Sumter Provocation

Statements about food made before April 7....


http://www.familytales.org/results.php?city=fort sumter
Fort Sumter, S. C, April4, 1861..

(Received A. G O., April 6.)
Col. L. Thomas, Adjutant-General U. S. Army:
Colonel: I have the honor to send herewith a report of the circumstances attending a firing yesterday afternoon by the batteries on Morris Island at a schooner bearing our flag, bound from Boston to Savannah, which, erroneously mistaking the lighthouse off this harbor for that of Tybee, and having failed to get a pilot, was entering the harbor.
The remarks made to me by Colonel Lamon, taken in connection with the tenor of newspaper articles, have induced me, as stated in previous communications, to believe that orders would soon be issued for my abandoning this work. When the firing commenced some of my heaviest guns were concealed from their view by planking, and by the time the battery was ready the firing had ceased. I then, acting in strict accordance with the spirit and wording of the orders of the War Department, as communicated to me in the letter from the Secretary of War dated February 23, 1861, determined not to commence firing until I had sent to the vessel and investigated the circumstances.
The accompanying report presents them. Invested by a force so superior that a collision would, in all probability, terminate in the destruction of our force before relief could reach us with only a few days' provisions on hand, and with a scanty supply of ammunition, as will be seen by a reference to my letter of February 27, in hourly expectation of receiving definite instructions from the War Department, and with orders so explicit and peremptory as those I am acting under, I deeply regret that I did not feel myself at liberty to resent the insult thus offered to the flag of my beloved country.
I think that proper notification should be given to our merchant vessels of the rigid instructions under which the commanders of these batteries are acting; that they should be notified that they must, as soon as a shot is fired ahead of them, at once round to and communicate with the batteries.
The authorities here are certainly blamable for not having constantly vessels off to communicate instructions to those seeking entrance into this harbor.
Captain Talbot is relieved, of course, by order No. 7, from duty at this post. I avail myself of this opportunity of stating that he has been zealous, intelligent, and active in the discharge of all his duties here, so far as his health permitted him to attempt their performance. I send him on with these despatches, to give the Department an opportunity, if deemed proper, to modify, in consequence of this unfortunate affair, any order they may have sent to me. I will delay obedience thereto until I have time to receive a telegram after Captain Talbot's having reported to the War Department.
I am Colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
Robert Anderson,
Major, First Artillery, Commanding.



Fort Sumter, S. C. April5, 1861..
(Received A. G. O., April 8.)
Colonel L. Thomas, Adjutant-General U. S. Army :
Colonel : I have the honor to report everything still and quiet, and to send herewith the report of Lieutenant Snyder, whom I sent yesterday with a short note and a verbal message to the Governor of South Carolina. No reply has been received to my note.
I cannot but think that Mr. Crawford has misunderstood what he has heard in Washington, as I cannot think that the Government would abandon, without instructions and without advice, a command which has tried to do all its duty to our country.
I cannot but think that if the Government decides to do nothing which can be construed into a recognition of the fact of the dissolution of the Union, that it will, at all events, say to me that I must do the best I can, and not compel me to do an act which will leave my motives and actions liable to misconception.
I am sure that I shall not be left without instructions, even though they may be confidential. After thirty odd years of service I do not wish it to be said that I have treasonably abandoned a post and turned over to unauthorized persons public property intrusted to my charge. lam entitled to this act of justice at the hands of my Government, and I feel confident that I shall not be disappointed. What to do with the public property, and where to take my command, are questions to which answers will, I hope, be at once returned. Unless we receive supplies, I shall be compelled to stay here without food or to abandon this post very early next week.
Confidently hoping that I shall receive ample instructions in time,
I am, Colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
Robert Anderson,

And now what his supplies were on the 13th

http://www.familytales.org/results.php?city=steamship baltic

So we have two letters from Anderson before the 7th speaking about the lack of food and finally, only one week after this he speaks of only having pork to eat on the 13th..Due to his statements about food shortage before and after the date that the Confederates officially closed his supply line to Charleston merchants it just doesn't seem to be that he was being fully provisioned up to the 7th as you claim...In fact, his condition on the 13th is pretty much what he predicted it would be.
 
So finally on April 12, just 5 days after all these supplies that the fort was getting from the markets of Charleston we have this ...

Our meal was not very sumptuous. It consisted of pork and water, but Dr. Crawford triumphantly brought forth a little farina, which he had found in a corner of the hospital.

Very odd that a little farina could be something that brought triumph if they were receiving all the food supplies they could need until just 5 days before that..What happened to all the supplies bought , for arguments sake, say April 6 or anytime in that first week if they did receive them...
http://www.pddoc.com/skedaddle/articles/sumter_and_moultrie-10.htm
 
I think it one of the premier works on the subject; I first read it on the suggestion of Connie Boone several years ago.
What did you think of this book? Must say its the first time I've heard of it, odd how you find things on Amazon though you have made a search with the same keyword multiple times...
 
Well what's the explanation for "yuze gize" talking so fast? Could it be the cold?

Nooooo yuze gize are said by those city people, that no one up here gets along with lol They talk funny too :) But you know it could be the cold for us talking fast, as you have to say what you mean quick before your face freezes off from the wind chill :) Though I sort of miss the chill this week....
 
Not really, we know enough, ive posted the timeline and supplies on hand, it in general agrees with Scotts maths on the same information. We know Anderson wife sent her slave to Sumpter from NY, once she heard Anderson had moved there, Peter Hart, who Anderson used as his trusted caterer for the garrison in fresh provisions in the Charleston market is one further example of how we know that while SC allowed provisoning from Charleston, there was no starvation.




Not really, we know enough. We know Anderson wife sent her slave to Sumpter from NY, once she heard Anderson had moved there, Peter Hart, who Anderson used as his trusted caterer for the garrison in fresh provisions in the Charleston market is one further example of how we know that while SC allowed provisoning from Charleston, there was no starvation.

When Scott did not know of Anderson access to market and ressuply from contractor he advised the following.
Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, Tuesday, March 12, 1861
(Report on Fort Sumter)From Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, March 12, 1861The President has done me the honor to propose certain military questions, concerning FortSumter to which he desires replies."1st." To what point of time can Major Anderson maintain his position at Fort Sumter withoutfresh supplies or reinforcements?Answer. In respect to subsistence he has bread, flour, and rice for about 26 days, and salt meat(pork) for about forty eight days. Without additional supplies of provisions he may hold out someforty days without much suffering from hunger.The besiegers are understood to be about 3,500 men, now somewhat disciplined, and they havefour powerful batteries on land, and one floating battery, all mounting guns and mortars of largecalibre and of the best patterns, bearing on Fort Sumter. Supposing Major Anderson not to bereinforced and the means of the assailants to be skilfully and vigorously employed -- Fort Sumter being defended by less than 100 men, including common laborers and musicians -- it might betaken, at any time, by a single assault, and easily, if previously harassed, perseveringly, for manydays and nights; the assailants having the ability (by the force of numbers) of converting one outof every three or four of those demonstrations, into a real attack."2d." Can you, with all the means now in your control, supply or reinforce Fort Sumter withinthe period you specify as the time, within which Major Anderson may hold out without freshsupplies?"Answer. No, not within many months; But not to speak of October or November, when theproposition was first made, and repeated, in writing, the third time, December 30th -- it wouldhave been easy to reinforce Fort Sumter, with war vessels, down to about the 12th of February. Inthis long delay, twice that time, Fort Moultrie has been re-armed and greatly strengthened, inevery way, and many powerful new land batteries (besides rafts) have been constructed. Hulkshave also been sunk in the principal channel, so as to render access to Fort Sumter, from the sea,impractical, without first carrying all the batteries of the secessionists. The difficulty of reinforcing has thus, by delay, been increased 1[0] or 12 fold. First, the late President refused toallow any attempt to be made, because he was holding negotiations with South CarolinaCommissioners. Afterwards, Secretary Holt and myself endeavored to obtain a ship of war for the purpose; but failing in this we were obliged to employ the steamer Star of the West. Thatvessel, but for the hesitation of the commander, might then have landed, it is generally believed,men and subsistence. That attempt having failed, I next, before the late Cabinet, submitted,orally, either that succor be sent by ships of war, fighting their way to the Fort, or, that Major


Once Scott was informed of the contractors suppling Sumpter again, and accss to local market for the command, And anderson satisifaction of the supply situation( March 17),he revised his estimae for POTUS on this issue.




Memorandum undated from General Scott to Lincoln, received by Lincoln, March 28.

It seems from the opinions of the Army officers who expressed themselves on the subject -- all within Fort Sumter, together with General Scott and Totten -- that it is perhaps now impossible to succor that fort substantially, if at all, without capturing, by means of a large expedition of ships of war and troops, all the opposing batteries of South Carolina. In the mean time -- six or ten months -- Major Anderson would almost certainly have been obliged to surrender under assault or the approach of starvation ... An abandonment of the fort in a few weeks, sooner or later, would appear, therefore, to be a sure necessity, and if so, the sooner the more graceful on the part of the Government.

It is doubtful, however, according to recent information from the South, whether the voluntary evacuation of Fort Sumter alone would have a decisive effect upon the states now wavering between adherence to the Union and secession. It is known, indeed, that it would be charged to necessity, and the holding of Fort Pickens would be adduced in support of that view. Our Southern friends, however, are clear that the evacuation of both the forts would instantly soothe and give confidence to the eight remaining slaveholding States, and render their cordial adherence to this Union perpetual ... The giving up of Forts Sumter and Pickens may be best justified by the hope that we should thereby recover the State to which they geographically belong by the liberality of the act, besides retaining the eight doubtful States.

Now in addition to the maths, i have given you a fairly large the textual record, Anything else you need?.



You seem to be saying that Scott revised his estimate that the fort has enough supplies for 6 to 10 months..
It seems from the opinions of the Army officers who expressed themselves on the subject -- all within Fort Sumter, together with General Scott and Totten -- that it is perhaps now impossible to succor that fort substantially, if at all, without capturing, by means of a large expedition of ships of war and troops, all the opposing batteries of South Carolina. In the mean time -- six or ten months -- Major Anderson would almost certainly have been obliged to surrender under assault or the approach of starvation ... An abandonment of the fort in a few weeks, sooner or later, would appear, therefore, to be a sure necessity, and if so, the sooner the more graceful on the part of the Government.

Another OR expands on Scotts thoughts....


General Scott, in his reply to the question addressed to him by the President, on the 12th instant, what amount of means and of what description, in addition to those already at command, it would require to supply and re-enforce the fort, says: I should need a fleet of war vessels and transports which, in the scattered disposition of the Navy [as understood], could not be collected in less than four months; 5,000 additional regular troops and 20,000 volunteers; that is, a force sufficient to take all the batteries, both in the harbor [including Fort Moultrie], as well as in the approach or outer bay. To raise, organize, and discipline such an army [not to speak of necessary legislation by Congress, not now in session] would require from six to eight months. As a practical military question the time for succoring Fort Sumter with any means at hand had passed away nearly a month ago. Since then a surrender assault or from starvation has been merely a question of time.

This states that the force needed to lift the seige would take six to eights months to create and by that time the fort would have been captured by assault or the garrison starved out.. I dont see anything that shows Scott revising his estimate on the amount of food the fort contains...
http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/sources/recordView.cfm?Content=001/0197
 
I used simple maths to answer the question, i have now included the 4 in 10 days increase of beef (and refered unkown fresh veg ) which Ansderson states he recieved till stopped by SC authorties, rounded down to nearst whole number of 10 day periods.

All show no starvation levels and supply of sallt pork till July, hard tack to end of April. When you claimed the maths would show otherwise.



No iused the exact same method in all instances.



No, thats incorrect, there is the Garrison and 43 civilians, i started by using garrison only, but provided a set of numbers with the civilans included that still put ample supplies in hand.

You can check your 55 (+12) civilians to begin with.

I did check and I was correct in stating that there 55 workers ..

The garrison transferred from Fort Moultrie consisted of seven officers, seventy-six enlisted men, and forty-five women and children. There were three officers, one enlisted man, two hundred and five laborers, and one woman at Fort Sumter. One hundred and fifty of the laborers were discharged within a few days, and the women and children were shipped to New York early in February, 1861, leaving at this date a garrison consisting of ten officers, seventy-five enlisted men, and fifty-five laborers. There has been and is an ample supply of water and a sufficiency of fuel, principally in the shape of lumber, flooring, and gun carriages.

http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/sources/recordView.cfm?Content=001/0214
 
because you said it

I pointed out, in that post, who Anderson used to obtain the daily fresh food from SC, and pointed out that Andserson was satisified with that amount, and that the QM report show food stock consumption halved while this in place.

Its important because you are using this factoid to show that there was plenty of food at Sumter, but once again you bring up things in January when the situation had totally changed by March and so are useless.

I did not i pointed out who was used to obtain the supplies, when he arrived and what his duties were.
 
I did check and I was correct in stating that there 55 workers ..

The garrison transferred from Fort Moultrie consisted of seven officers, seventy-six enlisted men, and forty-five women and children. There were three officers, one enlisted man, two hundred and five laborers, and one woman at Fort Sumter. One hundred and fifty of the laborers were discharged within a few days, and the women and children were shipped to New York early in February, 1861, leaving at this date a garrison consisting of ten officers, seventy-five enlisted men, and fifty-five laborers. There has been and is an ample supply of water and a sufficiency of fuel, principally in the shape of lumber, flooring, and gun carriages.


Except thats for Feb, in Dec it had been 109. The number for March and April, acording again to Anderson was 43. I already gave you this answer when you questioned it, it the first time and the second time, and now do so agian, from my prior answer.

There were six other officers present: Surgeon Samuel W. Crawford, First Lt. Theodore Talbot of Company H, First Lt. Jefferson C. Davis of the 1st U.S. Artillery, and Second Lt. Norman J. Hall of Company H. Capt. John G. Foster and First Lt. George W. Snyder of the Corps of Engineers were responsible for construction of the Charleston forts, but they reported to their headquarters in Washington, not directly to Anderson. The remaining personnel were 68 noncommissioned officers and privates, eight musicians, and 43 noncombatant workmen.http://www.enotes.com/topic/Battle_o...r#cite_note-13

Talbot was promoted while in Sumpter, transfered out on the post to a desk job in DC on 9 or 10th April.


*You refering to April, when there was 43 civilians, but using 55*.
So on half rations with troops and contractors he could last to the 10th, but with the 55 contractors sent away he could last to the 17th.. Since the contractors weren't sent away there must have been quite a shortage of food that last week...This mid April estimate for food shortage is consistent with all his latter messages to Washington and others..Its also the reason there were ships gathering to bring him supplies before that time arrived..


*You refering to March when there was 43 civilians but using 55*.
Inventory of Ft. Sumter March 1... So we have food ( bread and hard tack) for 85 men for at least 28 days. The problem is that were 55 more men that had to be fed from these stores.

* My reply to your use of 55*
What i decline to do is use your 55 number of civilians as the number was 40-43.


You refering To post 242 which is for March and April which had 43 civilians not 55.
Also, on your first posts on this thread you only used 85 men when in actuallity there were over 130 being fed from these supplies..So which math am I supposed to check...
*My reply*
No, thats incorrect, there is the Garrison and 43 civilians, i started by using garrison only, but provided a set of numbers with the civilans included that still put ample supplies in hand.

My reply.
You can check your 55 (+12) civilians to begin with.

I
 
I pointed out, in that post, who Anderson used to obtain the daily fresh food from SC, and pointed out that Andserson was satisified with that amount, and that the QM report show food stock consumption halved while this in place.



I did not i pointed out who was used to obtain the supplies, when he arrived and what his duties were.

Where in that post was anything showing Anderson was satistified with the amount of supplies that he was receiving?
 
Except thats for Feb, in Dec it had been 109. The number for March and April, acording again to Anderson was 43. I already gave you this answer when you questioned it, it the first time and the second time, and now do so agian, from my prior answer.

There were six other officers present: Surgeon Samuel W. Crawford, First Lt. Theodore Talbot of Company H, First Lt. Jefferson C. Davis of the 1st U.S. Artillery, and Second Lt. Norman J. Hall of Company H. Capt. John G. Foster and First Lt. George W. Snyder of the Corps of Engineers were responsible for construction of the Charleston forts, but they reported to their headquarters in Washington, not directly to Anderson. The remaining personnel were 68 noncommissioned officers and privates, eight musicians, and 43 noncombatant workmen.http://www.enotes.com/topic/Battle_o...r#cite_note-13

Talbot was promoted while in Sumpter, transfered out on the post to a desk job in DC on 9 or 10th April.


I

According to Anderson where? The Or I posted says "leaving at this date" , which was written March 24, what OR or primary document do you have that shows it went down to 43...Your link doesn't work and its not a primary source...I haven't run across any other or's showing additional workmen leaving at a later point. Im not saying your incorrect, but so far my or is the only primary one that I run across yet...
 
According to Anderson where? The Or I posted says "leaving at this date" , which was written March 24, what OR or primary document do you have that shows it went down to 43...Your link doesn't work and its not a primary source...I haven't run across any other or's showing additional workmen leaving at a later point. Im not saying your incorrect, but so far my or is the only primary one that I run across yet...
According to Anderson where? The Or I posted says "leaving at this date" , which was written March 24, what OR or primary document do you have that shows it went down to 43...Your link doesn't work and its not a primary source...I haven't run across any other or's showing additional workmen leaving at a later point. Im not saying your incorrect, but so far my or is the only primary one that I run across yet...



Link works for me.http://www.enotes.com/topic/Battle_of_Fort_Sumter it refers to the primary source held here,http://ebooks.library.cornell.edu/m/moawar/text/waro0001.txt How do you know its not a primary source if the link wont open?.

Its a cite that appears in most book btw.

OR gives us 109 and when, ( already posted in thread) it gives us 55 and when, and 43 and when, and i used the 43 for period when they were there, and you claimed i was wrong.

You refered to Swanberg book earlier, it uses the 43 for March and April, citeing the OR.

The answers to your question have not only been given here, but are present in the works you have, and have misued.
 
B Peach,

While I sincerely appreciate all the time and effort you have expended to show your side of the recent debate, I must confess, you have not convinced me of the fact that the resupply effort in any way represents a pure provocation by Lincoln to get Confederate forces to fire the first shot of the Civil War.

But thank you for an interesting presentation.

Sincerely,
Unionblue
 
No, please stop the insults when you dont like the answer provided.

I could care less what the answer is as long as it's an answer and as long as it's correct. But when you spew out a bunch of garbage and say "the answer's in there somewhere, you go and find it", I call Walter Matthau.
 
All this talk about how many crackers Anderson had or how many barrels of salt pork he had is really irrelevant to the situation at Sumter. What is important is the fact that Sumter was a U.S. facility. The state of South Carolina has no legal claims to it whatsoever. Anderson, as Army commander in the Charleston area, had every right to shift his forces to the fort. Lincoln, as commander-in-chief of the Army, had every right to send food and supplies to the fort and such acts were not provocation. And any unofficial agreement that may have existed between Buchanan and the rebels in South Carolina had long since been violated by South Carolina itself when they seized Fort Pickens, Castle Pinkney, and the Charleston Armory. So your attempts to place the blame on Lincoln is completely misplaced.
 

Learn About Us
►About CivilWarTalk
►Contact the Webmaster
►Meet the Staff
►Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
►Register
►Browse Forums
►View Today's Discussions
►Search the Forum
Get Help
►FAQ
►Student Guide
►Forum Rules & Etiquette
►Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top