English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

use with lots of info because it has to be 6 minutes long, thanks

2007-03-02 10:51:44 · 9 answers · asked by Hockey1626 2 in Arts & Humanities History

9 answers

Tell the true story of Fort Sumter:

On 11 February 1861 President elect Lincoln began his trip to Washington (arriving 23 February 1861) to assume the presidency.

On 4 March 1861 Lincoln entered the U.S. Senate chamber to deliver his inaugural speech. He was escorted arm-in-arm with President Buchanan. If Lincoln’s intent is taken from this speech, he offered no reason to begin a war over slavery. At the same Lincoln was committed to a union perpetual.

His cabinet included: William Seward as Secretary of State; Salmon Chase as Secretary of Treasury; Simon Cameron as Secretary of War; Gideon Wells as Secretary of the Navy; Caleb Smith as Secretary of the Interior; Edward Bates as Attorney General; and Montgomery Blair as Postmaster General.

On the morning after the inaugural festivities (5 March), Lincoln went to his office and found a report from Major Robert Anderson, written on February 28, which had reached Washington on Inauguration Day. Anderson reported that he had made an examination of his provisions and found that his supplies would be exhausted in about four to six weeks. Equally disconcerting, Anderson reported that he and his staff agreed that it would take a considerable land and naval force to relieve and reinforce the fort. He estimated it would take no less than "twenty thousand good and well-disciplined men."

Lincoln presented the information to General Winfield Scott for evaluation and received a gloomy response that evening. Scott, who had earlier advised the reinforcement of Sumter, now stated that the time had passed to save the fort. "I now see no alternative but a surrender, in some weeks," Scott argued. "Evacuation seems almost inevitable . . . if, indeed, the worn out garrison be not assaulted & carried in the present week."

Scott also mentioned the existence of "something like a truce," which he also referred to as a "truce, or informal understanding," at Fort Pickens. It had been established by the Buchanan administration following the movement of federal troops to the fort from the mainland. Reinforcements remained aboard ship with orders not to land at the fort until "an attack shall be made by the secessionists."

After consulting with selected cabinet and military officials, Lincoln convened his cabinet Saturday night (9 March) and informed them of the situation at Sumter. This was the first cabinet session to discuss the state of the country and the issue of the forts, particularly Sumter. The general effect of Lincoln's remarks was that of dismay and even consternation. "I was astonished to be informed that Fort Sumter . . . must be evacuated," Attorney General Edward Bates noted in his diary, "and that General Scott . . . and Major Anderson concur in opinion, that, as the place has but 28 days provision, it must be relieved, if at all, in that time; and that it will take a force of 20,000 men at least, and a bloody battle, to relieve it!"

On this same date General P.G.T. Beauregard received orders from Montgomery to prevent the reinforcement of Fort Sumter "at all hazards" by the "use of every conceivable agency." He was informed that Sumter was "silent now only because of the weakness of the garrison. Should re-enforcements get in, her guns would open fire upon you."

During the two days of 11 & 12 March, Lincoln received discordant advice about the situation at Sumter.

General Scott sent two replies in response to Lincoln's inquiries. Scott considered the relief of Sumter unfeasible; it would take up to eight months to authorize and prepare an expedition sufficiently large to relieve the fort. As a military question, the time for assisting Sumter had passed nearly a month before. "Since then a surrender under assault or from starvation has been merely a question of time." He recommended that Anderson be instructed "to evacuate" the fort.

But Lincoln also received contrary advice. On either March 11 or March 12, Francis P. Blair, father of Lincoln's postmaster general, Montgomery Blair, was so disturbed by reports that Sumter would be surrendered, that he went to see the President. Blair heatedly contended that the surrender of Sumter was "virtually a surrender of the Union," and, unless done under absolute military necessity, constituted treason. Those fortifications presently in the government's possession were necessary to protect all states against foreign invasion, and so long as they were not used to attack a southern state, the border slave states would accept continued federal occupation.

Faced with the shocking news from Major Anderson and the conflicting recommendations about what to do, Lincoln took the following steps:

On March 11, he issued General Scott a broad reminder to "exercise all possible vigilance for the maintenance of all the places within the military departments of the United States." He specifically directed Scott to reinforce Fort Pickens (Florida), the more accessible of the two forts.

The following day, March 12, Scott dispatched orders to Captain Israel Vogdes, commander of the army's troops aboard a ship lying off Fort Pickens, to "re-enforce Fort Pickens" and to hold the fort. The message was taken a board the steamer Crusader, which left New York for the Gulf of Mexico on March 15. In taking this action, Lincoln was, in effect, terminating the truce that the Buchanan administration had arranged with Florida.

With many advisers, particularly General Scott, declaring that the relief of Sumter was militarily unfeasible, advocates of Sumter relief sought to persuade Lincoln otherwise. In response to a telegram from his brother-in-law, Postmaster General Montgomery Blair, Gustavus Vasa Fox arrived in Washington and met with Lincoln on March 13. He presented Lincoln with a plan that he had unsuccessfully urged on General Scott during the last weeks of the Buchanan administration. Naval authorities considered Fox's plan militarily feasible.

Fox's plan called for a combination of warships, transports, and tugboats to run reinforcements and supplies into the fort. He proposed to put about three hundred troops aboard a large steamer, which would be convoyed by warships. Along with Fort Sumter's guns, these warships would, if necessary, subdue Confederate resistance. The troops would be run into the fort at night, using either the tugboats or small boats brought along for that purpose.

On 14 March Lincoln convened his cabinet twice on this day to consider Fox's plan. The first cabinet session was from 10 a.m. until 1 p.m., and the second session ran from 4 p.m. until 7 p.m.

Fox presented evidence both from military experiments and wartime experience of the difficulty for land batteries to hit objects, such as ships, moving rapidly at right angles to their line of fire, especially at night. Army experts, however, contended that the expedition would be destroyed. Sometime during these deliberations, Fox offered to visit Charleston Harbor to pursue his case for sending in supplies.

No decision was made at these sessions about Fox's relief plan.

Fox's plan, though highly controversial, offered at least a possibility of a successful military operation to relieve Fort Sumter. But Lincoln knew there was another, perhaps more important, question to consider. Even if feasible, would it be wise to undertake such an expedition? What would the political consequences be?

On March 15, Lincoln sought his cabinet's advice on this problem. He asked them to write a response to the following question: "Assuming it to be possible to now provision Fort Sumter, under all the circumstances is it wise to attempt it?"

On 19 March acting on Gustavus V. Fox's suggestion, Lincoln ordered Fox to Charleston to assess Anderson's situation, and well as the mood and intentions of the South.

Fox left on the same day, March 19, and passing through Richmond and Wilmington, reached Charleston two days later, on March 21. He was introduced to Governor Francis W. Pickens of South Carolina and General Beauregard, and after some delay, was permitted to go to Fort Sumter. He reached the fort that evening, "after dark and remained about two hours," discussing the situation with Major Anderson. He hinted at, but did not explicitly describe to Anderson, his plan to reinforce the fort.

21 March, in addition to Fox, Lincoln dispatched two personal, Illinois friends to assess the situation in Charleston, Stephen A. Hurlbut and Ward H. Lamon.

Hurlbut had family and prominent friends in Charleston. He traveled as a private citizen and stayed with his sister for two days before returning to Washington. Lamon formally came as a government agent to examine some post office matters. With his official status, imposing physical dimensions, and gregariousness, he drew more attention than Hurlbut. During his two day stay, Lamon was granted a formal audience with Governor Pickens and was permitted to visit Major Anderson at Fort Sumter. Lamon conveyed to both Governor Pickens and Anderson the impression that Sumter would be evacuated shortly.

On 25 March, having returned to Washington, Fox reported his assessment of Sumter's condition to Lincoln. He affirmed the feasibility of his plan, noting that at night it would be impossible to see small landing boats before they reached the fort. He confirmed that Anderson's troops were getting short of provisions, and set April 15 noon as the deadline for resupplying them.
Over the next few days, Fox met "frequently" with Lincoln, cabinet members, and military authorities. He answered the objections of army officers like Scott, who considered a relief expedition impracticable, and presented testimony from high ranking navy officers that supported his case. During one of these discussions, Fox cautioned that valuable time was being lost and that he "ought to be allowed to take the preparatory steps if there was any possibility of sending it out."
Meanwhile news of Fox's report became public.











********* 866


On 8 April 1861 President Lincoln notified Governor Pickens of South Carolina that he was resolved to provision Fort Sumter at all costs. General Beauregard telegraph the Confederate Secretary of War for instructions and was told (9 April) to compel evacuation of Fort Sumter without delay. Beauregard sent to of his staff to Major Anderson to demand surrender, he refused and further informed that provisions were so low that they could not hold out much longer. Beauregard notified Anderson that if he would name a day of surrender and not use his guns on the confederates, unless attacked, Beauregard would not attack him. Anderson named 15 April unless he should receive supplies or orders from Washington. Beauregard could not accept such conditions because he knew that a fleet with provisions and re-enforcements was then off the harbor. Beauregard told Anderson that he would open fire within the hour (12 April 1861 4:30 A.M.).

2007-03-02 14:19:28 · answer #1 · answered by Randy 7 · 1 0

The weapons have been in basic terms before the protecting tactics, and is the reason the super casualties. The South had very few forges and foundries, and little or no iron. The North had all the materials it mandatory and the wealth to borrow money for an exceedingly high priced conflict. because of the fact the cotton industry collapsed, the South had very nearly not something to look after its distant places money. besides the South became unfavorable at providing footware for squaddies, a severe fault. the two facets have been given imaginative with weapons. the two facets invented vessels that have been regularly sub-floor - the video exhibit and the Merrimac. The Gatling Gun became additionally invented. Oddly, it would have been an uncomplicated rely to fabricate repeating rifles, as repeating revolvers already existed. which may be an outstanding subject rely.

2016-10-17 03:26:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

You could describe one battle, such as the Battle of Gettysburg or the Battle of Vicksburg. You can probably find whole books on both of them.

You could discuss areas of the South that remained loyal to the Union, and why they did so. The western part of the State of Virginia actually became a new state (West Virginia), while eastern Kentucky and eastern Tennessee had many Union sympathizers. (In fact, President Andrew Johnson was from eastern Tennessee). Why did so many of these people oppose seccesion? (Hint: they are all mountainous regions, and none of them are suitbale for growing cotton).

You could discuss foreign policy of the United States during the Civil War. Great Britian and France had especially good relations with the Confederacy, but how was the U.S.-Mexico relationship (which was fighting its own civil war, best remembered for the Battle of Puebla on May 5, 1862--Cinco de Mayo). Lincoln had such a good relationship with Sian (Thailand) that the king gave him a sacred white elephant. (This topic may be too difficult for a high school kid.)

Anti-war sentiment in the U.S., as for example in the Irish riots depicted in the movie "Gangs of New York."

Non-war related domestic policy: Lincoln's making Thanksgiving a national holiday; land-grant universities, new states, westward expansion, Homestead Act.

The Emancipation Proclamation--why did Lincoln issue it, and what were its effects? (It went into effect on January 1, 1863. Did it help bring the war to an end, or was it meaningless?)

Why did slave states in the North (Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware) remain loyal to the Union?

You might be interested in Jesse James, who was the last person injured in the war and who became an outlaw when he resisted arrest by Union soldiers.

2007-03-02 11:10:57 · answer #3 · answered by dirty t 3 · 1 0

Here is something much more meaniful and easier to speak 6 minutes on: I know you will not believe this but there has all ready been a holocaust in this country (I mean other then what we did to the native Americans) take a look at Johnson s Island (northern Ohio); Camp Douglas (Chicago); and Elmira (New York).

The official U.S. position on the treatment of Confederate prisoners of war during The War for Southern Independence would shock many modern Americans. The data, facts and statistics have been thoroughly eliminated from American history books. One must research the original documents to discover the horrible truth.

During the Civil War (1861-1865), the U.S. House of Representatives passed the following resolution: "Rebel prisoners in our hands are to be subjected to a treatment finding its parallels only in the conduct of savage tribes and resulting in the death of multitudes by the slow but designed process of starvation and by mortal diseases occasioned by insufficient and unhealthy food and wanton exposure of their persons."

One Yankee prison commander boasted that he had killed more Confederate soldiers than any Union officer on the front battle lines.

The story of Confederate prison camps, especially Andersonville, has been misrepresented. There was no deliberate attempt to mistreat northern POWs. The South asked the North to send doctors and medicine, and they tried to exchange the prisoners.

The North refused and finally the Confederacy offered the North cotton and gold as payment to take them without exchange. Again, the North refused to do so. They knew the Confederate States of America would be honor bound to try to feed and house the Union POWs and to do so would hamper the Confederate war effort.

God Bless You and Our Southern People.

2007-03-02 11:12:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Check out wikipedia
Fort Sumter, S.C. President Davis and Pres. Lincoln
John Brown The Seccesion of the States
The Ships
Good luck

2007-03-02 11:18:07 · answer #5 · answered by LaLa 2 · 0 0

What ever you do dont say the Civil War was about freeing the slaves.

The CW had nothing to do with freeing slaves, thats the feel good reason.

The truth is it was about states being able to make their own self determinating decisions without interference for the Federall Government.

Thinnk about it , do you believe the New York irish regiments actually believed in freeing slaves?

How many southern farmboys owned or believed in slavery? very few if any.

And if it was about freeing slaves and making the blacjk man equal as Lincoln claimed , did it take nearly 100 years later before blacks and whites could sit in the same part of a bus, go to select university or register to vote.

2007-03-02 11:38:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Pick one officer, one battle, or one state to examine closely.
Lo Armistead would be good, so would Tecumseh Sherman. Or about Sherman presenting Savannah to Lincoln as a Christmas gift. Gettysburg has lots of info, but I think is the one everybody picks. You could look at a border state like Maryland, or the campaign in the west. So much of the stuff along the coast is covered, but there was fighting in the western areas, too. South Carolina would be a good state to look at. Hope it helps...

2007-03-02 11:40:57 · answer #7 · answered by steddy voter 6 · 1 0

talk about the Iron Brigade consisting of the 2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry along with the 19th Indiana and the 24th Michigan.

2007-03-03 00:59:09 · answer #8 · answered by Marvin R 7 · 1 0

concentrate on a specific battle, antietam in example, the bloodiest day in american history, 55K ish killed wounded or missing. check wikipedia youll find plenty of info there or search antietam national battle field for the government site

2007-03-02 10:58:27 · answer #9 · answered by cav 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers