New Website on the American Civil War

[mikegriffith1]

If Lincoln was prepared to evacuate Fort Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Pickens, where is that recorded?

Quantrill

It's recorded in a number of sources, as Randall and Eisenschiml document.

Randall was fair and balanced toward the Confederacy. He even acknowledged that the Confederacy was moving toward emancipation in early 1865 and that this indicated the Confederacy may well have ended slavery even if it had survived the war.

The Radical Republicans were starting to suspect that Lincoln planned on allowing the Confederacy to continue by default, by not taking any action against it. The Radicals even voiced this suspicion on the Senate floor.

Jefferson Davis threw a monkey wrench into Lincoln's plan by foolishly cutting off the food supply to the Fort Sumter garrison. He then wrecked Lincoln's plan by firing on Fort Sumter, even though he had been assured that the federal naval convoy would only offload food as long as they were not fired upon. We know that Gideon Welles, the Secretary of the Navy, specified this in the operations order for the convoy: they were not to fire unless fired upon and were not to offload any weapons or ammo unless fired upon.

I swear, if Jefferson Davis wasn't on the Radicals' payroll, he should have been. The attack on Fort Sumter was a dream come true for the Radicals.

 

[gipper]

It's not a myth. I would invite you to compare any pro-Confederate analysis of the Fort Sumter incident with Randall's exhaustive 40-page analysis in Lincoln the President, Volume 1. I've read several pro-Confederate analyses of the Fort Sumter affair, including Jefferson Davis's labored one, and not one of them compares to Randall's analysis in its depth and balance of research.

I agree that the North should not have responded to the bloodless Sumter attack with a massive invasion, but there would have been nothing to respond to if Davis had not make the foolish, hot-heated decision to cut off the garrison's food supply and then had not made the catastrophic, idiotic decision to bombard the fort even though he knew the federal ships would only offload food as long as the convoy was not attacked.

Davis could not have done a worse job for the Confederacy in this matter than if he had been on the Radicals' payroll. His attack on Sumter played right into the Radicals' hands. It boggles the mind to imagine how Davis could not have known that he was giving the Radicals exactly what they wanted by attacking Sumter.

I agree the firing on Sumter was a stupid mistake. However this doesn’t change the fact that Lincoln was deceptively trying to position the South to fire the first shot. He obviously wanted war.

Had Abe wanted a peaceful resolution or compromise, he could have revoked the deceitful tariffs passed by Congress just before and after he became potus.

Had Dishonest Abe not lied about evacuation, the South never fires on Sumter. All other federal facilities throughout the South were peacefully transferred.

So, you can place all the blame on Davis, but this would be factually incorrect. Much of the blame for this horrible war rests with Dishonest Abe.

 

[Quantrill]

It's recorded in a number of sources, as Randall and Eisenschiml document.

Randall was fair and balanced toward the Confederacy. He even acknowledged that the Confederacy was moving toward emancipation in early 1865 and that this indicated the Confederacy may well have ended slavery even if it had survived the war.

The Radical Republicans were starting to suspect that Lincoln planned on allowing the Confederacy to continue by default, by not taking any action against it. The Radicals even voiced this suspicion on the Senate floor.

Jefferson Davis threw a monkey wrench into Lincoln's plan by foolishly cutting off the food supply to the Fort Sumter garrison. He then wrecked Lincoln's plan by firing on Fort Sumter, even though he had been assured that the federal naval convoy would only offload food as long as they were not fired upon. We know that Gideon Welles, the Secretary of the Navy, specified this in the operations order for the convoy: they were not to fire unless fired upon and were not to offload any weapons or ammo unless fired upon.

I swear, if Jefferson Davis wasn't on the Radicals' payroll, he should have been. The attack on Fort Sumter was a dream come true for the Radicals.

You say, because you believe Randall and Eisenschiml, that Lincoln was prepared to evacuate Fort Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Pickens. That is just a bold face lie. Lincoln never entertained the idea of evacuating Sumter or Pickens.

In Lincoln's first inaugural address: "The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the government and to collect the duties and imposts: but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion." (The Annals Of America, Vol. 9, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 2003, p. 252)

Lincoln made it clear that he would never let the Forts go. And even before the inauguration Lincoln, when he was President in waiting, he wrote to Frank Blair: "On the forts, Lincoln was no less clear, 'If the forts shall be given up before the inaugeration, he wrote to Frank Blair, an elder statesmen who had once been a part of Andrew Jackson's kitchen cabinet, the General must retake them afterwards'. He asked Washburne to assure Scott 'to be as well prepared as he can to either hold, or retake, the forts, as the case may require, at, and after the inaugeration'." (Days Of Defiance, Maury Klein, Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1997, p. 137)

And, well on their way to the firing on Sumter, March 27, 1861, William Russel, famous reporter for the London Times, had opportunity to speak to Seward. "Russel asked about the rumors in the New York papers that Fort Sumter would be evacuated. 'That is a plain lie', Seward retorted. 'No such orders have been given. We will give up nothing we have--abandon nothing that has been entrusted to us'. If people would only read these statements by the light of the President's inaugural, they would not be deceived." (Klein, p. 350)

The problem was, Seward and Lincoln had been deceiving the Southern Commissioners that Sumter would be evacuated. Which is why there were rumors. But Lincoln never had any intent to let the forts go.

Why didn't Lincoln just send the message to Gov. Pickens and Anderson, that Anderson would evacuate the Fort? That's all he needed to do. He didn't even mention any evacuation.

Food would be supplied by the South for the soldiers at Sumter once they evacuated.

No need for any Navy force to be there at all. No need for any reinforcements.

And why was Lincoln sending a force to Fort Pickens to reinforce it, at the same time he was sending a force to Sumter? If, as you say, he was interested in any exchange of Pickens for Sumter?

And Jeff Davis did exactly what he should have. He waited patiently until the deception of Lincoln was fully exposed concerning Sumter. And with the Naval force on it's way to reinforce, gave Beauregard the authority to fire.

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

I agree the firing on Sumter was a stupid mistake. However this doesn’t change the fact that Lincoln was deceptively trying to position the South to fire the first shot. He obviously wanted war.

This is utter fiction. Lincoln was bending over backward to avoid war. Again, read Randall's 40-page chapter on Sumter. Lincoln was prepared to evacuate Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Pickens.

Had Abe wanted a peaceful resolution or compromise, he could have revoked the deceitful tariffs passed by Congress just before and after he became potus.

One, the tariffs weren't deceitful. Two, there was nothing he could do about the Morrill Tariff, which was passed and signed into law before he took office. The Morrill Tariff rates were lower than the 1820-1825 tariff rates and were the same as most of the Tariff of 1846 rates. Moreover, the Morrill Tariff included provisions that would help sectors of the Southern economy, unlike previous tariff bills.

Had Dishonest Abe not lied about evacuation, the South never fires on Sumter.

He did not lie about evacuation. Davis forced his hand by foolishly cutting off the Sumter garrison's food supply. Even then, Lincoln made it clear that the naval convoy would only offload food to the garrison as long as they were not fired upon, and we know these were the orders to the convoy.

If Davis had just allowed the garrison to receive food from the convoy, Lincoln could have continued with his plan to evacuate Sumter, but Davis's decision to fire on the fort discredited Northern moderates and gave the Radicals the perfect excuse to demand a full-scale invasion.

All other federal facilities throughout the South were peacefully transferred.

Uh, those facilities were seized at gunpoint. Most of them were seized by local or state forces before the Confederacy was formed. Davis should have ordered an immediate halt to any further seizures.

So, you can place all the blame on Davis, but this would be factually incorrect. Much of the blame for this horrible war rests with Dishonest Abe.

I don't place all the blame on Davis, but I fail to see how "much of the blame" falls on Lincoln, given the fact that Davis wrecked Lincoln's plan to give up Sumter in exchange for a meaningless, face-saving reinforcement of Pickens. If Davis had not cut off the Sumter garrison's food supply in the first place, Lincoln would not have come under intense pressure to send a resupply convoy. If Davis had not ordered the attack on Sumter but had let the food delivery go unopposed, the situation would have been defused and there would have been more time for Lincoln to carry out his plan.

For the life of me, I don't understand how Davis did not see that firing on Sumter was exactly what the Radicals were hoping he would do, and that destroying and seizing the fort would inflame Northern public opinion and discredit the Northern moderates.

 

[gipper]

This is utter fiction. Lincoln was bending over backward to avoid war. Again, read Randall's 40-page chapter on Sumter. Lincoln was prepared to evacuate Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Pickens.


One, the tariffs weren't deceitful. Two, there was nothing he could do about the Morrill Tariff, which was passed and signed into law before he took office. The Morrill Tariff rates were lower than the 1820-1825 tariff rates and were the same as most of the Tariff of 1846 rates. Moreover, the Morrill Tariff included provisions that would help sectors of the Southern economy, unlike previous tariff bills.


He did not lie about evacuation. Davis forced his hand by foolishly cutting off the Sumter garrison's food supply. Even then, Lincoln made it clear that the naval convoy would only offload food to the garrison as long as they were not fired upon, and we know these were the orders to the convoy.

If Davis had just allowed the garrison to receive food from the convoy, Lincoln could have continued with his plan to evacuate Sumter, but Davis's decision to fire on the fort discredited Northern moderates and gave the Radicals the perfect excuse to demand a full-scale invasion.


Uh, those facilities were seized at gunpoint. Most of them were seized by local or state forces before the Confederacy was formed. Davis should have ordered an immediate halt to any further seizures.


I don't place all the blame on Davis, but I fail to see how "much of the blame" falls on Lincoln, given the fact that Davis wrecked Lincoln's plan to give up Sumter in exchange for a meaningless, face-saving reinforcement of Pickens. If Davis had not cut off the Sumter garrison's food supply in the first place, Lincoln would not have come under intense pressure to send a resupply convoy. If Davis had not ordered the attack on Sumter but had let the food delivery go unopposed, the situation would have been defused and there would have been more time for Lincoln to carry out his plan.

For the life of me, I don't understand how Davis did not see that firing on Sumter was exactly what the Radicals were hoping he would do, and that destroying and seizing the fort would inflame Northern public opinion and discredit the Northern moderates.

Lincoln made it crystal clear in his inaugural speech, if the South refuses to pay the tariffs there will be war. Read it.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Lincoln made it crystal clear in his inaugural speech, if the South refuses to pay the tariffs there will be war. Read it.

This is one of the worst pro-Confederate arguments out there. It reflects a misreading of what Lincoln said. First off, you have to keep in mind that Lincoln knew the Radicals would be listening to every word he said and that they were already demanding action against the seceded states. Second, if you read his entire statement, you see that he hedged on the issue of using force. Let's read his entire statement, instead of just the few words that neo-Confederates usually quote:

In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices.

This was a far cry from saying "if you don't pay the tariffs, there will be war." Notice the important qualification of "may be necessary." Instead of saying that using force would be automatically required to maintain federal property and collect the tariffs, he said it "may be necessary." Obviously, that gave him the loophole to decide that using force was not necessary. Notice that he also said he would not even try to send "strangers," i.e., Northerners, to hold federal offices in the South if the local population found this too objectionable.

Would it surprise you to know that the Radicals thought Lincoln's speech was too soft, that it failed to absolutely promise action to enforce federal authority? They recognized that Lincoln had obliquely but clearly stopped short of making an ironclad promise to use force to maintain the Union. But, of course, at the other extreme, the hotheaded Southern Fire-Eaters idiotically interpreted Lincoln's speech as a declaration of war.

And let's read the very next paragraph, where Lincoln said that the federal postal service would continue to deliver the mail in all parts of the Union, "unless repelled," and notice he made no threat of action if mail delivery was repelled. Notice, too, that he made it clear that he would be flexible in dealing with situations that arose and that he would act "with a view and a hope" of "a peaceful solution of the national troubles" and the restoration of "fraternal sympathies and affections":

The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course here indicated will be followed unless current events and experience shall show a modification or change to be proper, and in every case and exigency my best discretion will be exercised, according to circumstances actually existing and with a view and a hope of a peaceful solution of the national troubles and the restoration of fraternal sympathies and affections.

And, it bears repeating that after Lincoln had been in office barely two weeks, he began to maneuver to evacuate Fort Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Fort Pickens.

 

[Quantrill]

This is one of the worst pro-Confederate arguments out there. It reflects a misreading of what Lincoln said. First off, you have to keep in mind that Lincoln knew the Radicals would be listening to every word he said and that they were already demanding action against the seceded states. Second, if you read his entire statement, you see that he hedged on the issue of using force. Let's read his entire statement, instead of just the few words that neo-Confederates usually quote:

And, it bears repeating that after Lincoln had been in office barely two weeks, he began to maneuver to evacuate Fort Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Fort Pickens.

That's a lie of yours. It is what Lincoln stated. "The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy and possess the property and places belonging to the government...." The forts were the issue of the day. The forts are what Lincoln is addressing. You may say he is lying. But you can't say he didn't say it. And, I showed in post #(463) that Lincoln made it clear to Scott that if the forts are given up before the inaugural, he would take them back.

Another lie of yours. Lincoln never maneuvered to evacuate Sumter in any way. He did maneuver to execute a plan of relieving Fort Sumter. By relief, he meant sending troops, arms, and food to supply Anderson to defend the fort. This plan was worked out and led by Gustavus Vasa Fox. It was a plan Fox contrived while Buchannan was still in office. But Buchannan rejected it because ot the disaster with the 'Star of the West'.

This maneuvering of Lincoln to relieve Sumter began on March 9, which is 5 days after Lincoln took office. So, you see. You have misrepresented what Lincoln was doing.

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

That's a lie of yours. It is what Lincoln stated. "The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy and possess the property and places belonging to the government...." The forts were the issue of the day. The forts are what Lincoln is addressing. You may say he is lying. But you can't say he didn't say it. And, I showed in post #(463) that Lincoln made it clear to Scott that if the forts are given up before the inaugural, he would take them back.

You're simply ignoring the "may be necessary" loophole that Lincoln included in that statement. The Radicals didn't miss it. They also didn't miss the fact that Lincoln declined to say he would use force to install Northerners in customs offices in the South.

Another lie of yours. Lincoln never maneuvered to evacuate Sumter in any way.

Yes, he did, and this is well documented. You obviously still have not taken the time to read Randall's 40-page analysis of the Sumter incident nor Eisenschiml's several chapters on the Sumter incident.

He did maneuver to execute a plan of relieving Fort Sumter. By relief, he meant sending troops, arms, and food to supply Anderson to defend the fort.

No, that is false. We have the order that Welles issued to the convoy. They were only to offload food unless they were fired upon. We have Lincoln's message to Gov. Pickens through State Department official Robert Chew that specified that the convoy would only offload food as long as they were not fired upon. And we know that Davis was made aware of this fact.

I quote the notice that Lincoln had Chew deliver to Pickens:

I am directed by the President of the United States to notify you to expect an attempt will be made to supply Fort Sumter with provisions only, and that if such attempt be not resisted, no effort to throw in men, arms or ammunition will be made, without further notice, or in case of an attack upon the fort.

As long as the Confederates did not fire on the convoy, the convoy would only deliver food to the Sumter garrison.

This plan was worked out and led by Gustavus Vasa Fox. It was a plan Fox contrived while Buchannan was still in office. But Buchannan rejected it because ot the disaster with the 'Star of the West'.

This is a badly misleading, distorted picture. It was not "led" by Fox. Fox was under orders from Welles and ultimately Lincoln. Fox didn't even get all the ships he wanted because Lincoln did not want the convoy to even appear provocative. Again, read Randall and Eisenschiml's analyses.

Eisenschiml was an ardent critic of the Radical Republicans, by the way.

This maneuvering of Lincoln to relieve Sumter began on March 9, which is 5 days after Lincoln took office. So, you see. You have misrepresented what Lincoln was doing. Quantrill

You don't know what you're talking about because you've only read pro-Confederate sources on the subject. Those sources ignore a huge body of evidence that consists of diary entries, letters, accounts, and memos of many people who dealt with Lincoln during the lead-up to the Sumter incident, and some of those sources were from Southerners who had contact with Lincoln at the time.

The sources make it crystal clear to anyone who can read that war was the last thing Lincoln wanted.

 

[Quantrill]

You're simply ignoring the "may be necessary" loophole that Lincoln included in that statement. The Radicals didn't miss it. They also didn't miss the fact that Lincoln declined to say he would use force to install Northerners in customs offices in the South.


Yes, he did, and this is well documented. You obviously still have not taken the time to read Randall's 40-page analysis of the Sumter incident nor Eisenschiml's several chapters on the Sumter incident.


No, that is false. We have the order that Welles issued to the convoy. They were only to offload food unless they were fired upon. We have Lincoln's message to Gov. Pickens through State Department official Robert Chew that specified that the convoy would only offload food as long as they were not fired upon. And we know that Davis was made aware of this fact.

I quote the notice that Lincoln had Chew deliver to Pickens:

I am directed by the President of the United States to notify you to expect an attempt will be made to supply Fort Sumter with provisions only, and that if such attempt be not resisted, no effort to throw in men, arms or ammunition will be made, without further notice, or in case of an attack upon the fort.

As long as the Confederates did not fire on the convoy, the convoy would only deliver food to the Sumter garrison.


This is a badly misleading, distorted picture. It was not "led" by Fox. Fox was under orders from Welles and ultimately Lincoln. Fox didn't even get all the ships he wanted because Lincoln did not want the convoy to even appear provocative. Again, read Randall and Eisenschiml's analyses.

Eisenschiml was an ardent critic of the Radical Republicans, by the way.


You don't know what you're talking about because you've only read pro-Confederate sources on the subject. Those sources ignore a huge body of evidence that consists of diary entries, letters, accounts, and memos of many people who dealt with Lincoln during the lead-up to the Sumter incident, and some of those sources were from Southerners who had contact with Lincoln at the time.

The sources make it crystal clear to anyone who can read that war was the last thing Lincoln wanted.

The 'may be necessary' loophole you speak of doesn't change what Lincoln said about the forts. He would never surrender them and if they were surrendered before the inauguration, he would take them back. The 'maybe' just give Lincoln his way to do what he wants. And he never gave any indication of evacuating Sumter. Except when he used Seward to lie about his intention to gain time while he organized the relief fleet.

I am saying your lying. I am arguing with you. If what you believe is from Randalls and Eisenschiml's, then they are liars also.

Show me the order Wells issued to the convoy as you claim. Lincolns message by Chew to Pickens, was at the very end when the Naval force was sent, and the deception was known by Pickens and the South. What I presented to you was that only 5 days as President, Lincoln was preparing to relieve Sumter, using Gustavus Fox. Not evacuate. Which is what you said, he was preparing within his first two weeks in office. in other words, Lincoln never intended to evacuate Sumter in exchange for Fort Pickens as you have claimed. You misrepresent what was going on. That is also called lying.

Another lie. Fox led the Naval force to relieve Sumpter. Just because Wells was a Superior and Lincoln the head of it all, doesn't mean they led the force. How stupid can you be? "By Monday, April 8, Captain Fox was ready to launch his fleet." (The Demon Of Unrest, Erik Larson, Crown Publishing Group, 2024, p. 396)

Fox didn't get 'one' ship that he expected to get. But he had plenty others. And the reason he didn't get that is because of the lying and deception that Lincoln and Seward were doing behind his back. Lincoln lied to him like he lied to Anderson, like he lied to the Southern commissioners. And you perpetuate his lies. Glory, glory....hallelujah. Just gives me goose bumps.

Sorry I have no desire to read anything you endorse. If you want to type out some quotes of theirs for me, that is fine. I will read that. And I don't care that Eisenschiml was a critic of the Radicals. That proves nothing to me.

Another lie. Many of the quotes I have given are not pro-Confederate sources. They are history books, with quotes and footnotes, or endnotes and Bibliography, showing their source.

Another lie of yours. Lincoln was wanting a war, because a war was the only way he could get what he wanted, which was a nation without slavery, and without concern for the Southern people. And he wanted to be started by the South so he and the North could glory in their self righteousness that they are the great proctectors of the Union. Whne in fact, they destroyed the Union.

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

The 'may be necessary' loophole you speak of doesn't change what Lincoln said about the forts. He would never surrender them and if they were surrendered before the inauguration, he would take them back. The 'maybe' just give Lincoln his way to do what he wants. And he never gave any indication of evacuating Sumter. Except when he used Seward to lie about his intention to gain time while he organized the relief fleet.

I am saying your lying. I am arguing with you. If what you believe is from Randalls and Eisenschiml's, then they are liars also.

Show me the order Wells issued to the convoy as you claim. Lincolns message by Chew to Pickens, was at the very end when the Naval force was sent, and the deception was known by Pickens and the South. What I presented to you was that only 5 days as President, Lincoln was preparing to relieve Sumter, using Gustavus Fox. Not evacuate. Which is what you said, he was preparing within his first two weeks in office. in other words, Lincoln never intended to evacuate Sumter in exchange for Fort Pickens as you have claimed. You misrepresent what was going on. That is also called lying.

Another lie. Fox led the Naval force to relieve Sumpter. Just because Wells was a Superior and Lincoln the head of it all, doesn't mean they led the force. How stupid can you be? "By Monday, April 8, Captain Fox was ready to launch his fleet." (The Demon Of Unrest, Erik Larson, Crown Publishing Group, 2024, p. 396)

Fox didn't get 'one' ship that he expected to get. But he had plenty others. And the reason he didn't get that is because of the lying and deception that Lincoln and Seward were doing behind his back. Lincoln lied to him like he lied to Anderson, like he lied to the Southern commissioners. And you perpetuate his lies. Glory, glory....hallelujah. Just gives me goose bumps.

Sorry I have no desire to read anything you endorse. If you want to type out some quotes of theirs for me, that is fine. I will read that. And I don't care that Eisenschiml was a critic of the Radicals. That proves nothing to me.

Another lie. Many of the quotes I have given are not pro-Confederate sources. They are history books, with quotes and footnotes, or endnotes and Bibliography, showing their source.

Another lie of yours. Lincoln was wanting a war, because a war was the only way he could get what he wanted, which was a nation without slavery, and without concern for the Southern people. And he wanted to be started by the South so he and the North could glory in their self righteousness that they are the great proctectors of the Union. Whne in fact, they destroyed the Union.

Quantrill

You seem hesitant to read the plentiful evidence that Lincoln was prepared to abandon Fort Sumter in exchange for fortifying Fort Pickens, even though this evidence has been presented by two scholars who are not hostile toward the Confederacy. Is it because this would refute your interpretation of Lincoln's intentions and actions regarding Sumter?

The quotes you've provided are the same cherry-picked, out-of-context quotes that other pro-Confederate authors have used. They never touch any of the evidence that Lincoln was ready to evacuate Sumter, that Lincoln did not want war, and that Lincoln did not send the Fox convoy in order provoke war but merely to provide food to the garrison.

Eisenschiml's detailed analysis of Lincoln and Fort Sumter is available online via my Civil War website. See the link titled "Lincoln Tried to Avoid War" on my site.

 

[Quantrill]

You seem hesitant to read the plentiful evidence that Lincoln was prepared to abandon Fort Sumter in exchange for fortifying Fort Pickens, even though this evidence has been presented by two scholars who are not hostile toward the Confederacy. Is it because this would refute your interpretation of Lincoln's intentions and actions regarding Sumter?

The quotes you've provided are the same cherry-picked, out-of-context quotes that other pro-Confederate authors have used. They never touch any of the evidence that Lincoln was ready to evacuate Sumter, that Lincoln did not want war, and that Lincoln did not send the Fox convoy in order provoke war but merely to provide food to the garrison.

Eisenschiml's detailed analysis of Lincoln and Fort Sumter is available online via my Civil War website. See the link titled "Lincoln Tried to Avoid War" on my site.

That's a damn lie. The quotes I gave are not from 'pro-Confederate' authors.

You're a liar. And you can take Eisenschml's anal ysis and shove it up your ass. As I told you before, I don't go to 'links'.

Name the pro-Confederate authors and the posts where I quoted from. Then name the authors who were not pro-Confederate authors I quoted from.

Shit or git off the pot.

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

That's a damn lie. The quotes I gave are not from 'pro-Confederate' authors.

You're a liar. And you can take Eisenschml's anal ysis and shove it up your ass. As I told you before, I don't go to 'links'.

Name the pro-Confederate authors and the posts where I quoted from. Then name the authors who were not pro-Confederate authors I quoted from.

Quantrill

No, I'm saying that the quotes you used are the same quotes that have been used in pro-Confederate sources, and that those quotes and sources ignore the strong evidence that contradicts their portrayal of Lincoln's intentions regarding Sumter.

You can read Randall's exhaustive analysis of Lincoln and Fort Sumter, i.e., chapter 12 in his famous book Lincoln the President, Volume 1, here:

lincoln the president springfield to gettysburg : j.g. randall : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

You don't even have to download it. You can just read it online.

You'll notice that Randall cites numerous sources, including some Southern sources, to prove that Lincoln intended to give up Sumter.

 

[Quantrill]

No, I'm saying that the quotes you used are the same quotes that have been used in pro-Confederate sources, and that those quotes and sources ignore the strong evidence that contradicts their portrayal of Lincoln's intentions regarding Sumter.

You can read Randall's exhaustive analysis of Lincoln and Fort Sumter, i.e., chapter 12 in his famous book Lincoln the President, Volume 1, here:

You don't even have to download it. You can just read it online.

You'll notice that Randall cites numerous sources, including some Southern sources, to prove that Lincoln intended to give up Sumter.

You said, "that other pro-Confederate authors have used". Implying the quotes I gave were also from pro-Confederate authors. I have used sources from pro-Confederate authors, but not all quotes I give are from them.

Your claim, of which you have given no proof, that Lincoln was prepared to abandon Sumter and your man Randall supposedly proves it, is enough for me to not be interested in anything Randall wrote. If you want to quote something from him that proves your point, go ahead. I will consider it.

I have provided proof, see post (463), which you ignored by the way, that Lincoln never had any intention of abandoning Sumter or exchanging Sumter for Fort Pickens. By his words. And by Sewards words. Though Seward lied like hell to the commissioners that Sumter would be abandoned in order to gain time to prepare Fox's expedition.

And you ignored my questions.

1.) If Lincoln was interested in abandoning Sumter, why wouldn't he just let the South know he was abandoning it and then order Anderson to abandon? No need for any Naval force. The South would have been happy to provide food for the soldiers at Sumter, as they had been before until the deception of Lincoln was revealed.

2.) If Lincoln was interested in abandoning Sumter, why wasn't 'abandoning Sumter' included in his message to Gov. Pickens?

3.) If Lincoln was interested in exchanging Sumter for Pickens, why was he sending reinforcements to Fort Pickens at the same time he was sending reinforcements to Sumter?

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

Your claim, of which you have given no proof, that Lincoln was prepared to abandon Sumter and your man Randall supposedly proves it, is enough for me to not be interested in anything Randall wrote. If you want to quote something from him that proves your point, go ahead. I will consider it.

I'm not going to reinvent the wheel when the evidence is readily available online with a single click.

I have provided proof, see post (463), which you ignored by the way, that Lincoln never had any intention of abandoning Sumter or exchanging Sumter for Fort Pickens. By his words. And by Sewards words. Though Seward lied like hell to the commissioners that Sumter would be abandoned in order to gain time to prepare Fox's expedition.

And, as I said, those quotes are misleading and are clarified and explained by the bulk of the evidence.

And you ignored my questions.

1.) If Lincoln was interested in abandoning Sumter, why wouldn't he just let the South know he was abandoning it and then order Anderson to abandon?

He was in the process of doing this when Davis cut off the food supply to the garrison, which threw a major monkey wrench into his plan. Even then, he hoped to resume it after he resupplied the garrison with food. He did not think Davis would be so idiotic and rash as to bombard the fort after he was assured the naval convoy would only offload food as long as they were not fired upon.

No need for any Naval force. The South would have been happy to provide food for the soldiers at Sumter, as they had been before until the deception of Lincoln was revealed.

Oh, no, no. The Confederates began reducing the food supply shortly after the election, and they formally cut off the food supply on April 2, when Lincoln was smack dab in the middle of maneurvering to evacuate Sumter in exchange for fortifying Pickens. This is all explained by Eisenschiml and Randall.

2.) If Lincoln was interested in abandoning Sumter, why wasn't 'abandoning Sumter' included in his message to Gov. Pickens?

There is no "if" here. The evidence is clear. Lincoln was in the middle of laying the groundwork to evacuate Sumter when Davis idiotically cut off the food supply. Obviously, after the Confederates officially cut off the food supply, that threw a huge monkey wrench into Lincoln's plan and he had to adapt.

Because of the screaming and enormous pressure from the Radical Republicans, Lincoln could not appear to hand over the fort as an act of capitulation in response to the cutting off of the food supply. That would have made Lincoln look like a weak sister who bowed to the Confederate extortion and provocation of cutting off the garrison's food supply.

The Radicals were thrilled when they heard the food supply had been cut off. They had gotten wind that a move to evacuate Sumter was in the works, and they began to scream all the more loudly that it would be "treason" to abandon Sumter. When they heard that Davis had cut off the garrison's food supply, they quickly made the point that handing over the fort now would be a shameful captiulation to Confederate bullying. It is hard to fathom how Davis could not have grasped that the food cutoff would play right into the hands of the hardline Radicals.

3.) If Lincoln was interested in exchanging Sumter for Pickens, why was he sending reinforcements to Fort Pickens at the same time he was sending reinforcements to Sumter? Quantrill

Obviously, he had to first reinforce Pickens to be able to use that act as an offset for evacuating Sumter. Pickens was supposed to have been reinforced several days earlier, but there was a communication mixup. When Lincoln realized the Pickens reinforcement had not yet been done, he immediately gave the second order to carry it out, but of course he also had to send a naval convoy to Sumter to provide food to the garrison at the same time because Davis had cut off the food supply. If Davis had not done that, there would have been no naval convoy to Sumter.

Lincoln needed time and political cover to evacuate Sumter, but Davis seemed to be on the Radicals' payroll, first by cutting off the food supply and then by bombarding the fort even though he knew the naval convoy would only offload food as long as they were not attacked. If Davis had just had the common sense and political savvy to let the garrison receive more food, this would have given Lincoln more time and provided the chance to renew his move to evacuate Sumter.

 

[Quantrill]

mikegriffith1

Concerning post #(474)

In other words, you can't prove anything you have just said.

Your constant claim that Davis caused it all by cutting off the food from Sumpter is nothing but 'Bullshit'.

"Other accounts declared that the Confederates had forced the government to undertake the relief project by cutting off Anderson's local supply of fresh meats and vegetables. This was equally untrue, for the fresh food from Charleston was not withheld until April 7, which was after the Federal ships had been instructed to sail." (And The War Came, Kenneth Stamp, Louisiana State University Press, 1990, p. 282)

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

Pro-Confederate authors often cite Major Anderson's occupation of Fort Sumter on December 26, 1860, as an act of aggression. Anderson moved his small force (about 100 men) during the night from Fort Moultrie to Fort Sumter because Moultrie was indefensible, because local hotheads had been making dire threats against the garrison for months, and because South Carolina forces had begun moving cannons and sharpshooters into position to attack Moultrie three weeks earlier.

Of the many threats that were voiced, here are just two examples: In the beginning of July, four months before the 1860 election, Robert Barnwell Rhett and other Fire-Eaters in Charleston made violent speeches to pro-secession gatherings and urged the people to drive every federal official out of the state. By the middle of August, many locals began to be quite violent in their language, and made many threats of what they would do in case of Lincoln’s election.

Captain Abner Doubleday, one of the officers who served under Major Anderson, discussed the fact that South Carolina forces moved cannons and sharpshooters into position to attack Fort Moultrie three weeks before Major Anderson moved his garrison from Moultrie to Sumter:

Previous to Lincoln’s election, Governor Gist had stated that in that event the State would undoubtedly secede, and demand the forts, and that any hesitation or delay in giving them up would lead to an immediate assault. Active preparations were now in progress to carry out this threat. In the first week of December we learned that cannon had been secretly sent to the northern extremity of the island, to guard the channel and oppose the passage of any vessels bringing us re-enforcements by that entrance. We learned, too, that lines of countervallation had been quietly marked out at night, with a view to attack the fort by regular approaches in ease the first assault failed. Also, that two thousand of the best riflemen in the State were engaged to occupy an adjacent sand-hill and the roofs of the adjoining houses, all of which overlooked the parapet, the intention being to shoot us down the moment we attempted to man our guns. (Chapter 3 – Preliminary Movements of the Secessionists)

So Anderson's relocation to Sumter was a purely defensive move and was entirely understandable given the increasingly ominous threats being voiced by local secessionists and given that South Carolina forces had moved cannons and sharpshooters into position to attack Moultrie.

Pro-Confederate authors fail to mention these threats and aggressive actions because they want to portray Major Anderson's garrison as the aggressors and paint South Carolina as the innocent victim of federal aggression.

Pro-Confederate authors also usually omit the fact that when a federal officer tried to transfer supplies from the Charleston armory to the federal garrison on Fort Moultrie on November 7, which he had every legal right to do, city authorities arrested him. Keep in mind this was the day after the election, before South Carolina had even held its secession convention, so local authorities had no right whatsoever to prevent a federal officer from moving supplies from a federal armory to a federal fort.

These facts debunk the neo-Confederate narrative that federal forces in Charleston committed the first acts of aggression and that South Carolina forces did nothing to provoke Major Anderson into believing he needed to move from Moultrie to Sumter.

 

[Quantrill]

mikegriffith1

Yes, there were many threats made if Lincoln won the election. No doubt South Carolina was preparing for what all knew was coming. Were these actions offensive or defensive? All depends in on whose side you're on.

What is the name of the federal officer who tried to supply arms from the Charleston armory to Moultrie that you speak of on Nov. 7th?

Your facts debunk nothing. South Carolina had a right to protect its State as it saw best. No pledge had been made at this time between Buchanan and the South Carolina Commissioners concerning the forts. That would not occur till (Dec. 9th).

And, the pledge concerned the Federal movement of troops, not the State of South Carolinas. "The next day, Sunday, December 9, they delivered a one-paragraph recapitulation in which they stated that South Carolina would not attack the forts before the results of both the upcoming secession convention and subsequent negotiations as to the disposition of federal property in the state, 'provided that no reinforcement shall be sent into those Forts and their relative military status remain as at present'." (The Demon Of Unrest, Erik Larson, Crown Publishing Group, 2024, p. 105)

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

mikegriffith1

Concerning post #(474)

In other words, you can't prove anything you have just said.

You must be kidding. I'm not going to copy and paste dozens of pages of evidence when you can read the evidence yourself with a click of your mouse. I get the feeling you are simply afraid to read the evidence.

Your constant claim that Davis caused it all by cutting off the food from Sumpter is nothing but 'BS'.

Again, you must be kidding. If Southern officials had not started reducing the garrison's food supply soon after the election, the Radicals would have been unable to pressure Lincoln into sending a resupply convoy.

"Other accounts declared that the Confederates had forced the government to undertake the relief project by cutting off Anderson's local supply of fresh meats and vegetables. This was equally untrue, for the fresh food from Charleston was not withheld until April 7, which was after the Federal ships had been instructed to sail." (And The War Came, Kenneth Stamp, Louisiana State University Press, 1990, p. 282)

Phew! You're relying on Kenneth Stamp?! Stamp is totally out to lunch on this issue. Just read Captain Abner Doubleday's memoir where he documents that SC officials began reducing and intermittently halting the garrison's food supply soon after the election and that this pattern continued after the national Confederate government took over the handling of the Sumter situation. Doubleday was an officer in the Sumter garrison. Or, read Captain Foster's and Major Anderson's pre-April 7 messages to the War Department where they repeatedly mention being unable to obtain food in Charleston and express concern about the garrison's dwindling amount of supplies.

For example, on January 24, 1861, Anderson wrote to his superior at the War Department, Colonel Thomas, to dispel the false report that the garrison was getting fresh food from the Charleston markets:

The object of one, which has been repeated more than once, that we are getting fresh provisions from the Charleston market, is apparent enough, viz,, to show they are treating us courteously. But even that is not a fact. I send herewith a copy of a letter written to our former beef contractor about furnishing us with meat, etc., to which no reply has yet been received--why, I am unable to ascertain; so that, up to this moment, we have not derived the least advantage from the Charleston markets.

On March 31, Captain Foster, who commanded the garrison before Anderson took over, reported this about his situation to his boss in Washington, General Totten:

The provisions that I laid in for my force having become exhausted, and the supplies of the command being too limited to spare me any more, I am obliged to discharge nearly all my men to-day. I retain only enough to man a boat.

On that same day, March 31, Major Anderson said much the same thing in a message to Colonel Thomas:

As our provisions are very nearly exhausted, I have requested Captain Foster to discharge his laborers, retaining only enough for a boat's crew. I hope to get them off to-morrow. The last barrel of flour was issued day before yesterday.

On April 3, Anderson wrote this to Colonel Thomas:

The governor of South Carolina has not sent the permission alluded to yesterday, and to-day notice has been received that no butter can be sent down and only one quarter of a box of soap. These little matters indicate, perhaps, an intention to stop our supplies entirely. I must, therefore, most respectfully and urgently ask for instructions what I am to do as soon as my provisions are exhausted. Our bread will last four or five days.

Davis issued the food-cutoff order on April 7. The first ship of the Sumter convoy did not leave until April 8 and the last did not leave until April 10. Humm, do you see a connection? But the cutoff order was only the final step in reducing the garrison's food supply--this action began shortly after the election. The Confederate government took over the handling of Sumter by mid-March at the latest.

If the Confederates had ensured that the garrison received plenty of food, the Radicals would have had no leverage or excuse to pressure Lincoln into authorizing and then sending the naval convoy. Davis's order to cut off the food supply was icing on the cake for the Radicals--it ensured that Lincoln would not dare to call off the naval convoy.

Yet, even then, Lincoln assured Southern officials that the convoy would only offload food as long as they were not fired upon. Moreover, at the last minute, Lincoln reduced the size of the naval convoy to Sumter by removing its only main combat ship, the USS Powhatan, which rendered the convoy toothless. Even the ardent pro-Confederate scholar Dr. Samuel Mitchem admits this fact:

When the main vessel, the steamer Baltic, arrived at 3:00 a.m. on April 12, only the Harriett Lane was there to greet it. Commander Rowan in the Pawnee arrived at 7:00 a.m., but the main combat vessel, the Powhatan, was a no-show. Only later did Fox learn that it had been ordered to Pensacola on April 7.

Without the Powhatan, the U.S. naval forces were of no use in the Battle of Fort Sumter. . . . (It Wasn't About Slavery, p. 149)

So Lincoln sent a toothless naval convoy with orders to only offload food unless fired upon, and he assured Southern officials ahead of time that no troops or weapons would be offloaded as long as the convoy was not attacked. These are hardly the actions of a man who wanted to start a war. To any rational, objective person, they are the actions of a man who was trying to avoid war while satisfying the demands of the hardliners that the garrison be resupplied with food.

The Radicals were hoping that Jefferson Davis would be stupid enough and hotheaded enough to attack Fort Sumter anyway, and he made their hope come true and wrecked any chance of a peaceful resolution.

 

[Quantrill]

mikegriffith1

Toward the end of January: "For the moment, at least, the spoiled rice posed no particular worry. The fort had an adequate supply of provisions, and more food was in the offing--if Anderson chose to accept it." (Demon Of Unrest, Erik Larson, Crown Publishing Group, p. 207)

"On January 19, the state's quartermaster notified Anderson that he had been directed by the governor to send, by the next moring's mail boat, 'two hundred pounds of beef and a lot of vegetables' and thereafter supply whatever Anderson wished on a daily basis." (Larson, p. 207)

"Before Anderson could reject the offer, as he planned to do, the boat arrived at Sumter with the provisions. Asst. Surgeon Crawford watched its approach and found the ensuing scene amusing. The boat had hardly touched the wharf before one quarter of beef was on its way to the mess hall', Crawford wrote. Having learned of Anderson's intention, Crawford went down to the wharf to try to stop the delivery. 'Each man had a vegetable, poor fellows, they had not tasted anything but pork for so long'." (Larson, p. 207)

"Crawford ordered the supplies returned to the boat. The meat made it back; the vegetables got away, spirited to the men's quarters and hidden under pillows, in bedding, in knapsacks. Anderson's rejection of the provisions tickled his men, even though it meant a continuation of tedious meals of salt pork and water. 'Anderson showed a good deal of proper spirit on this occasion', conceded Captain Doubleday. (Larson, p. 207)

By March Anderson probably felt like a proper fool for not accepting Gov. Pickens gift of food. He was probably under the impression that his government had his interest at heart. Instead, the delaying game continued by Lincoln and Seward toward the Southern Commissioners.

In March: "His supplies of provisins were running low as well. After Anderson rejected Governor Picken's offer of free beef and vegetables, he secured from Pickens permission to acquire such foods on his own from city suppliers using the fort's existing contracts. But delivery was eratic. Attempts to acquire even minor supplies, such as condiments, required permits from Pickens himself...prompted Anderson to write a long letter of complaint to the governor, in which he sulked that it might be better to have no supplies at all." (Larson, p. 335)

The end of March: "All of the six members present, including Seward, endorsed directly or implicitly the reinforcement of Fort Pickens. LINCOLN AUTHORIZED BOTH EXPEDITIONS."

Lincoln authorized the reinforcement of both Pickens and Sumter in March. All this while promising the Southern Commissioners that Sumter would be evacuated. The idea that Davis forced Lincoln's hand is bullshit. Lincoln never intended on evacuating either forts. He and Seward lied their ass off to delay so they could prepare for the reinforcement.

Concerning the absence of the ship Powhatan, Fox had plenty of other ships. "...three oceangoing tugs, the Thomas Freeborn, Yankee, and Uncle Ben; a large transport, the Baltic, carrying troops and supplies; a secondary transport, the Illinois, to carry whatever the Baltic could not; and most critical, four large warships: the Pawnee, Harriet Lane, Pocahontas--and, he presumed the Powhatan, the most powerful of all." (Larson p. 392)

Fox had plenty of ships to make an attempt to reinforce Sumter. The absence of the Powhatan would not, or should not, have prevented the attempt. Unless one wanted an excuse to not attempt. I personally think Fox got scared.

Quantrill

 

[IM2]

Drunk history.