Tweet
Last night at the Milwaukee Civil War Round table meeting, the guest speaker, Professor William W. Freehling, author of several books on the Secession Movements of the South, gave a fascinating talk on what actually transpired to bring Secession, and the resulting Civil War. He used the phrase, " chance. a Statesman arguments, and political timing" as present, and essential to South Carolina's leaving the Union and her hope the other States would follow.
He explained that in December of 1860 the Savannah and Charleston Railroad, started back in 1854 was finally completed, and that a party was scheduled in Charleston to celebrate on December 9th-- that this party had nothing to do with the Secession Crisis. That Francis Bartow, a Georgian, spoke at the gathering, the same day that a Convention was being held in Charleston to discuss Secession, and said Georgia must support its new neighbor if she went out. So it was printed in the papers that Secession has the support of some big deal politicians in Georgia, That was the Chance a big party over the completion of a railroad held the same time as the Secession Crowd was meeting in Charleston,
That President Buchanan wanted to send a supply ship to Fort Sumter, and it was reported back to the South Carolinians that Buchanan was sending a "military force" to reoccupy the Forts. This went out to all the Southern States and so they began to occupy themselves all the Federal Forts and Arsenals in their respective States in anticipation of Buchanan reinforcing Federal property. Buchanan never sent the supply ships or sent reinforcements. He gave it some lip service, but direct action on the Southerners part was taken, not by Buchanan. This was the "Statesman's arguments". a reaction to a possible movement of troops South-- that helped lead to Secession.
South Carolina had to act fast in bringing in the other Southern States before a Southern Union Convention was scheduled to meet to support a vote of "no-secession", by popular vote. Freehling says from his research over 1/3 of the Southern population were against Secession, and 2/3 in 1860 were on the fence. South Carolina moved on December 12, to Secede from the Union, made the argument that the Federals were about to use force to reoccupy all Federal installations in the South, and bring Armies and War on the Southerners. That Lincoln was not fit to be President, that Georgia was on their side, and that we had to support "our Boys" who now occupied those Federal buildings if attacked.-- This was a strong argument, a political steamroller, an us or them situation !! This was the "political timing" segment. South Carolina had to get the ball rolling before the Peace Convention could meet, and they did.
This is a general overview of the Professor's talk. There was more-- It was interesting he never mentioned slavery that night, and he argued that the election of Lincoln was not the "great issue" as to whether Lincoln would abolish slavery in the country-- when Lincoln stated he would never do that if elected. They understood the South could lose their slaves if they started a Civil War and lost-- and Lincoln could be dealt with politically and without force of arms in coming years.. Basically it was not Lincoln's election, it was the Southern fire-eaters who had secession on their minds going back to 1832 and the Nullification Crisis. They had enough and wanted out!! period!!
It was a great evening for me.. With the 150th coming up-- the Secession movement is a vital part in understanding the Civil War and our American history as it was. I would suggest those with an interest read Professor Freehling's books.
CSuniforms
Tom Arliskas
He explained that in December of 1860 the Savannah and Charleston Railroad, started back in 1854 was finally completed, and that a party was scheduled in Charleston to celebrate on December 9th-- that this party had nothing to do with the Secession Crisis. That Francis Bartow, a Georgian, spoke at the gathering, the same day that a Convention was being held in Charleston to discuss Secession, and said Georgia must support its new neighbor if she went out. So it was printed in the papers that Secession has the support of some big deal politicians in Georgia, That was the Chance a big party over the completion of a railroad held the same time as the Secession Crowd was meeting in Charleston,
That President Buchanan wanted to send a supply ship to Fort Sumter, and it was reported back to the South Carolinians that Buchanan was sending a "military force" to reoccupy the Forts. This went out to all the Southern States and so they began to occupy themselves all the Federal Forts and Arsenals in their respective States in anticipation of Buchanan reinforcing Federal property. Buchanan never sent the supply ships or sent reinforcements. He gave it some lip service, but direct action on the Southerners part was taken, not by Buchanan. This was the "Statesman's arguments". a reaction to a possible movement of troops South-- that helped lead to Secession.
South Carolina had to act fast in bringing in the other Southern States before a Southern Union Convention was scheduled to meet to support a vote of "no-secession", by popular vote. Freehling says from his research over 1/3 of the Southern population were against Secession, and 2/3 in 1860 were on the fence. South Carolina moved on December 12, to Secede from the Union, made the argument that the Federals were about to use force to reoccupy all Federal installations in the South, and bring Armies and War on the Southerners. That Lincoln was not fit to be President, that Georgia was on their side, and that we had to support "our Boys" who now occupied those Federal buildings if attacked.-- This was a strong argument, a political steamroller, an us or them situation !! This was the "political timing" segment. South Carolina had to get the ball rolling before the Peace Convention could meet, and they did.
This is a general overview of the Professor's talk. There was more-- It was interesting he never mentioned slavery that night, and he argued that the election of Lincoln was not the "great issue" as to whether Lincoln would abolish slavery in the country-- when Lincoln stated he would never do that if elected. They understood the South could lose their slaves if they started a Civil War and lost-- and Lincoln could be dealt with politically and without force of arms in coming years.. Basically it was not Lincoln's election, it was the Southern fire-eaters who had secession on their minds going back to 1832 and the Nullification Crisis. They had enough and wanted out!! period!!
It was a great evening for me.. With the 150th coming up-- the Secession movement is a vital part in understanding the Civil War and our American history as it was. I would suggest those with an interest read Professor Freehling's books.
CSuniforms
Tom Arliskas
Comment