WI Confederates don't attack Fort Sumter

Uxi

Always fascinated that the Confederacy commits treason and starts the war, putting the tools the Abolishionists needed in Lincoln's hands.

Lincoln himself seemed to recognize that the Emancipation Proclamation was of dubious legality outside of his war powers (and thus lobbied HARD for the 13th Amendment):

"You dislike the emancipation proclamation; and, perhaps, would have it retracted. You say it is unconstitutional – I think differently. I think the constitution invests its commander-in-chief, with the law of war, in time of war. The most that can be said, if so much, is, that slaves are property. Is there – has there ever been – any question that by the law of war, property, both of enemies and friends, may be taken when needed? And is it not needed whenever taking it, helps us, or hurts the enemy? Armies, the world over, destroy enemies' property when they can not use it; and even destroy their own to keep it from the enemy. Civilized belligerents do all in their power to help themselves, or hurt the enemy, except a few things regarded as barbarous or cruel. Among the exceptions are the massacre of vanquished foes, and non-combatants, male and female."

If the Secessionists don't fire the first shots and start the war, things have to unfold differently.

Surely the Southern leadership recognized that the North would eventually be able to overwhelm them electorally, but that most definitely was not in the 1860's. We could get well into the 1900's before they would be able to get to a 2/3's majority by which time they could see that even outside of it' barbarism, slavery is an outmoded and archaic concept in the industrialized world.
 

herricks

even if Ft. Sumter wasnt attacked the war would have eventually stared some way or another since South Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, & Texas had already seceded before the attack took place.
 

Uxi

Possibly. The war definitely doesn't start in the 1860's, though:

"If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. "
 

Grimm Reaper

The south certainly did not believe it had much hope for the future. Not only would there have been sufficient free states for that two thirds majority before the turn of the century, and no civil war might have meant enough territories were settled earlier than OTL, but there was also the growing likelihood that certain slave states would choose abolish slavery on their own, thus reaching that majority much sooner.

The rapidly growing immigrant population in Missouri, strongly abolitionist, had put the future of slavery in that state in question.

Delaware was already seen as an effective write off by the slave states.

Maryland, of course, was a bombshell when in 1864 it voted to abolish slavery as, even with the ACW, very few thought Maryland was ready to do so.

Then there was the factor that the decline of slavery in a state was an event which, once started, rapidly peaked as the slave owners, once emancipation was seen as possible, would sell their slaves further south and save their own money(presuming they did not move further south themselves).

The three states above would have reduced the number of slave states from fifteen to twelve and, even without West Virginia, Nebraska's entry would have been the final state needed.
 

DuQuense

At the Time of Fort Sumter The South was Winning.
The Railroads, Mails and other Commerce was operating normally across the new border.
The Southern Ports were Still Open
The South had ordered new Money from the NY Banks Printing Facilities.
IIRC the South had ordered Rifles/Pistols from Colt and Winchester Gun Companies and the Companies were preparing to fill the Orders.
The Opposition Papers had started Using a Confederate byline on News from the South.
Most Lower/Middle Class Whites in the North Had no desire to go to War, over Political wrangling between the Upper Class Ruling Classes.

Fort Sumter Changed all This.
It gave Lincoln the Bloody Flag. -- The Rebels Have Attacked The Union, Our Boys in Blue have been Killed.

However I think that Lincoln would have keep pushing till He got the Bloody Flag in Some other Incident.

But every Day with out it gives the South another day to Get Organized. To Raise and Train it's Military.
How much difference another couple Months of Preparing would have done is debatable, But any extra time would Help.
 

Grimm Reaper

That works both ways and this period of confusion leaves eight of the fifteen slave states within the Union which certainly calls into question a need to secede while Lincoln can strengthen positions still held in the South.

One likely change would be the USN having time to remove or destroy the ship which became CSS Virginia OTL.
 

Typo

Banned
The problems is that as long as Lincoln pushes it there's no way the South isn't going to attack some Federal property.

Ok, so they don't fire on fort Sumter, alright, I guess now the Federal government can collect tariffs on southern trade since the legality of them as a country isn't recognized, ok, so the south is effectively blockaded, now I guess federal forces can try enforcing certain laws at the border states to prevent anymore treasonous actions.

At some point this is going to lead to the south firing the first shot.

But every Day with out it gives the South another day to Get Organized. To Raise and Train it's Military.
How much difference another couple Months of Preparing would have done is debatable, But any extra time would Help.
Click to expand...
Not damn much actually, since the only really major battle: Bull Run, was a huge debacle for the union in 1861 anyway.
 

usertron2020

Donor
Thing was, with the exception of Billy Sherman, Sam Houston, and a few others, EVERYONE seemed to be in the "one big battle and it's all over" mindset. For the fire-eaters in South Carolina, it was a point of honor to be able to fire the first shot.
 

Don Lardo

Typo said:
Ok, so they don't fire on fort Sumter, alright, I guess now the Federal government can collect tariffs on southern trade since the legality of them as a country isn't recognized, ok, so the south is effectively blockaded, now I guess federal forces can try enforcing certain laws at the border states to prevent anymore treasonous actions.
Click to expand...


Sumter wasn't collecting custom dues, Sumter wasn't enforcing tariffs, Sumter wasn't stopping maritime traffic entering or leaving Charleston harbor, there was no Federal blockade at the time, firing on Sumter didn't make the Confederacy a recognized nation and four more states joined the Confederacy after Sumter surrendered.

Sumter was symbol, nothing more. Anderson had only 85 men and few stores, not enough men or material to defend the fort let alone "fight" it. South Carolina wanted Sumter because Sumter represented the Federal Government and not because it was a threat.
 

Tank Cdr

An intelligent Southern leadership should have waited for the North to start hostilities. I believe that eventually that would happen because President Lincoln was not going to allow the South to form it's own nation. If the South was able to restrain itself from being the aggressor, and the North was the one to fire the first shots, it would strengthen the Southern cause, possibly leading to foreign recognition and more Southern sympathies in the border states. Kentucky, instead of declaring neutrality, could well have swung into the Southern camp.
 

Grimm Reaper

Except that the decision on Fort Sumter will not be able to make that happen. Sooner or later the south will have to fire the first shot or their position will be gravely weakened.

For instance, a fully manned and equipped Union fortress in the middle of South Carolina's only port and largest city as Lincoln reinforces the other fortresses in the seven states while expanding the army and navy.
 

Tank Cdr

Grimm Reaper said:
Except that the decision on Fort Sumter will not be able to make that happen. Sooner or later the south will have to fire the first shot or their position will be gravely weakened.

For instance, a fully manned and equipped Union fortress in the middle of South Carolina's only port and largest city as Lincoln reinforces the other fortresses in the seven states while expanding the army and navy.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but if Fort Sumter is just sitting there, making no effort to interfere with commerce in and out of the port, it can be ignored and marginalized, at least for a while. It is possible that the fort could attempt to close the port, firing warning shots at merchant vessels would be seen as Northern aggression. Then Fort Sumter could be fired on in the pretext of protecting unarmed merchant ships from being destroyed by Northern aggression, that will be the Southern story anyway.
 

Grimm Reaper

Once fully manned it won't just sit there, it will be able to force ships entering and leaving to pay tariffs to the US government, establishing a legal claim that Charlestown remains subject to the United States.

Nor will it work to claim it is aggression for the US government to attempt to collect taxes on a port where the US is obviously still active. Meanwhile other key points, including the Florida Keys, are also quietly returning to federal control and the incidents which convinced four more states to secede have not taken place while anti-secessionist efforts are organizing...
 

Snake Featherston

Banned
So the South, having already fired on the Star of the West at this point is suddenly willing to accept a US fortress in the key port of South Carolina, the first state to secede? I can't see this working.....
 

Grimm Reaper

I should add that one part of manning the fort will be a warship or three so no shots will be fired but no ships will be able to enter/leave the harbor without persmission.
 

Tank Cdr

Grimm Reaper said:
Once fully manned it won't just sit there, it will be able to force ships entering and leaving to pay tariffs to the US government, establishing a legal claim that Charlestown remains subject to the United States.

Nor will it work to claim it is aggression for the US government to attempt to collect taxes on a port where the US is obviously still active. Meanwhile other key points, including the Florida Keys, are also quietly returning to federal control and the incidents which convinced four more states to secede have not taken place while anti-secessionist efforts are organizing...
Click to expand...

What lengths will it take to force the paying of tariffs? Will they fire warning shots if it comes to that? There are a lot of what ifs, but it would have been smart for the South to wait for at least a moderate show of aggression by the North before they fired on US property.
 

Tank Cdr

Grimm Reaper said:
I should add that one part of manning the fort will be a warship or three so no shots will be fired but no ships will be able to enter/leave the harbor without persmission.
Click to expand...

True, but a smart and patient Southern government would use this to inflame public opinion. The headlines in the papers would talk of a forcibly closed port, hundreds out of work, free commerce damaged, etc. The downside would be a demand for immediate action, that would lead to the ships and fort being fired upon. Lots of possibilities and it might come down to who wins in the court of public opinion as to who is seen as the aggressor.
 

Grimm Reaper

Federal ships block entrance/exit, collect fee before moving out of the way, no shots fired, all good.:)


How are they going to inflame public opinion with the announcement that Lincoln is not recognizing secession, is not yielding federal authority and is especially not surrendering federal property(Fort Sumter) to the CSA? If one side is collecting tariffs without firing a shot and the other starts blasting away then public opinion will have no trouble picking the aggressor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top