|
The
Buchanan Administration sent a force of about 250 men and supplies to
reinforce Maj. Anderson at Fort Sumter. The original plan had
been to use the U.S.S. Brooklyn,
a steam powered sloop-of-war, but it was thought that using a warship
would make it hard to keep the mission secret, thus a private steamer,
the Star of the West was
used. In the event, this did not help keep the voyage secret, as
at least two future Confederate figures (Senator Louis T. Wigfall of
Texas, and former Secretary
of the Interior---in the Buchanan Administration---Jacob Thompson) sent
telegrams to Gov. Pickens warning of the ship's purpose. She was
fired upon as soon as she attempted to enter the harbor, and quickly
turned about. The message informing Maj. Anderson of the purpose
of the ship's voyage had not yet arrived, so he did fire any of Fort
Sumter's guns in support of the Star of the West.
The correspondence here is how Maj. Anderson reported the incident to
the War Department, including the two rather tense notes that he and
Gov. Pickens exchanged.
|
|
No. 17.] FORT SUMTER,
S.C., January 9, 1861. Col. S. COOPER, Adjutant General: COLONEL: I have the honor to send herewith the
correspondence which took place to-day between the governor of South Carolina
and myself in relation to the firing by his batteries on a vessel bearing our
flag. Lieutenant Talbot, whose health is very much impaired, will be the bearer
of these dispatches, and he will be enabled to give you full information in
reference to this and to all other matters. I am, colonel, your obedient servant, ROBERT
ANDERSON, Major, First
Artillery, Commanding.
----- [Inclosures.]
FORT SUMTER, S.C.,
January 9, 1861. To his Excellency the GOVERNOR OF SOUTH CAROLINA: SIR: Two of your batteries fired this morning upon an
unarmed vessel bearing the flag of my Government. As I have not been notified
that war has been declared by South Carolina against the Government of the
United States, I cannot but think that this hostile act was committed without
your sanction or authority. Under that hope, and that alone, did I refrain from
opening fire upon your batteries. I have the honor, therefore, respectfully to
ask whether the above mentioned act--one, I believe, without a parallel in the
history of our country or of any other civilized government--was committed in
obedience to your instructions, and to notify you, if it be not disclaimed,
that I must regard it as an act of war, and that I shall not, after a
reasonable time for the return of my messenger, permit any vessels to pass
within range of the guns of my fort. In order to save, as far as in my power,
the shedding of blood, I beg that you will have due notification of this my
decision given to all concerned. Hoping, however, that your answer may be such
as will justify a further continuance of forbearance upon my part, I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient
servant, ROBERT
ANDERSON, Major, First
Artillery, Commanding.
STATE OF SOUTH
CAROLINA, EXECUTIVE OFFICE, Maj. ROBERT ANDERSON, SIR: Your letter has been received. In it you make
certain statements which very plainly show that you have not been fully
informed by your Government of the precise relations which now exist between it
and the State of South Carolina. Official information has been communicated to
the Government of the United States that the political connection heretofore
existing between the State of South Carolina and the States which were known as
the United States had ceased, and that the State of South Carolina had resumed
all the power it had delegated to the United States under the compact known as
the Constitution of the United States. The right which the State of South
Carolina possessed to change the political relations which it held with other
States under the Constitution of the United States has been solemnly asserted
by the people of this State in convention, and now does not admit of
discussion. In anticipation of the ordinance of secession, of which the
President of the United States has received official notification, it was
understood by him that sending any re-enforcement of the troops of the United
States in the harbor of Charleston would be regarded by the constituted
authorities of the State of South Carolina as an act of hostility, and at the
same time it was understood by him that any change in the occupation of the
forts in the harbor of Charleston would in like manner be regarded as an act of
hostility. Either or both of these events, occurring during the period in which
the State of South Carolina constituted a part of the United States, was
then distinctly notified to the President of the United States as an act or
acts of hostility; because either or both would be regarded, and could only be
intended, to dispute the right of the State of South Carolina to that political
independence which she has always asserted and will always retain. Whatever
would have been, during the continuance of this State as a member of the United
States, an act of hostility, became much more so when the State of South
Carolina had dissolved the connection with the Government of the United States.
After the secession of the State of South Carolina, Fort Sumter continued in
the possession of the troops of the United States. How that fort is at this
time in the possession of the troops of the United States, it is not now
necessary to discuss. It will suffice to say that the occupancy of that fort
has been regarded by the State of South Carolina as the first act of positive
hostility committed by the troops of the United States within the limits of this
State, and was in this light regarded as so unequivocal that it occasioned the
termination of the negotiations then pending at Washington between the
Commissioners of the State of South Carolina and the President of the United
States. The attempt to re-enforce the troops now at Fort Sumter, or to retake
and resume possession of the forts within the waters of this State, which you
abandoned, after spiking the guns placed there, and doing otherwise much
damage, cannot be regarded by the authorities of the State as indicative of any
other purpose than the coercion of the State by the armed force of the
Government. To repel such an attempt is too plainly its duty to allow it to be
discussed. But while defending its waters, the authorities of the State have been
careful so to conduct the affairs of the State that no act, however necessary
for its defense, should lead to an useless waste of life. Special agents,
therefore, have been off the bar to warn all approaching vessels, if armed or
unarmed, and having troops to re-enforce <ar1_136> the forts on board,
not to enter the harbor of Charleston, and special orders have been given to
the commanders of all forts and batteries not to fire at such vessels until a
shot fired across their bows would warn them of the prohibition of the State. Under
these circumstances, the Star of the West, it is understood, this morning
attempted to enter this harbor, with troops on board, and having been notified
that she could not enter, was fired into. The act is perfectly justified by me.
In regard to your threat in regard to vessels in the harbor, it is only
necessary to say that you must judge of your own responsibilities. Your
position in this harbor has been tolerated by the authorities of the State, and
while the act of which you complain is in perfect consistency with the rights
and duties of the State, it is not perceived how far the conduct which you
propose to adopt can find a parallel in the history of any country, or be
reconciled with any other purpose of your Government than that of imposing upon
this State the condition of a conquered province. F. W. PICKENS. |
Back to Civil War Chronologies (Main page) Back to Chronology of the Fort Sumter Crisis Source: Official Records, Vol. 1, pp. 134--36. Date added to website: January 10, 2025. |