More below:

>>>>Polk acted on his own. He was not authorized by the Confederate government to cross the Mississippi River from Missouri and occupy Hickman and Columbus. After Polk did so, Davis excused him by saying the necessity justified the action. Walker, on the other hand, ordered him to get out of Kentucky. Not only did Polk stay put, he created a fortress at Columbus.>>>>

Polk only stayed put when Davis came down with his decision and Davis trumps Walker (and Walker resigns). Had Davis ordered him out I think that Polk would have actually obeyed that order since Davis was his friend.

>>>>>Polk did not occupy Hickman and Columbus and move troops farther east into Kentucky as a response to the Federals' recruiting and training men at Camp Robinson, nor was his action a response to the Federals' seizing boats on the Ohio or any other river, nor was it a response to any other minor Federal presence in Kentucky. He did it because he had learned it was Fremont's intent to seize Columbus. Polk saw the value of occupying the high ground above the river. He saw the value of blockading the river. He installed batteries and a huge chain across the river. Polk's own words, quoted earlier, revealed his intent, which was to be ahead of the enemy. He didn't give a hoot about Kentucky's neutrality or anything else the Federals had done earlier in minor violation of that neutrality. He saw the value of controlling the Mississippi River below Cairo, and he wanted to grab that control before the Federals did. He also saw the value of controlling the mouth of the Tennessee River, and that's why he wanted to be ahead of the Federals in occupying Paducah.>>>>>>>

Actually Polk, and others, DO cite Camp Dick Robinson as a reason to move into KY. The Mississippi River could be, and was, controlled below the KY-TN line on the four Chickasaw Bluffs that existed starting with Memphis and moving north. The Confederates built a series of forts there from Ft. Pickering to Ft. Randolph, Ft. Pillow etc. Fortifications were built at New Madrid, MO, Island No. 10, Tiptonville, TN. That river was nicely closed down with just those - and all of these positions were vulnerable from land attack (and indeed most of them were taken that way). Colunbus was nice - but ultimately if one can read a map like Grant could and Polk could not (nor Jeff Davis), that post was easily turned by the Tennessee and Cumberland Rivers.

Ultimately, what the Confederates needed was a river navy of a large size with a number of ironclads. All the ironclads that were being built numbered two - the CSS Eastport (taken on Ledyard Phelps' River Raid after Ft. Henry and finished as the USS Eastport), and the CSS Arkansas. That's it.

>>>>>I don't see that one side having a training camp, whether armed or not, and seizing contraband-carrying boats on the rivers, and the other side aggressively occupying two towns with armed forces, deploying other armed forces farther east into Kentucky, and blockading the Mississippi as being remotely comparable in degree. The Federal offense pales in comparison to the Confederate offense. When Davis said the necessity justified the action, he wasn't talking about responding to the minor Federal presence in Kentucky. He was talking about preventing the Federals from controlling the Mississippi below Cairo.>>>>

If you wish to stay true to the letter of not violating KY's declared neutrality then you would bend over backwards so that not ONE of you men ever set foot into that state. When Lincoln told Magoffin that he would honor that neutrality he closed with the line, "nor have I any present purpose to do so (violate it - but when the time comes.......). Had Magoffin been as politically astute as Lincoln he would have taken that as a more than veiled threat. I certainly take it as such - and that statement fully explains why Lincoln, when responding to Magoffin's demand that Dick Robinson be closed, ended with his total declining to do so.

The Mississippi Was already closed from the KY-TN border to the Gulf of Mexico so the matter of it being closed at Columbus is completely moot.

>>>>Since you don't seem to accept my degree point, let me try an analogy with you. In the mid-1950s up to May 1960, the US flew U-2 aerial photography missions over the USSR. Obviously, that was a violation of the USSR's air space. But the degree of that offense was minor in comparison to dropping down and occupying Moscow. And that's borne out by the response. The airspace violation resulted in the Soviets' shooting down a U-2 plane and temporarily holding the pilot. Occupying Moscow would have resulted in nuclear war. The degree justifies the response.>>>>

In the Cold War each side would have, and did, do things to protect their nations. I do not blame the Soviets for shooting down the U2 - it was a risk that we knew would happen. Their subs and our subs collided a few times, sometimes with boats being lost. And while there is a big difference between this and a nuclear war, there is no difference between the Federals occupying land in KY with armed Union troops over a month before the Confederates did so - and they stated that it was partly in response to that camp. Dick Robinson was fortified and protected and remained a training camp into 1864 I believe. Columbus was fortified and protected. So Federal troops moved into the state (from TN) and Confederates responded. So it does indeed come down to who moved first - and that move wore blue uniforms.

>>>>When John Y. Simon said the Confederates were first to violate Kentucky's neutrality, he was talking about the degree of the offenses. The Federal violations were minor in comparison to the Confederate violation. But that doesn't really matter because Polk was not in Kentucky in response to the Federals' being there in a minor way. He was there to be ahead of the enemy in controlling the rivers. >>>>

No he wasn't He was totally looking to blame Polk for it and ignore Camp Dick Robinson. Read Grant's memoirs - he omits Camp Dick Robinson too. Hmmmmmm. I wonder why?

Greg Biggs