at a cost of about seven million dollars, and armed with over thirteen hundred guns, were thus in possession of the secessionists. All had been occupied without resistance, as, with the exception of those still retained by the government, the only force was a fort-keeper or a few workmen; it was but necessary to walk in and the place was theirs.' Very few of the forts seized were, even if garrisoned, in a condition for any defence against attack by men-of-war; Pulaski, at Savannah, had but half its armament; and Clinch, Cumberland Sound, Florida, was in no condition even for occupancy. Ship Island, designed for one of the most important defences of the South, had no guns, and was not yet in readiness for any. General Beauregard reported, February 13, to the military board of Louisiana that forts Jackson and St. Philip, the passage of which was later to make Farragut famous, could be passed by any steamer in broad daylight." Seven arsenals had been seized, with over two hundred thousand muskets, many of the highest standard, and with a large quantity of heavy ordnance. The value of the property at the ordnance depot at San Antonio, Texas, alone, was twelve hundred thousand dollars.

The situation in this last state was one of special aggravation. The department of Texas had been

For list, condition, etc., see War Records, Serial No. 122, pp. 47-51; also House Reports, 36 Cong., 2 Sess., No. 85. 2 War Records, Serial No. 1, p. 501.

placed in command of General Twiggs only in November, 1860. He asked almost immediately after his arrival what was to be done with the army property in case of the secession of Texas. "My course," he said, "as respects myself will be to remain at my post and protect this frontier as long as I can, and then, when turned adrift, make my way home, if I have one." The inquiry in this letter (of December 13) was repeated two weeks later. An answer to his first, from General Scott, had gone the same day the second was written. It contained no advice, but left everything in Twiggs's hands, “in full confidence" of his discretion and patriotism. January 15 he asked to be relieved, as he must follow his native state, Georgia. The war department now proceeded to act, and on January 28, Holt now being secretary, orders were despatched relieving Twiggs and placing Colonel Waite in command. But the order was too late. February 9, Twiggs, at San Antonio, ordered a commission of three officers "to meet the commissioners on behalf of the Convention of the People of Texas, to transact such business as relates to the disposition of the public property upon the demand of the State of Texas." Formal sessions were held to discuss the questions involved, until February 16, when the invasion of San Antonio by armed bodies of Texans, who seized the property of the United States, made such further action useless, and the record of these extraordinary proceedings to that

date were submitted to the commanding general. The next day the convention committee made a formal demand for the surrender of all posts and property, to which Twiggs acceded, provided that the troops should retain their arms, clothing, subsistence, etc., and such means of transportation as might "be necessary for an efficient and orderly movement of the troops from Texas, prepared for attack or defense against aggression from any source," which was accepted. The result was one of the few displays of energy made by this unhappy administration. Twiggs was dismissed, by order of March 1, "for his treachery to the flag of his country." But the fault was primarily with the administration itself; Twiggs's pleas for instructions had passed unheeded. He had under his command a force of 2479 officers and men, which, if concentrated, could probably have held the whole state. Scattered as they were over a vast extent, the individual posts were powerless. This General Scott, as well as every officer in the war department, knew, but no step was taken, not an intimation given as to action. (The supineness, the folly, shown go far to support the theory of the necessity of an occasional war to revamp the human mind and character.

1 War Records, Serial No. 1, pp. 503-514.

• Ibid.,

597.

CHAPTER XVII

LINCOLN'S ATTITUDE

(DECEMBER, 1860-FEBRUARY, 1861)

INCOLN, after his election, remained at home in such quiet as the anxiety of friends regarding his own course would allow. No period of this wonderful man's career exhibits more complete greatness than that of this trying four months' waiting to take up the burden which day by day was being made heavier by those who, under a more reasonable system, should have surrendered their authority as soon as possible into the hands now made responsible for the government of the country.

Lincoln clearly defined his course in a letter of December 21, 1860, which is of the utmost importance as showing his mind to have been long made up, and that any apparent want of decision later was due to the influence of his cabinet. Thanking Washburn for an account of an interview with General Scott, he says: "Please present my respects to the general, and tell him, confidentially, I shall be obliged to him to be as well prepared as he can to either hold or retake the forts, as the case may

2

"1

require, at and after the inauguration. December 17 he wrote Thurlow Weed, whose paper, the Albany Evening Journal, had strongly leaned to compromise, of the character of that brought forward by Crittenden: "My opinion is that no State can in any way lawfully get out of the Union without the consent of the others; and that it is the duty of the President and other government functionaries to run the machine as it is." He steadily resisted any compromise in Congress, and equally and against very strong pressure refused to make any special announcement of his views, holding, in his own words: "I could say nothing which I have not already said, and which is in print, and accessible to the public.... If I thought a repetition would do any good, I would make it. But in my judgment it would do positive harm. The secessionists per se, believing they had alarmed me, would clamor all the louder." s

In nothing does Lincoln appear to better advantage than in an admirable, frank, and wise letter to Gilmer, of North Carolina, in response to a similar request, December 15, 1860: he disclaimed any thought of recommending the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, or the slavetrade among the slave states; he had never in his life thought of the question of the employment of slaves in arsenals and dock-yards; as to patronage

'Lincoln, Works (ed. of 1894), I., 660.

Ibid.

Lincoln to Paschal, in ibid., 655.