Their protesting because it was unnecessary in the prevention of war. What Anderson did was the opposite to keeping the peace. No one or party from the government of South Carolina had made a threatening move towards Anderson, but Anderson made a very visable threatening move towards Charleston.

Your looking at it out of context. The sentence before The South Carolina commissioners said,

"After many and reiterated assurances given on your behalf, which we cannot believe unauthorized, they determined to forbear, and in good faith sent on their commissioners to negotiate with you. They meant you no harm; wished yon no ill. They thought of you kindly, believed you true, and were willing, as far as was consistent with duty, to spare you unnecessary and hostile collision."

On the otherhand Anderson said this after his deed...

Dec. 28, 1860 to Col. S. Cooper, Adjutant-General

"P. S.-I do not feel authorized to reply to the memorandum of the governor [Pickens], but shall regret very deeply his persistence in the course he has taken. He knows not how entirely the city of Charleston is in my power. I can cut his communication off from the sea, and thereby prevent the reception of supplies, and close the harbor, even at night, by destroying the light-houses. These things, of course, I would never do, unless compelled to do so in self-defense."

The "course he has taken" by governor Pickens was to cut off communications to Fort Sumter from the city.

This sounds like a threat from Major Anderson. He of course did not or could not do what he bragged.

_______________________
David Upton