hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 111 3 Browse Search
Benson J. Lossing, Pictorial Field Book of the Civil War. Volume 1. 78 0 Browse Search
Brigadier-General Ellison Capers, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 5, South Carolina (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 58 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events, Diary from December 17, 1860 - April 30, 1864 (ed. Frank Moore) 54 0 Browse Search
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War. 50 0 Browse Search
James Barnes, author of David G. Farragut, Naval Actions of 1812, Yank ee Ships and Yankee Sailors, Commodore Bainbridge , The Blockaders, and other naval and historical works, The Photographic History of The Civil War: in ten volumes, Thousands of Scenes Photographed 1861-65, with Text by many Special Authorities, Volume 6: The Navy. (ed. Francis Trevelyan Miller) 49 1 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 1. (ed. Frank Moore) 40 2 Browse Search
Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Massachusetts in the Army and Navy during the war of 1861-1865, vol. 2 38 4 Browse Search
Benson J. Lossing, Pictorial Field Book of the Civil War. Volume 3. 34 0 Browse Search
Daniel Ammen, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 7.2, The Atlantic Coast (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 32 0 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government. You can also browse the collection for Charleston Harbor (South Carolina, United States) or search for Charleston Harbor (South Carolina, United States) in all documents.

Your search returned 14 results in 6 document sections:

liable to quiet seizure (if any such purpose existed), as in the beginning of the year 1861. Certainly, those within the range of my personal information are occupied, as they were at that time, only by ordnance sergeants or fort keepers. There were, however, some exceptions to this general rule—especially in the defensive works of the harbor of Charleston, the forts at Key West and the Dry Tortugas, and those protecting the entrance of Pensacola Bay. The events which occurred in Charleston harbor will be more conveniently noticed hereafter. The island forts near the extreme southern point of Florida were too isolated and too remote from population to be disturbed at that time; the situation long maintained at the mouth of Pensacola Bay affords, however, a signal illustration of the forbearance and conciliatory spirit that animated Southern counsels. For a long time Fort Pickens, on the island of Santa Rosa, at the entrance to the harbor, was occupied only by a small body of f
, the language is, defense and safety of the said State, and no longer. South Carolina in 1805, by legislative enactment, ceded to the United States, in Charleston harbor and on Beaufort River, various forts and fortifications, and sites for the erection of forts, on the following conditions, viz.: That, if the United Stats I believe, were desirous to make, and prompt to propose to the federal authorities. On the secession of South Carolina, the condition of the defenses of Charleston harbor became a subject of anxiety with all parties. Of the three forts in or at the entrance of the harbor, two were unoccupied, but the third (Fort Moultrie) waseet again in Washington about the end of the ensuing November, to examine the report and revise it for transmission to Congress. Major Anderson's duties in Charleston harbor hindered him from attending this adjourned meeting of the commission, and he wrote to me, its chairman, to explain the cause of his absence. That letter was
senger to Charleston to give notice of its purpose to use force, if opposed in its intention of supplying Fort Sumter. No more striking proof of the absence of good faith in the conduct of the Government of the United States toward the Confederacy can be required, than is contained in the circumstances which accompanied this notice. According to the usual course of navigation, the vessels composing the expedition, and designed for the relief of Fort Sumter, might be looked for in Charleston Harbor on the 9th of April. Yet our Commissioners in Washington were detained under assurances that notice should be given of any military movement. The notice was not addressed to them, but a messenger was sent to Charleston to give notice to the Governor of South Carolina, and the notice was so given at a late hour on the 8th of April, the eve of the very day on which the fleet might be expected to arrive. That this manoeuvre failed in its purpose was not the fault of those who control
al, and therefore important to us without reference to our relations with the seceded States. Not so with Moultrie, Johnson, Castle Pinckney, and Sumter, in Charleston Harbor; not so with Pulaski, on the Savannah River; not so with Morgan and other forts in Alabama; not so with those other forts that were intended to guard the entsir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, (Signed) G. T. Beauregard, Brigadier-General commanding. Major Robert Anderson, Commanding at Fort Sumter, Charleston Harbor, S. C. headquarters Fort Sumter, S. C., April 11, 1861. General: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication demanding the evacuat, very respectfully, Your obedient servant, (Signed) G. T. Beauregard, Brigadier-General commanding. Major Robert Anderson, Commanding at Fort Sumter, Charleston Harbor, S. C. headquarters Fort Sumter, S. C., 2:30 A. M., April 12, 1861. General: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your second communication of t
which could, at any time within the past sixty days, have taken possession of the forts in Charleston Harbor, but which, upon pledges given in a manner that, we can not doubt, determined to trust to y which could at any time within the past sixty days have taken possession of the forts in Charleston Harbor, but which, upon pledges given in a manner that we (you) can not doubt, determined to trus, impossible. The world knows that I have never sent any reenforcements to the forts in Charleston Harbor, and I have certainly never authorized any change to be made in their relative military ste distinct impression that you did seriously contemplate the withdrawal of the troops from Charleston Harbor. And, in support of this impression, we would add that we have the positive assurance of g your faith? What was the condition of things? For the last sixty days, you have had in Charleston Harbor not force enough to hold the forts against an equal enemy. Two of them were empty; one of
motive of every public act —vague rumors of an intention to take Fort Moultrie. But, sir, a soldier should be confronted by an overpowering force before he spikes his guns and burns his carriages. A soldier should be confronted by a public enemy before he destroys the property of the United States lest it should fall into the hands of such an enemy. Was that fort built to make war upon Carolina? Was an armament put into it for such a purpose? Or was it built for the protection of Charleston Harbor; and was it armed to make that protection effective? If so, what right had any soldier to destroy that armament lest it should fall into the hands of Carolina? Some time since I presented to the Senate resolutions which embodied my views upon this subject, drawing from the Constitution itself the data on which I based those resolutions. I then invoked the attention of the Senate in that form to the question as to whether garrisons should be kept within a State against the consent