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
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 324 324 Browse Search
George P. Rowell and Company's American Newspaper Directory, containing accurate lists of all the newspapers and periodicals published in the United States and territories, and the dominion of Canada, and British Colonies of North America., together with a description of the towns and cities in which they are published. (ed. George P. Rowell and company) 152 152 Browse Search
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3 82 82 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery. 68 68 Browse Search
Knight's Mechanical Encyclopedia (ed. Knight) 53 53 Browse Search
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register 50 50 Browse Search
Hon. J. L. M. Curry , LL.D., William Robertson Garrett , A. M. , Ph.D., Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 1.1, Legal Justification of the South in secession, The South as a factor in the territorial expansion of the United States (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 44 44 Browse Search
Cambridge History of American Literature: volume 3 (ed. Trent, William Peterfield, 1862-1939., Erskine, John, 1879-1951., Sherman, Stuart Pratt, 1881-1926., Van Doren, Carl, 1885-1950.) 41 41 Browse Search
C. Edwards Lester, Life and public services of Charles Sumner: Born Jan. 6, 1811. Died March 11, 1874. 38 38 Browse Search
Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I. 33 33 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 2. (ed. Frank Moore). You can also browse the collection for 1850 AD or search for 1850 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 5 results in 5 document sections:

ech already referred to, of January, 1830, in almost every line of it, denounces the doctrine. Which of you has failed to read that speech, and to be convinced? It will remain forever a crushing answer to the heresy. And as it has ever since been, so it will ever continue to be, the brightest gem in the patriotic literature of the age. Secession — peaceable, constitutional secession — asserted even in the Senate Chamber on the authority of Daniel Webster! Hear what he thought of it. In 1850, as in 1830, the country was threatened with destruction. The error again ventured to show itself. Its disciples once more rallied to its support. Do you remember his 7th of March speech? Let me recall a part of its lofty eloquence and its more lofty patriotism: I hear, with pain and anguish and distress, the word secession, especially when it falls from the lips of those who are eminently patriotic, and known to the country and known all over the world for their political services.
e same principles I then contended for. As early as 1833, (let me here say that I am glad to find that the Committee which have waited upon me on this occasion, and have presented to me their sentiments through their organ — I am glad to find that they represent all the parties among which we have been divided;)--as early as 1833, I say, I formed my opinions in reference to this doctrine of secession in the nullification of the laws of the United States. I held these doctrines up to the year 1850, and I maintain them still. (Applause.) I entertained these opinions, as I remarked before, down to the latest sitting of Congress, and I then reiterated them. I entertain and express them here to-day. (Applause.) In this connection, I may be permitted to remark that, during our last struggle for the Presidency, all parties contended for the preservation of the Union. Without going further back, what was that struggle? Senator Douglas of the State of Illinois was a candidate. His
nder inoperative the remedies provided by her own laws and by the laws of Congress. Now, were this statement true in every particular, relating, as it does, only to the action of particular States, it would not constitute the shadow of a justification for rebellion against the General government. In 1842 the Supreme Court of the United States decided that the power of legislation in relation to the recapture of fugitive slaves, is, by the Constitution, vested exclusively in Congress. In 1850 Congress enacted a Fugitive Slave Act, prepared by Southern Senators and Representatives, so stringent in its provisions that Mr. Rhett, of South Carolina, one of the arch instigators of treason there, expressed doubts of its constitutionality; and that Act is still in force. So far, then, as there is constitutional requirement to provide by legislation for such recapture, it was fulfilled to the letter, by the only body having authority to act in the premises, and in the very terms prescrib
ancient renown — to look calmly, even placidly, around her, and from the stand-point of that dignity and renown surveying the whole ground, consider and advise, and remonstrate and forbear, and forbear yet again, until every pacific and constitutional expedient for composition and safety shall have been exhausted. And furthermore: these radical measures of seizing the United States arms and seceding from the Union, are totally unwarranted by the more recent political action of Virginia. In 1850, when the subject of the Wilmot Proviso was up for consideration in her Legislature, she took a new position. She declared that if any one of four things should be done by the Federal Government, she would resist at all hazards, and to the last extremity: first, the application of the Wilmot Proviso to the common territories; secondly, the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia; thirdly, interference with slavery in the States; and fourthly, interference with the slave trade betwee
g the State out of the Union and into the Southern Confederacy. It is evident to me that with many the talk about compromise and the settlement of this question is mere pretext, especially with those who understand the question. What more was done at the last session of Congress, when the North had the power? Let us tell the truth. Three territorial bills were brought forward and passed. You remember in 1847, when the agitation arose in reference to the Wilmot proviso. You remember in 1850 the contest about slavery prohibition in the Territories. You remember in 1854 the excitement in reference to the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and the power conferred on the Legislature by it. Now we have a constitutional amendment, proposed at a time when the Republicans have the power; and at the same time they come forward with three territorial bills, and in neither of those bills can be found any prohibition, so far as slavery is concerned, in the Territories. Colorado, Nevada, and Dakota are