Confederate South Carolina

True Stories of Civilians, Soldiers and the War

Karen Stokes

• Publisher: The History Press
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9781626198203
• eBook ISBN: 9781625853974
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Military & Maritime History
• Index: History

The Civil War never left South Carolina, from its beginning at Fort Sumter in 1861 through the destructive, harrowing days of Sherman's march through the state in 1865. Included here are the stories of Confederate civilians and soldiers who remained true to their cause throughout the perilous struggle. An English aristocrat risked his life to run the blockade and become one of the defenders of Charleston. The Haskells of Abbeville sent seven sons into Confederate service. Many South Carolina women made heart-rending sacrifices, including a disabled woman from Laurens County whose heroic efforts preserved Mount Vernon, the home of George Washington, from wartime ravages. Author Karen Stokes details the lives of men and women whose destinies intertwined with a tragic era in Palmetto State history.

Chapter 1

PRELUDE TO WAR: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED AT FORT SUMTER

Fort Sumter, located in the harbor of Charleston, South Carolina, is known as the place where the American “Civil War” began. The South is usually portrayed as the aggressor—that is, the side that fired the “first shot”—and is thus given the blame for starting the war. The whole truth is, however, that over a period of several months, the governments of South Carolina and the Confederate States of America made repeated efforts to settle the problem of Fort Sumter peacefully before any shots were fired. Though they knew that secession might bring on a conflict and made defensive preparations, the Southern leaders desired a peaceful separation from the union, not one bought with blood.

THE SECESSION CRISIS

In December 1860, South Carolina seceded from the United States and declared its independence. The Secession Convention, composed of delegates from throughout the state, assembled first in Columbia and then moved to Charleston because of a reported outbreak of smallpox in the capital city. In his book The Genesis of the Civil War, Samuel W. Crawford, a United States Army officer stationed in Charleston in 1860 (and later a Union general), described the excitement of the people of Charleston in contrast to the more sober nature of the convention itself:

This lithograph by Currier & Ives is titled Fort Sumter, Charleston Harbor, S.C. Library of Congress.

There was a feverish anxiety to know that the secession of the State was really accomplished, and as the hour of noon approached, crowds of people streamed along the avenues towards St. Andrew’s Hall and filled the approaches. A stranger passing from the excited throng outside into the hall of the Convention would be struck with the contrast…Quietly the Convention had met, and had been opened with prayer to God. There was no excitement. There was no visible sign that South Carolina was about to take a step more momentous for weal or woe than had yet been known in her history…The Convention moved in procession to Institute Hall, amid the crowds of citizens that thronged the streets, cheering loudly as it passed…The Hall was densely crowded…The President [of the convention] then announced that “the Ordinance of Secession has been signed and ratified, and I proclaim the State of South Carolina,” said he, “an independent Commonwealth.”¹

The long, complex history of conflict between the North and the South reached a fever pitch in 1860, and the documents produced by committees of the Secession Convention presented a number of South Carolina’s grievances. The Address of the People of South Carolina compared the position of the South to that of the American colonists in 1776, stating:

The one great evil, from which all other evils have flowed, is the overthrow of the Constitution of the United States. The Government of the United States is no longer a Government of Confederated Republics…it is no longer a free Government, but a despotism. It is, in fact, such a Government as Great Britain attempted to set over our fathers; and which was resisted and defeated by a seven years’ struggle for independence…The Southern States now stand exactly in the same position towards the Northern States that the Colonies did towards Great Britain. The Northern States, having the majority in Congress, claim the same power of omnipotence in legislation as the British Parliament…and the people of the Southern States are compelled to meet the very despotism their fathers threw off in the Revolution of 1776…

They [the Southern states] are a minority in Congress. Their representation in Congress is useless to protect them against unjust taxation…For the last forty years, the taxes laid by the Congress of the United States have been laid out with a view of subserving the interests of the North…to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the production of their mines and manufactures…The people of the Southern States are not only taxed for the benefit of the Northern States, but after the taxes are collected, three-fourths of them are expended at the North…

No man can, for a moment, believe that our ancestors intended to establish over their posterity, exactly the same sort of Government they had overthrown…It cannot be believed, that our ancestors would have assented to any union whatever with the people of the North, if the feelings and opinions now existing amongst them, had existed when the Constitution was framed. There was then no tariff…African slavery existed in all the States but one. The idea that the Southern States would be made to pay tribute to their northern confederates which they had refused to pay to Great Britain; or that the institution of African slavery would be made the grand basis of a sectional organization of the North to rule the South, never crossed the imagination of our ancestors.

South Carolina, acting in her sovereign capacity, now thinks proper to secede from the Union…The right to do so is denied by her Northern confederates. They desire to establish a sectional despotism, not only omnipotent in Congress, but omnipotent over the States; and as if to manifest the imperious necessity of our secession, they threaten us with the sword, to coerce submission to their rule…²

The address further complained that “the Government of the United States has become consolidated, with a claim of limitless powers in its operations.”³

The convention also produced a document titled the Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union. Citing “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery,” the declaration defended states’ rights, including the right of secession, and decried the existence of abolition societies in the North, which “sent emissaries, books and pictures” into the South to incite the slaves to violence against their owners.⁴ The document also contended that the Northern states were not abiding by the Constitution or federal legislation regarding slaves by resisting the enforcement of the fugitive slave laws. The U.S. Constitution was viewed as a contractual agreement, or compact, that could be rendered null and void if any of the parties (i.e., the states) did not abide by their obligations. The declaration stated that “the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.”⁵

Though many Northerners derided and even persecuted the proponents of abolitionism, especially in the earlier years of the movement, their influence increased, and in the 1850s, a series of events and publications further exacerbated sectional tensions, among them Harriet Beecher Stowe’s book Uncle Tom’s Cabin, published in 1852, and John Brown’s raid at Harpers Ferry arsenal in Virginia in 1859. Brown planned to capture weapons at the armory and to lead an armed slave rebellion, and it was soon revealed that his raid had been funded by six prominent abolitionists in the North. All this made some Southerners anxious about their safety in the Union. In his book Crisis of Fear, historian Stephen Channing argued that fears and suspicions regarding Northern intentions after the raid contributed to the secessionist movement. Southerners were also shocked and angered that many Northerners admired John Brown and praised him as a martyr after his execution.⁶

Another cause for concern in the South was the formation of the Wide Awakes, a paramilitary organization of young men that formed in the North in the late 1850s and became closely affiliated with the Republican Party and the presidential election of 1860. The Wide Awakes wore uniforms, marched in the streets of Northern cities with torches and drilled as if preparing for military action. In September 1860, the Richmond Enquirer newspaper reported, “[T]he ‘Wide Awakes’ have their authority for believing that in the event of secession of Alabama or South Carolina it will be not only a pretext but a duty to march into Southern territory.”⁷ Historian Jon Grinspan noted that their militarism “sent an ominous message to those already apprehensive about the Republican party’s antisouthern attitudes.”⁸ Southerners began to organize “Minute Men” militia as a “direct response to the Wide Awakes.”⁹ In a sermon preached at Saint Peter’s Episcopal Church in Charleston on November 25, 1860, Reverend William O. Prentiss mentioned the threat of the “Wide Awake organizations” of the North.¹⁰ They were also brought up by delegate Edward McCrady during the Secession Convention in Charleston and might have been a factor on the minds of the delegates who authored The Address of the People of South Carolina, which asserted of the Northern states: “[T]hey threaten us with the sword, to coerce submission to their rule.”¹¹

This illustration from an 1860 Harper’s Weekly depicts a “Grand Procession of Wide-Awakes” in New York. Library of Congress.

The Republican Party platform of 1860 did not call for the abolition of slavery—in fact, it explicitly affirmed that any state had the right to maintain that institution—but it did oppose the expansion of slavery into the U.S. territories, a prohibition that the Southern states saw as an unconstitutional attack on their equality in the Union and an effort to diminish their political power. The Republican Party platform also called for changes in the tariff laws and for internal improvements. The promise of a protectionist tariff was a factor in the 1860 election and likely helped the Republicans secure crucial electoral votes that would win them the presidency in November.¹²

FORT SUMTER AND THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR

After the election of Abraham Lincoln, the candidate of a political party viewed by Southerners as purely sectional and concerned mainly with promoting the interests of the North, South Carolina proclaimed its independence on December 20, 1860. Less than a week later, Major Robert Anderson, the officer in command of the United States garrison at Fort Moultrie on Sullivan’s Island, decided to move his men a short distance to Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor. In the secrecy of night, the garrison spiked the cannons of Fort Moultrie, set the gun carriages on fire and took boats to the other fort. At about the same time, representatives from South Carolina arrived in Washington, D.C., commissioned to seek the removal of Major Anderson’s garrison, to negotiate for a peaceful settlement of questions of Federal property within their state and to offer to pay South Carolina’s share of the national public debt. News of the unexpected occupation of Fort Sumter, however, changed everything, and their mission was terminated.

Prior to this turn of events, in early December 1860, a delegation of congressmen from South Carolina (anticipating secession) had communicated with the president of the United States, James Buchanan, and assured him that there would be no attempt to take possession of the U.S. forts in South Carolina as long as the Federal government did not try to reinforce them and as long as no change was made in the status of the forts. They understood Buchanan to be in agreement with them on this, and consequently the South Carolina government was shocked by Major Anderson’s move (which Buchanan said he had not authorized).

Just after occupying Fort Sumter, Major Anderson met with two militia officers sent by the governor of South Carolina and told them he was unaware of any agreement between President Buchanan and the South Carolina government concerning the status of the forts. Anderson said he had feared that an armed steamship patrolling the harbor would land men for an attack on Fort Moultrie and that the sole purpose for moving his garrison was “to prevent bloodshed.” One of the South Carolina militia officers replied that the steamer patrol was there to monitor any attempts at reinforcement and that an attack on Anderson’s men “was never entertained by the little squad who patrolled the harbor.”¹³

The book Gentlemen Merchants by Philip N. Racine includes correspondence between Robert N. Gourdin, a prominent Charleston merchant, and his friend Major Anderson, written during the crucial months of December 1860 to April 1861. After Anderson’s move to Fort Sumter, in a letter dated December 27, 1860, Gourdin expressed his profound sorrow over the major’s decision and protested that the garrison had been in no danger at Fort Moultrie.

...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1. Prelude to War: What Really Happened at Fort Sumter
• 2. The Federal Occupation of Beaufort and Columbia
• 3. English and Irish South Carolina Confederates
• 4. Extraordinary Women of Confederate South Carolina
• 5. More True Stories of Confederate South Carolina
• Notes
• Bibliography
• About the Author