April 12, 1861 4:30 a.m.

[Hank]

Dispute between Southern and Northern States reached a critical diplomatic mass in April of 1861. Many states had passed, or were in the process of legislating, ordinances of secession in order to leave the fetters of the Federal government. The State of South Carolina had been the first of the Southern States to attempt to go quietly her own way. Northern ire was raised at the attempt to dissolve the Union, but lip-service paid to reunion under President Franklin Buchanan, but imputus placed on action with the election of President Abraham Lincoln in 1860.

Even money might have been placed on bets where conflict might have begun, some stating Pensacola, Florida or Mobile, Alabama as the area where spark might lead to fire. All bets were off as the attempts of South Carolina governor Pickens to persuade Major Robert Anderson, USA, to abandon Fort Sumter in the harbor of Charleston proved fruitless. A telegram was sent to Southern military commander in Charleston, General P.G.T. Beauregard, by Provisional President Jefferson Davis giving orders to open fire apon the fort and reduce it to terms.

Let us view the course of events from this point, on this day, in the words of Beauregard chronicaler Alfred Roman.

"The peaceful stillness of the night was suddenly broken just before dawn. From Fort Johnson's battery, at 4:30 a.m. April 12, 1861, issued the first-and, as many thought, the too-long-deferred signal shot of the war. It was fired, not by Mr. Edmund Ruffin, of Virginia, as has been erroneously believed, but by Captain George S. James, of South Carolina, to whom Lieutenant Stephen D. Lee issued the order. It sped aloft, describing its peculiar arc of fire, and, bursting over Fort Sumter, fell with crashing noise, in the very center of the parade."

So began four years of the bloodiest history, so far to be recorded, of the American States. This Day.

Regards

[John Odom]

Yes, It is amazing how much debate can be aroused even today, about the war and its causes. I had great grand fathers on each side. Today I can honor the one that fought for the union., but not the one that fought for the confederacy. My northern GF fought to preserve the union. The southern one fought because his homeland was invaded. Neither was fighting to free slaves.

[Hank]

Yes, John- Though the abolisionists were fundamental in the formation of Nothern policy before and during the war I have yet to find one iota of proof that the abolishment of the institution of slavery was the reason this conflict occurred. The Special Session of the House of Representatives of July 4, 1861, the closest bit of Northern legislation that the South had of war being declared on it, cites the collection of revenue. Not once is slavery mentioned. The condition of the people used in the labor system of the South only really came to be addressed by the North as Union officers, increasing under pressure to provide for captured 'contrabands', began to bombard the War and Navy Departments with requests for orders and policy regarding same.

The basis and cause of the War of the Rebellion was collection of the Revenue. If anyone can cite proof otherwise I'd be glad to read of it. Regards

[John Odom]

I fully Agree. The cause was economic, not moral.

[jainso31]

I have read this thread started by Hank and followed up by John very carefully; for which my thanks; and would like to contribute if I may. It seems to me that primary cause for the war was indeed Slavery; looked at in it's broadest sense ie sociologically,politically and of course, from an economics point of view; and they all blend together to make a singularly "muddied" picture.
I have given below a link, which I hope gives a balanced view; and shows how this blending of interrelated causes; makes many people unable to be ABSOLUTELY convinced about the real cause of the American Civil War- simply because there is no single reason on which to lay the blame.

jainso31


http://www.greatamericanhistory.net/causes.htm

[Hank]

Jainso- No one could argue against Abolisionists being a factor in making Slavery as an issue for the start of the conflict. My point is that the Federal Government did not voice the issue as such untill there was a great need for manpower to increase the military and it was a certainty that Federal might would prevail.

President Abraham Lincoln fired his commander in Missouri, Major General John C. Fremont, for issuing a declaration to remove slaves from their owners. This in September of 1862 (Make that 1861. Jeez, the second gumby this week). Lincoln's aim was to repair the Union, not fix Southern resolve.

I repeat my iteration of the fact that the Special Session of Congress of July 4, 1862 is as close as the Southern Confederacy ever came to having war declared on it, an act that would have recognized the Confederacy as a soverign nation. Not once in the legislative instrument produced by the Special Session is the issue of Slavery addressed. The collection of the revenue is.

I am not pro-slavery. I could not be, I live in its aftermath.

Regards

[John Odom]

There is no doubt that the economic problems preceding the civil war were The result of slavery, and in that sense a cause of the war. But, freeing the slaves was not what the was was initially about.

[jainso31]

John I totally agree with you,in that the war was not about freeing the slaves but slavery was an issue viewed differently by both sides The very idea that the North would impose Abolition made certain that the South would go to war.

jainso31

[davidrn]

Re-Lincoln on slavery I understand that he said:-

“I declare that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so and I have no inclination to do so.”
He had to accept that the South’s economic wealth in Cotton a tobacco relied on a large cheep workforce.
He also went on to say that he did not believe in the right of states to withdraw from the Union.

The southern states belief in their right to withdraw from the union if they so desired.
Lincolns decision to supply and hold the Charleston Harbour fort.
The Southern decision to have Beauregard take possession of fort Sumter. I believe that he wrote twice to Major Anderson, demanding that he evacuate the fort. On Andersons refusal he then at 3.20 A.M. issued the ultimatum the If the fort was not evacuated within an hour, that he would open fire.

All these were steps along the road that led to war. Of course slavery was an issue and had been growing for years. John Brown, Bleeding Kansas, Harriet Beecher Stowes “Uncle Toms Cabin”, Preston Brooks assault on Charles Sumner, all inflamed passions on both sides but the abolition of slavery did not seem to by the main issue at that time.
Indeed I do not think that Abolition became a main issue until after the North’s victory at Gettysburg in 1863 even though Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation on 1st January 1863

Dave

[jainso31]

Not a lot to argue about in your reply davidrn;but WHY did the South want to and did, secede from the Union.--to perpetuate slavery on which their economy depended. As you said Lincoln did not wish to interfere with the South's economy; but distrust and lack of diplomacy ,ensured there would be strife.

jainso31