig=B73Qd0a9wptDNb-vDrE5u_rqfXY&ei=xNbUTpy-JoG5twet8-SCAg&ct=result&id=GH0FAAAAQAAJ&ots=ZBZ1hIexVN#v=onepage&q=fort%20moultrie%20guns%20turned%20charleston&f=false
 
Hey Dvrmte, what the heck is your name anyway ? lol Anyhow check out this link, the story of the crisis published in S. Carolina in 1862

http://books.google.com/books?id=gq...=gbs_selected_pages&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

Thanks! I just recently thought of looking at the older and outdated books. There are many tidbits of interest not in modern accounts.

I jumped the gun with this thread, I've had nothing but trouble trying to get the text from the link to post here. The system at work is different than what I have at home, which adds to my frustration. I'm just glad someone else is taking the time to read the link I posted from. I haven't had the time I thought I would to absorb all the information.

Do you notice the difference of opinion about the strength of Fort Moultrie between Major Anderson and Captain Foster? Foster thought only an organized force, well equipped with scaling ladders could take it.

Also, the article seems to say that while Anderson had the right to move to any fort in the harbor, his fears of being overran at Fort Moultrie were unjustified.

I just read somewhere else that Beauregard said, that at that time, there wasn't enough gunpowder in South Carolina to sustain the fire of a three gun batter for three hours. I wonder how true that was?

As for my name, it's Cary, but don't wear it out.:tongue:

dvrmte
 
People now tend to forget that Maj. Anderson was a reluctant warrior at best. His main goal was to preserve the appearce of his honor being served. He already had authorization from Pres. Buchanan to surrender in the face of insuperable odds. He was not expected by his superiors nor by himself to defend any installation under his command to the last extremity.
But, at the same time, as noted, honor, his and the United States, had to be honored, i.e., there could be no honorable way to surrender, 'on demand'.
Once an infantry assalt starts there is usually little chance for a surrender before large casualties are incurred by both sides. So, the thing to do is take a position where the direct use of infantry is limited or, preferably, eliminated. A place well protected from bombardment, but very difficult, if not impossible, for a successful infantry assault. Where an overwhelming bombardment could be suffered in relatively safety, from which after an appropriate time could be formally and safely surrendered with minimum loss of life on either side, and honor satisfied by both sides, ergo the choice of Fort Sumter.
 
Maybe you shouldn't have posted that link. You might've shot yourself in the foot. Lot's of good ammo in there.

Look who it was published by and the preface, only slightly biased.... But, if it provides info I didn't know then its all good....But, I would suggest reading what it says about the defensibility of Moultrie or should I say lack of.... :smile:
 
Look who it was published by and the preface, only slightly biased.... But, if it provides info I didn't know then its all good....

Nawh! Not biased?:angel:

For one thing it's not influenced by the Lost Cause. Since it was published during the conflict, it makes it all the more valuable to me.
 
Nawh! Not biased?:angel:

For one thing it's not influenced by the Lost Cause. Since it was published during the conflict, it makes it all the more valuable to me.

The book in your link is fantastic, there is more information on the notes on the bottom of the pages then I have seen in many modern books on the subject... What is really interesting is it seems that the authors seem to have great doubts on Andersons loyalties and how much zeal he had for the Union... I have read some things that does make me wonder on just how much the government of S. Carolina wanted to go to war with the Union, and that maybe it was Pickens that was actually pushing the state towards conflict, but I will have to keep reading and checking their sources...For instance, the secession convention failed to pass, and simply tabled two resolutions to authorize an immediate attack and seizure of Sumter...Thats what I love about this forum you can always learn something you didn't know...
 
The book in your link is fantastic, there is more information on the notes on the bottom of the pages then I have seen in many modern books on the subject... What is really interesting is it seems that the authors seem to have great doubts on Andersons loyalties and how much zeal he had for the Union... I have read some things that does make me wonder on just how much the government of S. Carolina wanted to go to war with the Union, and that maybe it was Pickens that was actually pushing the state towards conflict, but I will have to keep reading and checking their sources...For instance, the secession convention failed to pass, and simply tabled two resolutions to authorize an immediate attack and seizure of Sumter...Thats what I love about this forum you can always learn something you didn't know...

It seems like the South Carolina hot heads got the publicity and the thoughts and concerns of the common man were neglected. I do think that Anderson got a raw deal. I would've been very pizzed to be put in such a position and then more or less left out of the information loop by two presidents, not knowing exactly what the right thing to do was. Anderson did what he thought best and made the move to Fort Sumter, for the safety of his men. I can respect that but Governor Pickens and some of the military leaders of SC saw it as an aggressive move that put the communications of the harbor at the will of the forces within Fort Sumter.

I take particular interest in General Simon's report of the defenses of the harbor from the link you supplied.

http://books.google.com/books?id=gq...=gbs_selected_pages&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false page 14

PS - The footnotes are interesting in the link I provided initially. When I get the time, I'm going to read the reports from the Committee on the Conduct of the War. Many of the footnotes were from it.
 
After Reading Andersons Or's, you can tell he is practically screaming for some guidance and communacation from higher up. They left him high and dry and with his orders, you can almost see him being set up to be the fall guy... What would have happened if he followed their vague guide lines and gave up the fort once he saw all the batteries erected against him, knowing the resistance would be futile and a pointless shedding of blood...Would he have been hailed as a hero or coward, and would have anyone in the government stood up for him?
 
After Reading Andersons Or's, you can tell he is practically screaming for some guidance and communacation from higher up. They left him high and dry and with his orders, you can almost see him being set up to be the fall guy... What would have happened if he followed their vague guide lines and gave up the fort once he saw all the batteries erected against him, knowing the resistance would be futile and a pointless shedding of blood...Would he have been hailed as a hero or coward, and would have anyone in the government stood up for him?

I agree that higher ups left Anderson swinging in the wind out there, from the moment he arrived to practically the day the Confederates opened fire. Then -- suddenly -- they want to mount this resupply mission that Anderson did not feel could work if the Confederates resisted. They want him to hold on until they arrive. If any of us were in Anderson's shoes, we would certainly be entitled to some under-the-breath fuming about Washington. Assuming we had his courage and will, we'd probably act much like he did, keeping his men under cover during the fight to minimize casualties and standing up to the fight to honor the flag and his profession as a soldier.

Tim
 
I agree that higher ups left Anderson swinging in the wind out there, from the moment he arrived to practically the day the Confederates opened fire. Then -- suddenly -- they want to mount this resupply mission that Anderson did not feel could work if the Confederates resisted. They want him to hold on until they arrive. If any of us were in Anderson's shoes, we would certainly be entitled to some under-the-breath fuming about Washington. Assuming we had his courage and will, we'd probably act much like he did, keeping his men under cover during the fight to minimize casualties and standing up to the fight to honor the flag and his profession as a soldier.

Tim

I think he had a genuine fear of being blamed for starting the war. The only honorable thing he could do, with the info he had, was what he done.
 
Heres a thought ... Should Anderson have opened fire on the S. Carolina troops as they took over Moultrie and the other forts once he occupied Sumter... Did he have a duty to protect federal possessions within the harbor? Should he have considered these moves acts of war and responded...He wouldn't have been in any worst position then he was 4 months later and might have been able to been resupplied..
 
Heres a thought ... Should Anderson have opened fire on the S. Carolina troops as they took over Moultrie and the other forts once he occupied Sumter... Did he have a duty to protect federal possessions within the harbor? Should he have considered these moves acts of war and responded...He wouldn't have been in any worst position then he was 4 months later and might have been able to been resupplied..

But wouldn't that have started civil war right then? With Buchanan as Commander in Chief, and Floyd as Secretary of War? Yikes!

P.S. - And congrats on your promotion!
 
That would have been a scary thought for the nation having those two still in office... :smile: Im just trying to get a sense of Anderson, he did his duty to hold Sumter to the last, but he seemed to avoid taking a stand when faced with other confrontations...Twice, he did nothing while ships flying the flag were fired upon..I know he wanted to avoid war at all cost and was in a no-win situation but did he try too hard to avoid conflict...Bucannon might have been forced to take a harder stand, he did send the Star of the West, so its not beyond possibility that he would have done more..And if firing had started before all the Confederate positions were constructed, the fort might have had a chance to hold out better then it did... Though, that does bring up the question then what :smile:
But, thats not a question that Anderson was duty bound to ask...

Thanks for the congrats.. I haven't even noticed.. Beers on me at the O club :smile:
 
That would have been a scary thought for the nation having those two still in office... :smile: Im just trying to get a sense of Anderson, he did his duty to hold Sumter to the last, but he seemed to avoid taking a stand when faced with other confrontations...Twice, he did nothing while ships flying the flag were fired upon..I know he wanted to avoid war at all cost and was in a no-win situation but did he try to hard to avoid conflict...Bucannon might have been forced to take a harder stand, he did send the Star of the West, so its not beyond possibility that he would have done more..And if firing had started before all the Confederate positions were constructed, the fort might have had a chance to hold out better then it did... Though, that does bring up the question then what :smile:
But, thats not a question that Anderson was duty bound to ask...

Well no, Anderson wasn't duty bound to ask that question, but he was duty bound to follow orders. And his superiors had presumably taken all those issues into consideration when they gave him his orders. Personally I think that would have been a gross violation of his orders and an unnecessary provocation at a time when most of the country was still hoping that a diplomatic solution could be worked out.

Thanks for the congrats.. I haven't even noticed.. Beers on me at the O club :smile:

Yuengling for me! (They just started selling the stuff here finally. It's quite good!)
 
Heres a thought ... Should Anderson have opened fire on the S. Carolina troops as they took over Moultrie and the other forts once he occupied Sumter...

Very few guns had been mounted at that point, and he had a large group of workers of unknown loyalty at Ft. Sumter. For practical reasons, probably too early.

Might have been a good point to start acting tough, though, if he knew what the government wanted him to do.

Did he have a duty to protect federal possessions within the harbor?

Absolutely. He was a serving military officer who was sure of his path on that issue.

Strangely, I think Robert E. Lee might have done much as Anderson did. When the Texans acted aggressively against Twiggs, the officers at San Antonio discussed it among themselves. Many thought that if Lee had still been in command, they would have cut their way through and been riding North instead of meekly surrendering.

If Twiggs had been in command at Charleston, though, I think he would have simply surrendered all three posts and the Arsenal the second the South Carolinians asked. I really don't think much of Twiggs.

Should he have considered these moves acts of war and responded...He wouldn't have been in any worst position then he was 4 months later and might have been able to been resupplied..

Possible. He'd need to know the government's intentions, though, and I am not sure anyone knew what Buchanan might do (even Buchanan).

If Winfield Scott and a strong Secretary of War had been working with Buchanan and Anderson for this event, it might have been really different.. In that case, you might have seen a relief steaming out of New York earlier and already well organized. But Scott kept Army HQ in New York and didn't get along well with the Washington politicians (or a lot of other people). Floyd was in the midst of a major financial scandal, already asked to resign by Buchanan before Anderson moved to Ft. Sumter. None of those people was doing the kind of things needed to assure Anderson of support.

If there'd been an Andrew Jackson in the White House, Charleston might have awoken one day in mid-December to find a USN warship and a transport in the harbor, with supplies and two or three hundred extra troops to throw into Castle Pinckney, Ft. Moultrie and Ft. Sumter, along with clear instructions for Colonel Anderson. Now that would have made for an interesting vote on secession, wouldn't it?

Tim
 
Back
Top