hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Frederick H. Dyer, Compendium of the War of the Rebellion: Regimental Histories 631 631 Browse Search
The Atlanta (Georgia) Campaign: May 1 - September 8, 1864., Part I: General Report. (ed. Maj. George B. Davis, Mr. Leslie J. Perry, Mr. Joseph W. Kirkley) 69 69 Browse Search
William Schouler, A history of Massachusetts in the Civil War: Volume 2 39 39 Browse Search
John Bell Hood., Advance and Retreat: Personal Experiences in the United States and Confederate Armies 20 20 Browse Search
Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Massachusetts in the Army and Navy during the war of 1861-1865, vol. 2 19 19 Browse Search
Col. O. M. Roberts, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 12.1, Alabama (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 19 19 Browse Search
William F. Fox, Lt. Col. U. S. V., Regimental Losses in the American Civil War, 1861-1865: A Treatise on the extent and nature of the mortuary losses in the Union regiments, with full and exhaustive statistics compiled from the official records on file in the state military bureaus and at Washington 16 16 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 22. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 15 15 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 11. (ed. Frank Moore) 14 14 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 8. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 13 13 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4. You can also browse the collection for July 22nd or search for July 22nd in all documents.

Your search returned 3 results in 3 document sections:

Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 45: an antislavery policy.—the Trent case.—Theories of reconstruction.—confiscation.—the session of 1861-1862. (search)
e and dissipated the hope of a speedy close of the war, it led the people to reflect more seriously than before on the character of the struggle and the necessity of putting the national cause on the highest ground, and of bringing to the rescue of the country all possible moral and physical forces. This change of sentiment appeared in the debates and action of Congress on the proposition to declare free the slaves of rebels employed by them for military purposes, which passed the Senate, July 22, the day after the disaster, and became a law on the last day of the session. Sumner called, May 26, 1862, for the instructions to commanding generals in pursuance of this provision. Works, vol. VII. p. 82. It was the first of a series of laws against slavery, and was aptly characterized by Breckinridge, its leading opponent, as the beginning of a loosing of all bonds. Sumner, referring a few months later to the fact that it passed the Senate the day after the defeat, said; In the pro
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 48: Seward.—emancipation.—peace with France.—letters of marque and reprisal.—foreign mediation.—action on certain military appointments.—personal relations with foreigners at Washington.—letters to Bright, Cobden, and the Duchess of Argyll.—English opinion on the Civil War.—Earl Russell and Gladstone.—foreign relations.—1862-1863. (search)
a servile war,— . . .the former by making the most desperate attempts to overthrow the federal Union; the latter by demanding an edict of universal emancipation as a lawful and necessary if not, as they say, the only legitimate way of saving the Union. Curiously enough, when Mr. Seward sent his despatch, July 5, 1862, the President was already brooding on a proclamation of emancipation, which he mentioned to two of his secretaries eight days later, and formally presented to his Cabinet, July 22. The general dissatisfaction of the Republican senators with Mr. Seward took formal shape in a caucus which was convened shortly after the session began. They took unanimous action (Mr. King of New York alone not voting), which it was supposed would effect his withdrawal from the Cabinet. Without naming him, it was agreed to call upon the President to make such changes in his Cabinet as would secure unity of purpose and action, and include in it only the cordial and unwavering support
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 55: Fessenden's death.—the public debt.—reduction of postage.— Mrs. Lincoln's pension.—end of reconstruction.—race discriminations in naturalization.—the Chinese.—the senator's record.—the Cuban Civil War.—annexation of San Domingo.—the treaties.—their use of the navy.—interview with the presedent.—opposition to the annexation; its defeat.—Mr. Fish.—removal of Motley.—lecture on Franco-Prussian War.—1869-1870. (search)
nation. She is needy and unpopular. I was the friend of the President, and therefore I exert myself for her. I wish you could see this case as I do. Ever sincerely yours and your husband's. To Longfellow, July 16:— At last the bolt has fallen on Motley. I am unhappy at the thought of the unhappiness in his house. Wilson tells me that there is a talk of removing Monti also. When I see you on that piazza, I will tell you this story of— Revenge! To Mr. Bemis, then in Europe, July 22:— The removal of Motley is simply brutal. This is the only word to describe it; add also heartless and cruel. I hope you will see him and strengthen him. The tragical death of Prevost Paradol 1829-1870; French minister at Washington. adds to the gloom. He was with me half an hour three days before his suicide, speaking of the war and his surprise at it, but saying that it was necessary; also of literature and Guizot, Thiers, and Saint Beuve. He evidently was a great admirer of <