Very interesting. I believe this was probably cancelled, and that it mentions Fort Moultrie and not the Charleston Armory, a different post. Do a look up on the "stand of arms" at the Charleston Armory and almost every history on the internet says "70,000 to 75,000". The O.R. (Series 1, Vol. 1, page 130, DEC. 21, 1860) says 22,430 stand of arms, all flintlocks or altered flintlocks, except for about 3,000 factory percussion rifles and pistols.
NEW YORK TIMES
The Forts at Charleston.
Published: December 18, 1860
. .All other questions connected with secession become unimportant, in view of the position of Fort Moultrie, at Charleston. Sixtyfive men, under a gallant and loyal officer, constitute its only garrison, and are instructed to hold it against assault. South Carolina has for months threatened secession, in the event of LINCOLN's election, and the seizure of that fort is an indispensable incident of secession. Six weeks before the election a force of three hundred men was collected, for the purpose of being sent to reinforce that garrison; but just as they were ready to start, Secretary FLOYD, -- for reasons which he may possibly explain, -- countermanded the order, and they were sent to California. From that day to this nothing has been done to strengthen the garrison. A month ago Gen. SCOTT addressed directly to the President, an elaborate paper representing the absolute necessity of sending reinforcements to all the Southern forts, and designating the number needed for each, and the posts from which they could be obtained. No notice whatever has been taken of this urgent-recommendation. Col. ANDERSON, the officer in command, has asked for reinforcements, and his request has been refused.
On the other hand, 75,000 stand of arms have been deposited in an arsenal in Charleston -- which has been taken and is now held by a Company of armed Secessionists, who recently stopped an attempt to remove some percussion caps from the building to the Fort. Active measures have been taken by Col. ANDERSON to put the fort in a condition for defence -- and yet even this, as we have been informed on respectable authority, has been done without orders from the War Department.
75,000 Arms is an alarming number and who was increasing this amount?