New Website on the American Civil War

[mikegriffith1]

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)

You are again relying on neo-Confederate sources that omit large amounts of contrary evidence or that minimize contrary evidence. Let's take a second look at one of the paragraphs you quoted from Larson's book:

In March: "His supplies of provisins were running low as well.

And why was that? Why? Because SC officials began reducing the food supply soon after the election, as is well documented.

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.

Of course Anderson rejected Pickens' offer. He wasn't about to have himself and his unit seem to be relying on charity from Pickens when he and his men were perfectly capable of buying the necessary food themselves. Captain Doubleday explained:

Many unfavorable comments having been made, even in the Southern States, more particularly in Kentucky, in relation to Governor Pickens’s treatment of us, he relaxed his severity, and on the 21st sent us over some fresh beef and vegetables; as if we would consent to be fed by the charity of South Carolina. Anderson showed a good deal of proper spirit on this occasion. He declined to receive the provisions, but notified the governor that, if we were not interfered with, we would purchase our own supplies in Charleston market. The governor consented to this; but nothing came of it. There seemed to be a combination among the market-men not to sell us any food.

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)

You should have highlighted these sentences insted of the sentence that said Pickens authorized Anderson to buy supplies in Charleston. Your own source admits that delivery of supplies was erratic, that Pickens' authorizaton was disingenuous, that Pickens demanded that Anderson get permits from him just to buy minor supplies, and that Anderson complained about these things.

I notice you didn't lay a finger on the evidence that early on the Sumter garrison began running low on food.

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."

Huh??? Umm, yes, of course he did. I've never disputed that. The online sources you keep refusing to read talk about this fact. You act like you have discovered some stunning piece of information, when you are citing a fact that no one has denied and that has been discussed ad nauseum in the literature.

Lincoln authorized the reinforcement of both Pickens and Sumter in March. All this while promising the Southern Commissioners that Sumter would be evacuated.

Sigh. . . . Just sigh. . . . Again, for the umpteenth time, the plan was to evacuate Sumter after reinforcing Pickens. By the end of March, the Sumter garrison's food supply was almost gone, as is well documented, which is why Lincoln also authorized a relief convoy to Sumter, but that convoy was specifically ordered not to reinforce Sumter but only to deliver food as long as they were not fired upon, unlike the Pickens convoy.

You simply refuse to address these facts and refuse to read the ample evidence that establishes them.

The idea that Davis forced Lincoln's hand is BS. Lincoln never intended on evacuating either forts. He and Seward lied their ass off to delay so they could prepare for the reinforcement.

You can keep repeating this Lost Cause mythology until the Sun burns out, but that won't make it come true. Yes, Lincoln absolutely intended to abandon Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Pickens, but you won't dare yourself to read the dozens of pages of evidence that prove this fact, even though the evidence has been documented by two authors who were entirely fair to the Confederacy and who harshly criticized the Radical Republicans.

You can't even admit that Lincoln and Welles specified that the Sumter convoy was not to reinforce the fort unless fired upon because that debunks your narrative that Lincoln was trying to provoke war.

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

You have no idea what you're talking about. Even a responsible neo-Confederate scholar such as Mitchem admits that Fox's convoy was toothless without the Powhatan, but you can't even admit this obvious fact. Even Fox himself said the Powhatan was "the main portion, the fighting portion, of our expedition." You might want to read his report on the subject.

It is silly for you to argue that Fox "got scared." Fox was a war-hungry hardliner who was anxious for combat. He was furious about the last-minute removal of the Powhatan from his convoy. He was also angry and chagrined that his convoy was unable to take part in the fighting at Sumter. But you have to assume he got scared because you don't want to admit that he didn't think he had the needed firepower without the Powhatan.

The Pawnee and the Harriet Lane were insufficiently manned, and the Pocohantas did not even arrive near Charleston Harbor until the morning of April 13, over 24 hours after the attack on Sumter had begun, and did not dare try to enter the channel, in addition to the fact that Sumter was nearly destroyed by then. The Pawnee was under orders not to even get closer than 10 miles from the harbor's lighthouse until the Powhatan arrived, but the last-minute removal of the Powhatan from Fox's convoy rendered the Pawnee useless.

As military historian John Pelzer notes, the absence of the Powhatan crippled Fox's mission:

Powhatan’s transfer had a devastating impact on Fox’s mission. The Northern warship carried the armed launches and crews necessary to land troops and supplies from Baltic. To make matters worse, Fox did not learn of Powhatan’s diversion until April 13, a week after it had taken place. (Mission to Relieve Fort Sumter)

Historian Michael Burlingame:

One way was to sabotage the Sumter expedition by stripping it of its key component, the warship Powhatan, which was to transport howitzers, armed launches, and hundreds of troops. That vessel, it was understood, was the only one in the navy capable of carrying out the mission. (https://share.google/cmIbJu9zW8JFqBPEv)

On April 6, Lincoln sent a special messenger to Gov. Pickens informing him of the relief convoy and promising that if no resistance is offered, no troops, arms or ammunition would be moved into the fort, only food. The messenger arrived on April 8 and spoke with Pickens, with Gen. Beauregard present. Beauregard then informed Davis of the message, including the assurance that only food will be delivered as long as the convoy and/or the fort were not attacked. But good ole' Jeff Davis, doing the Radicals' bidding, decided to attack the fort in response to this assurance.

 

[Quantrill]

Drunk history.

Real history. And much better than your empty bullshit.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

mikegriffith1

Erik Larson is not a neo-confederate source. And even If I used a Southern author, that wouldn't make them wrong.

Andersons supplies ran low. They didn't run out. As I said, he played the fool in not accepting the food when offered. And it was still being given, just not as much as before. If he didn't want to accept any, then don't. But don't b***h about not having none later.

I have showed you already Lincolns own words. He never planned to evacuate Sumter or Pickens. You can sigh all you like, but show me in Lincolns words that he planned to evacuate Sumter. And his letter to Gov. Pickens made no mention of any evacuation.

Well, some so-called Southern scholars are fakes and liars and copperheads. Fox had three other large battleships. Just because the Powhatan wasn't there didn't mean he couldn't try to reinforce...if he wanted to. He lost it. He saw the bombardment going on and shit his pants.

By the time Lincoln's letter arrived to Gov. Pickens, they already knew Lincoln and Seward, and the messengers they sent them had been lying. Anderson even admitted it in a letter to Lincoln which had been confiscated and read and then given to the local newspapers to publish, which they did. The deception and lies which the North were using to gain time to prepare the Naval expedition was despicable. They knew Lincoln was lying in his letter, just like he and Seward had been lying all along.

Your constant use of food as a cause is just bullshit. All Lincoln had to do was evacuate Sumter. He didn't have to send one damn boat. Just a messenger saying we will evacuate. Case closed. But then, Lincoln wouldn't have his war.

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

mikegriffith1

Erik Larson is not a neo-confederate source. And even If I used a Southern author, that wouldn't make them wrong.

Andersons supplies ran low. They didn't run out. As I said, he played the fool in not accepting the food when offered. And it was still being given, just not as much as before. If he didn't want to accept any, then don't. But don't b***h about not having none later.

I have showed you already Lincolns own words. He never planned to evacuate Sumter or Pickens. You can sigh all you like, but show me in Lincolns words that he planned to evacuate Sumter. And his letter to Gov. Pickens made no mention of any evacuation.

Well, some so-called Southern scholars are fakes and liars and copperheads. Fox had three other large battleships. Just because the Powhatan wasn't there didn't mean he couldn't try to reinforce...if he wanted to. He lost it. He saw the bombardment going on and shit his pants.

By the time Lincoln's letter arrived to Gov. Pickens, they already knew Lincoln and Seward, and the messengers they sent them had been lying. Anderson even admitted it in a letter to Lincoln which had been confiscated and read and then given to the local newspapers to publish, which they did. The deception and lies which the North were using to gain time to prepare the Naval expedition was despicable. They knew Lincoln was lying in his letter, just like he and Seward had been lying all along.

Your constant use of food as a cause is just bullshit. All Lincoln had to do was evacuate Sumter. He didn't have to send one damn boat. Just a messenger saying we will evacuate. Case closed. But then, Lincoln wouldn't have his war.

Quantrill

This is fantasy material. It is delusional revisionism that ignores a mountain of facts. It also ignores the political situation that Lincoln faced. I'm guessing you still have not read Eisenschiml's and Randall's detailed presentations on the Sumter issue.

It is especially incredible that you're claiming that Fox didn't engage in the Sumter battle because he chickened out. You clearly know nothing about Fox. You don't want to admit that he did not engage in the fighting because his convoy had been rendered toothless. Nor do you want to admit that Lincoln-Seward made the convoy toothless because they were trying to make the convoy as non-threatening as possible, because they were trying to avoid war.

Saying "all Lincoln had to do was evacuate Sumter" is as silly and surreal as saying "all Davis had to do was begin a gradual emancipation program in 1862" or "all Hirohito had to do was evacuate China."

Are you at least willing to admit that when it came to Reconstruction, Lincoln offered remarkably lenient, merciful terms, whereas the Radical Republicans wanted to ravage and subjugate the South after Lee surrendered? Can you at least admit that?

 

[Dante]

I have finally created a new website on the American Civil War. My site presents a view of the Civil War that is rarely discussed in our history books, a view that steers a middle course between the pro-Southern Lost Cause narrative and the standard pro-Northern narrative that dominates our history books.

The American Civil War: An Alternative View

Most of OUR history books on the Civil War have been written by Southerners

 

[Quantrill]

This is fantasy material. It is delusional revisionism that ignores a mountain of facts. It also ignores the political situation that Lincoln faced. I'm guessing you still have not read Eisenschiml's and Randall's detailed presentations on the Sumter issue.

It is especially incredible that you're claiming that Fox didn't engage in the Sumter battle because he chickened out. You clearly know nothing about Fox. You don't want to admit that he did not engage in the fighting because his convoy had been rendered toothless. Nor do you want to admit that Lincoln-Seward made the convoy toothless because they were trying to make the convoy as non-threatening as possible, because they were trying to avoid war.

Saying "all Lincoln had to do was evacuate Sumter" is as silly and surreal as saying "all Davis had to do was begin a gradual emancipation program in 1862" or "all Hirohito had to do was evacuate China."

Are you at least willing to admit that when it came to Reconstruction, Lincoln offered remarkably lenient, merciful terms, whereas the Radical Republicans wanted to ravage and subjugate the South after Lee surrendered? Can you at least admit that?

You first labeled Larson as a 'neo-confederate source'. Which was either a lie or ignorance on your part. Now you just label it 'fantasy material' and 'revisionism'. Which it is not also. Instead of trying to label my sources in a wrong and negative way, why don't you just disprove what they say.

You say 'fantasy material'. I asked you to show me a quote from Abraham Lincoln where he said he was going to evacuate Sumter. You have not produced any. You know why? Because they don't exist.

Fox without the Powhatan was not toothless. Far from it. It certainly provided him an excuse. But he had plenty of firepower. "He would lead a small but mighty fleet of steam-powered vessels: 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." (Erik Larson, The Demon Of Unrest, Crown Publishing Group, 2024, p. 392)

That quote is not an 'opinion'. It is factual information. Your 'opinion' is that Fox was toothless. My opinion is that he was not toothless. You base your opinion on the absence of the largest battleship. I base my opinion on that he still had three battleships. Your opinion is without merit, because you use the term 'toothless' as though Fox had nothing. My opinion has merit because Fox had plenty still to engage the enemy with.

Here is a quote from another source. "Meanwhile, Gustavus Fox, still upset over the delays in getting ships for his Sumter expedition, headed back to Washington. Montgomery Blair had summoned him on the 1st, saying that Lincoln wished to shape the final orders. Welles had dutifully ordered the Pocahontas, Pawnee, and Harriet Lane to be ready to sail with a month's rations by April 6. These were small vessels, and Fox worried that his transport ship could not handle the necessary troops and supplies." (Days Of Defiance, Maury Klein, Published by Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1997, p. 378)

Again, the facts remain. Fox had three other battleships. My opinion is there was no reason he could not engage the enemy other than fear.

All Lincoln had to do was evacuate Sumter if he wanted peace and not war. Again, Lincoln said nothing about evacuation to Governor Pickens or to Major Anderson. But both had been lied to and led to believe Anderson would evacuate. Lincoln lied to all of them. Deceived all of them.

And Lincoln's lies were revealed when Anderson's letter to Lincoln was confiscated and read and published in the newspapers.

After all of Lincoln's lies and deception, which seemed to characterize his person, why would you or anyone else believe anything he said? The South certainly didn't. Why should they?

Lincoln always did what was best for Lincoln. He wasn't going to do anything to benefit the South unless it benefitted Lincoln. Lincoln said 'without malice'. Where was that when he made total war on the Southern civilian population of all ages and genders?

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

You first labeled Larson as a 'neo-confederate source'. Which was either a lie or ignorance on your part. Now you just label it 'fantasy material' and 'revisionism'. Which it is not also. Instead of trying to label my sources in a wrong and negative way, why don't you just disprove what they say.

You say 'fantasy material'. I asked you to show me a quote from Abraham Lincoln where he said he was going to evacuate Sumter. You have not produced any. You know why? Because they don't exist.

Fox without the Powhatan was not toothless. Far from it. It certainly provided him an excuse. But he had plenty of firepower. "He would lead a small but mighty fleet of steam-powered vessels: 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." (Erik Larson, The Demon Of Unrest, Crown Publishing Group, 2024, p. 392)

That quote is not an 'opinion'. It is factual information. Your 'opinion' is that Fox was toothless. My opinion is that he was not toothless. You base your opinion on the absence of the largest battleship. I base my opinion on that he still had three battleships. Your opinion is without merit, because you use the term 'toothless' as though Fox had nothing. My opinion has merit because Fox had plenty still to engage the enemy with.

Here is a quote from another source. "Meanwhile, Gustavus Fox, still upset over the delays in getting ships for his Sumter expedition, headed back to Washington. Montgomery Blair had summoned him on the 1st, saying that Lincoln wished to shape the final orders. Welles had dutifully ordered the Pocahontas, Pawnee, and Harriet Lane to be ready to sail with a month's rations by April 6. These were small vessels, and Fox worried that his transport ship could not handle the necessary troops and supplies." (Days Of Defiance, Maury Klein, Published by Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1997, p. 378)

Again, the facts remain. Fox had three other battleships. My opinion is there was no reason he could not engage the enemy other than fear.

All Lincoln had to do was evacuate Sumter if he wanted peace and not war. Again, Lincoln said nothing about evacuation to Governor Pickens or to Major Anderson. But both had been lied to and led to believe Anderson would evacuate. Lincoln lied to all of them. Deceived all of them.

And Lincoln's lies were revealed when Anderson's letter to Lincoln was confiscated and read and published in the newspapers.

After all of Lincoln's lies and deception, which seemed to characterize his person, why would you or anyone else believe anything he said? The South certainly didn't. Why should they?

Lincoln always did what was best for Lincoln. He wasn't going to do anything to benefit the South unless it benefitted Lincoln. Lincoln said 'without malice'. Where was that when he made total war on the Southern civilian population of all ages and genders?

Quantrill

I already addressed the silly arguments that Fox chickened out and that he still had "plenty of firepower" without the Powhatan.

I can tell it's a waste of time trying to reason with you about the Sumter issue.

So, I'm asking again, are you at least willing to admit that Lincoln's reconstruction terms were not only vastly better than the Radicals' terms but were downright merciful and generous?

 

[Quantrill]

I already addressed the silly arguments that Fox chickened out and that he still had "plenty of firepower" without the Powhatan.

I can tell it's a waste of time trying to reason with you about the Sumter issue.

So, I'm asking again, are you at least willing to admit that Lincoln's reconstruction terms were not only vastly better than the Radicals' terms but were downright merciful and generous?

That you addressed them means nothing. You can't prove them. I have proved that Fox had the fire power to engage, and chickened out. To which you have nothing.

Yes, it's a waste of 'your time'. Because history is against you.

Lincoln's terms don't mean shit. I have proved Lincoln was a liar and deceiver concerning Sumter. Thus nothing he says can be believed. Lincoln's history is proof against him being merciful and generous to the South.

I asked if you can provide a quote from Lincoln that he would evacuate Sumter. You couldn't, and can't, because there isn't one. And there isn't one because Lincoln never intended to evacuate Sumter as you suggested.

And that is all Lincoln had to do to avoid the War. No ships, no reinforcements needed, no food needed. Just evacuate Sumter. But then , Lincoln would not get his war that he wanted with the South being postured as the instigator. What a piece of shit Lincoln was and is.

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

I asked if you can provide a quote from Lincoln that he would evacuate Sumter. You couldn't, and can't, because there isn't one. Quantrill

Huh??? Just huh??? Randall and Eisenschiml provide several quotes from Lincoln on his intention to evacuate Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Pickens. I've told you this several times. The problem is that you can't be bothered to do a few mouse clicks to read their research. Again, I'm not going to spend time copying and pasting when you can easily access the material yourself.

You are unbelievably misguided and uninformed when it comes to Lincoln's reconstruction terms. His lenient, merciful, reasonable terms were already being carried out in Louisiana and Tennessee. They were far, far better than the Radicals' draconian, oppressive terms. But you're so blinded by neo-Confederate mythology that you can't even acknowledge this profusely documented fact.

 

[Quantrill]

Huh??? Just huh??? Randall and Eisenschiml provide several quotes from Lincoln on his intention to evacuate Sumter in exchange for reinforcing Pickens. I've told you this several times. The problem is that you can't be bothered to do a few mouse clicks to read their research. Again, I'm not going to spend time copying and pasting when you can easily access the material yourself.

You are unbelievably misguided and uninformed when it comes to Lincoln's reconstruction terms. His lenient, merciful, reasonable terms were already being carried out in Louisiana and Tennessee. They were far, far better than the Radicals' draconian, oppressive terms. But you're so blinded by neo-Confederate mythology that you can't even acknowledge this profusely documented fact.

You can 'huh, just huh' all you like. What you can't do is provide a quote from Lincoln that he intended on evacuating Sumter. And that he ever intended on any exchange of Sumter for Pickens.

You can't provide a quote because a quote doesn't exist. And every time you refuse to provide a quote proves the emptiness of your position.

I have not presented 'neo-Confederate mythology'. Show me where I have presented that?

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

You can 'huh, just huh' all you like. What you can't do is provide a quote from Lincoln that he intended on evacuating Sumter. And that he ever intended on any exchange of Sumter for Pickens. You can't provide a quote because a quote doesn't exist. And every time you refuse to provide a quote proves the emptiness of your position.

And I say you're a coward who's afraid to click your mouse a few times to read those numerous quotes presented in Randall and Eisenschiml's research. Since the files are scanned PDFs, I can't copy and paste the quotes--I'd have to manually retype them, which I'm not going to do since you can easily read them with a few mouse clicks.

The quotes that you claim don't exist are right there for the reading. I've already given you the links. Or, you can just go to my Civil War website and click the links there.

I have not presented 'neo-Confederate mythology'. Show me where I have presented that? Quantrill

Umm, most of the claims about Sumter in your previous replies in this thread repeat neo-Confederate mythology on the subject.

It is curious that you can't seem to process the implications of the fact that the Radical Republicans bitterly condemned Lincoln's reconstruction terms and reversed them as soon as they had enough votes to do so.

Lincoln was going to allow nearly all former Confederates to vote. He was not going to impose universal black voting rights on the Southern states. He was not going to allow any confiscation of slaveholders' plantations and lands. He had no problem with the Southeren states electing former Confederates as congressmen and senators as long as they had not held high positions in the Confederacy. He required that only 10% of a state's citizens take the loyalty oath in order for the state to form a new state government and to send representatives to Congress. Etc., etc., etc.

If you can't admit that these terms were vastly better, vastly more lenient, and vastly more reasonable than the Radicals' terms, further dicussion is pointless.

 

[Quantrill]

And I say you're a coward who's afraid to click your mouse a few times to read those numerous quotes presented in Randall and Eisenschiml's research. Since the files are scanned PDFs, I can't copy and paste the quotes--I'd have to manually retype them, which I'm not going to do since you can easily read them with a few mouse clicks.

The quotes that you claim don't exist are right there for the reading. I've already given you the links. Or, you can just go to my Civil War website and click the links there.


Umm, most of the claims about Sumter in your previous replies in this thread repeat neo-Confederate mythology on the subject.

It is curious that you can't seem to process the implications of the fact that the Radical Republicans bitterly condemned Lincoln's reconstruction terms and reversed them as soon as they had enough votes to do so.

Lincoln was going to allow nearly all former Confederates to vote. He was not going to impose universal black voting rights on the Southern states. He was not going to allow any confiscation of slaveholders' plantations and lands. He had no problem with the Southeren states electing former Confederates as congressmen and senators as long as they had not held high positions in the Confederacy. He required that only 10% of a state's citizens take the loyalty oath in order for the state to form a new state government and to send representatives to Congress. Etc., etc., etc.

If you can't admit that these terms were vastly better, vastly more lenient, and vastly more reasonable than the Radicals' terms, further dicussion is pointless.

I'm not afraid. I can't find any quotes from Lincoln where he said he wanted to evacuate Sumter. If you have some, prove me wrong and present them.

If you say, someone else is saying Lincoln said that, by all means, present what they said and their source.

You keep saying it is neo-Confederate mythology yet you don't support your accusation. Just because it disagrees with you doesn't make it 'neo-Confederate'. Just makes it history that you can't disprove.

As I have showed, it doesn't matter what 'Radical Republican' were saying. Or that they disagreed with Lincoln. The point is, Lincoln proved he could not be trusted. He lied to any who needed lying to in order to get his way. Lincoln could not be trusted. And, as I have continually said, Lincoln, though who made war on women and children of the South, you somehow believe he has the South's interest in mind.

What is pointless is your inability to prove what you say. Show me where Lincoln ever intended to evacuate Sumter or trade Sumter for Fort Pickens.

Quantrill

 

[mikegriffith1]

I'm not afraid. I can't find any quotes from Lincoln where he said he wanted to evacuate Sumter. If you have some, prove me wrong and present them.

If you say, someone else is saying Lincoln said that, by all means, present what they said and their source.

You keep saying it is neo-Confederate mythology yet you don't support your accusation. Just because it disagrees with you doesn't make it 'neo-Confederate'. Just makes it history that you can't disprove.

As I have showed, it doesn't matter what 'Radical Republican' were saying.

You have showed no such thing. You have no idea how foolish and fringe such claims make you look.

Now, in point of fact, it matters a great deal what the Radicals were saying because, among other things, it proves that Lincoln was not the lying, scheming warmonger that you falsely paint him to be, and that he had no desire to subjugate the South. The Radicals detested him precisely because they could tell he was trying to avoid war and they knew he did not want to oppress the South after the war.

Or that they disagreed with Lincoln. The point is, Lincoln proved he could not be trusted. He lied to any who needed lying to in order to get his way. Lincoln could not be trusted. And, as I have continually said, Lincoln, though who made war on women and children of the South, you somehow believe he has the South's interest in mind.

What is pointless is your inability to prove what you say. Show me where Lincoln ever intended to evacuate Sumter or trade Sumter for Fort Pickens.

Quantrill

Once again, here are the links to Randall and Eisenschiml's analyses, which contain abundant evidence that Lincoln intended to evacuate Sumter in exchange for fortifying Pickens, including several quotes from Lincoln himself:

Lincoln Tried to Avoid War (Eisenschiml)

Lincoln the President, Volume 1 (Randall) (see chapter 12: "Sumter," 39 pages long)

 

[Quantrill]

You have showed no such thing. You have no idea how foolish and fringe such claims make you look.

Now, in point of fact, it matters a great deal what the Radicals were saying because, among other things, it proves that Lincoln was not the lying, scheming warmonger that you falsely paint him to be, and that he had no desire to subjugate the South. The Radicals detested him precisely because they could tell he was trying to avoid war and they knew he did not want to oppress the South after the war.



Once again, here are the links to Randall and Eisenschiml's analyses, which contain abundant evidence that Lincoln intended to evacuate Sumter in exchange for fortifying Pickens, including several quotes from Lincoln himself:

Lincoln Tried to Avoid War (Eisenschiml)

Lincoln the President, Volume 1 (Randall) (see chapter 12: "Sumter," 39 pages long)

Once again, give me a quote from Lincoln where he said he would evacuate Sumter. Give me a quote from Lincoln where he said he would trade Sumter for Fort Pickens.

It doesn't take 39 pages of anal-yses to present a quote.

Quantrill