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
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3 30 0 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Your search returned 30 results in 8 document sections:

Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3, Chapter 32: the annexation of Texas.—the Mexican War.—Winthrop and Sumner.—1845-1847. (search)
rom such as appealed to a far-sighted patriotism filled the minds of Tyler and Calhoun and their fellow-plotters. Their purpose, boldly avowed not only in Southern contempt of Northern sentiment. When the treaty of annexation, negotiated by Calhoun, Secretary of State, had been rejected by the Senate in 1844, President Tyler s topic has assumed a great importance in Massachusetts. S. C. Phillips and W. B. Calhoun (formerly of the House of Representatives), and several other prominent Whints partly for the unanimity with which they have declared in favor of peace. Calhoun has won what Adams has lost; and I have been not a little pained to be obliged in the House, with the name of John Quincy Adams standing at their head. Mr. Calhoun pleaded for deliberation; denied the truth of the statement in the bill as tre opposition in both Houses of Congress had had the moral courage to act like Calhoun, the 11th and 12th of May, 1846, would not be counted among the darkest and mo
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3, Chapter 33: the national election of 1848.—the Free Soil Party.— 1848-1849. (search)
islatures of California and New Mexico from acting on the subject, and referred the question of its legal existence in those territories to the Supreme Court of the United States, then a pro-slavery tribunal. the measure received the support of Calhoun and Jefferson Davis, with no Northern Whig senator supporting it except Phelps of Vermont. It passed the Senate, but was lost in the House,—its defeat in the latter body being accomplished, strangely enough, by Alexander H. Stephens, who, from g it; and he did not comprehend the machinations of those who sought to extend and perpetuate slavery. If he was not an opponent of slavery on moral and political grounds,—as certainly he was not,—neither was he its partisan after the manner of Calhoun. The policy to which he came as President, so far as he seemed to have one, was to suspend action by Congress, and allow the people of the territories to settle the question for themselves, without influence from the national executive; to admi<
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3, Chapter 34: the compromise of 1850.—Mr. Webster. (search)
g the Fugitive Slave law in Boston, Curtis's Life of Webster, vol. II. p. 490. and with his passionate charges of treason against the rescuers of negroes, unarmed and unorganized, acting from instinct of race or generous sentiments of human nature. Webster's Works, vol. II. pp. 560, 577, 578. He spoke of the city of Syracuse as that laboratory of abolitionism, libel, and treason. Wilson's Rise and Fall, vol. II. p. 361. In the Senate he paused in his argument to pay compliments to Calhoun, Mason, and the Nashville convention,— a body whose disunion purpose was already understood by men less intelligent than himself Webster's Works, vol. v. pp. 336, 337, 363. In a later speech he was obliged to admit the disunion character of the convention (vol. v. p. 429). His weighing of sectional grievances was in proportion and emphasis a judgment against the North. The remarks as to the imprisonment of Northern colored seamen in Southern ports were inserted in the speech after i
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3, Chapter 35: Massachusetts and the compromise.—Sumner chosen senator.—1850-1851. (search)
sistency of our position. The slavery discussion will follow that of the Austrian mission. . . . In the Senate I predict great weight for my friend, the new senator from Ohio, Mr. Chase. He is a man of decided ability, and I think will trouble Calhoun on the slavery question more than any others. He is in earnest, is a learned and well-trained lawyer, and is a grave, emphatic, and powerful speaker. Mr. Chase spoke against Clay's Compromise, March 26 and 27, 1850, making the most thoroughs object and infamy upon its authors. See Von Holst's remarks, vol. IV. pp. 41, 42. the election of a Whig governor and of an anti-Texas Democratic senator in New Hampshire, and the recent election of Geyer as senator in Missouri by a Whig and Calhoun—Democratic coalition, were quite forgotten. The Whig journals assured Sumner of a cool reception in the Senate, which he would enter, if he entered it at all, without authority, and with the ignominy of the coalition branded upon him. The in
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3, Chapter 36: first session in Congress.—welcome to Kossuth.—public lands in the West.—the Fugitive Slave Law.—1851-1852. (search)
ntly passed from it who would have given dignity and renown to any parliamentary assembly. Benton, the least distinguished of the four, after thirty years of service, had been thrown out by the intense pro-slavery party of Missouri, made up of Whigs and Democrats, as a punishment for his resistance to the Compromise policy. He was chosen at the next election a member of the house from the St. Louis district, which was less affected than the rest of the State with pro-slavery sentiments. Calhoun had died a senator during the preceding Congress. Webster had passed from the body to Fillmore's Cabinet. Clay was still a senator, but was enfeebled by age and by disease, which had been aggravated by his severe labors in support of the Compromise of 1850. He was in the Senate for the last time on the day that Sumner took his seat; it was observed how sadly clanged he was from the last session as he came with tottering steps into the chamber. He spoke twice on a point of procedure,
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3, Chapter 38: repeal of the Missouri Compromise.—reply to Butler and Mason.—the Republican Party.—address on Granville Sharp.—friendly correspondence.—1853-1854. (search)
century rested under the conviction that this territory was to remain free, and in due time be divided into free States under the compromise and compact by which in 1820 Missouri was, after prolonged resistance from the free States, admitted as a slave State upon the condition that slavery should be forever prohibited in the rest of the territory acquired from France under the name of Louisiana, so far as it lay north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes. No partisan of slavery-neither Calhoun, who guarded the institution with a comprehensive and far-reaching vision, nor Atchison, 1807-1886. who overlooked the territory from the border State of Missouri—had ever been audacious enough, even when the slave-power was putting forth its utmost pretensions, to propose in Congress the abrogation of the compact known as the Missouri Compromise. With the extinction of Indian titles, the progress of national surveys, and the pressure of emigration, the time had come for the organizatio
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3, Chapter 40: outrages in Kansas.—speech on Kansas.—the Brooks assault.—1855-1856. (search)
ctised in the houses of Congress and in the British Parliament. London Star, June 21. the London Times, August 7, in referring to the speech as an alleged provocation for violence, said: The speech was elaborately strong, but not stronger than many delivered within the walls of our own Parliament during the discussion on the Reform and Emancipation bills. James W. Grimes said in a speech , at Burlington, Iowa: His [Sumner's] speech fell short in invective of the philippics of Randolph, Calhoun, McDuffie, Hayne, Prentiss, and Henry A. Wise. It was diluted when compared to Webster's onslaught upon Charles J. Ingersoll. (Grimes's life, p. 80.) The style of debate. marked by threats and epithets, which the partisans of slavery in Congress had long practised, is treated in Sumner's speech on The Barbarism of Slavery, June 4, 1860, Works, vol. v. pp. 85-99. At the close of the final encounter Sumner received hearty congratulations from political friends, who crowded about him,
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3, Chapter 43: return to the Senate.—the barbarism of slavery.—Popular welcomes.—Lincoln's election.—1859-1860. (search)
n April, adjourned, after a session marked by tumult and passion, to meet at Baltimore in June, where it nominated Douglas as President, after the withdrawal of Southern delegations, and of Northern delegates like B. F. Butler and Caleb Cushing, both of Massachusetts, who were in sympathy with them. In the Charleston convention Butler voted for Jefferson Davis for President, and was the Breckinridge candidate for governor of Massachusetts, in the autumn. These seceders, who, disciples of Calhoun, (lid not think Douglas Southern and pro-slavery enough in his position, put John C. Breckinridge (afterwards a general in the Confederate army) in nomination. In May, a remnant of conservative Whigs, known as the Constitutional Union party, nominated John Bell for President and Edward Everett for Vice-President. The Republicans met at Chicago, May 16, and passing by Seward, the leading candidate, nominated Abraham Lincoln, who was supposed more likely than any one to command the support