RE: Fort Sumter

[Qman39]

Just for fun and the sake of discussion.....does anyone have any thoughts on whether Lincoln should have used a more aggressive approach to handling the Fort Sumter situation? If so, what implications might there have been on both sides? I realize that the Union wasn't really ready to do much at this time and that there were timing issues because of the supplies available to the garrison at Fort Sumter, but I was thinking about how things might have turned out if Lincoln had wanted to push the issue at this time and how he might have gone about it.

[jackfox]

Interesting question. I think that for him to act more aggressively would have been a mistake and might have accelerated secession. At this time, the Federal Government was, or at least needed to appear to be, doing everything possible to prevent civil war. In his inaugural speech, Lincoln expressed that he would do all that was in the government's power to protect Federal property and installations. He also made it clear, though, that the government would not use force against "the people" to protect that property. In other words, if civil war were to be initiated it would not be the Federal government that fired the first shots.

Ultimately, the new administration could not appear to be the aggressor. To attempt to use force in order to relieve or evacuate the Sumter garrison, as a small Federal fleet was ready to do, would have further alienated the states in the upper south, still believed at this time to be on the fence concerning secession. Also considering that many of Lincoln's advisors saw a relief attempt as a tactical folly not likely to succeed, there would have been little reason to risk so much (upper south loyalty) on so little (an all-but-lost symbol of Federal authority).

Now, we all know that most of those states seceded shortly after April 12 anyway, especially after Lincoln went SUPER aggressive by calling for 75,000 volunteers to put down the rebellion. It was safer for him to do so at that time, though, because civil war had already been initiated by the rebels the moment the first shells went soaring toward Sumter. If Lincoln had been even MORE aggressive by using force to relieve the Sumter garrison ahead of the attack, it's also possible that Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, or even Delaware would have seceded.

Another thing that might be fun to consider would be the chances of success of the relief expedition. Could Fox's small fleet have successfully landed supplies and troops at Fort Sumter? Or would he have been blown out of the water?

[Qman39]

Great points and I tend to agree. I think part of the equation here is motivation. The South was eager to show their determination and felt that they had been wronged. The North on the other hand was not as invested in the problems existing at the time (at least it seems that way). I suppose it could be argued (and it has) that Lincoln wanted the South to do something at Sumter to give him the moral and political imperative to handle the situation the way he believed it should be handled. The fact that he called for 75,000 volunteers tells me he wasn't against the use of force but was simply cunning about when it should be used. If that were all there was to it however then one wonders why Lincoln didn't try harder to send Fox because it would almost certainly have created a conflict where the South fired the first shot.