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
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery. 118 0 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. 113 1 Browse Search
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 64 0 Browse Search
John G. Nicolay, A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln, condensed from Nicolay and Hayes' Abraham Lincoln: A History 52 0 Browse Search
Edward Alfred Pollard, The lost cause; a new Southern history of the War of the Confederates ... Drawn from official sources and approved by the most distinguished Confederate leaders. 38 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government 34 0 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 14. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 26 0 Browse Search
John Harrison Wilson, The life of Charles Henry Dana 24 0 Browse Search
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3 22 0 Browse Search
William Alexander Linn, Horace Greeley Founder and Editor of The New York Tribune 14 0 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government. You can also browse the collection for Dred Scott or search for Dred Scott in all documents.

Your search returned 17 results in 6 document sections:

act to promote domestic tranquillity. The question with regard to the territories has been discussed in the foregoing chapters, and the argument need not be repeated. There was, however, one feature of it which has not been specially noticed, although it occupied a large share of public attention at the time, and constituted an important element in the case. This was the action of the federal judiciary thereon, and the manner in which it was received. In 1854 a case (the well-known Dred Scott case) came before the Supreme Court of the United States, involving the whole question of the status of the African race and the rights of citizens of the Southern states to migrate to the territories, temporarily or permanently, with their slave property, on a footing of equality with the citizens of other states with their property of any sort. This question, as we have seen, had already been the subject of long and energetic discussion, without any satisfactory conclusion. All parties
13th. Mr. Blair having been acquainted with the proposition I presented to General Scott, under Mr. Buchanan's Administration, sent for me to tender the same to Mr. Lincoln, informing me that Lieutenant-General Scott had advised the President that the fort could not be relieved, and must be given up. Mr. Blair took me at once tose, and I explained the plan to the President. Thence we adjourned to Lieutenant-General Scott's office, where a renewed discussion of the subject took place. The Gort. The President readily agreed to my visit, if the Secretary of War and General Scott raised no objection. Both these gentlemen consenting, I left Washington soon as assembled, the President informed them he had just been advised by General Scott that it was expedient to evacuate Fort Pickens, as well as Fort Sumter, whi A brief silence followed the announcement of the amazing recommendation of General Scott, when Mr. Blair, who had been much annoyed by the vacillating course of the
Chapter 12: Protests against the conduct of the Government of the United States Senator Douglas's proposition to evacuate the forts, and extracts from his speech in support of it General Scott's advice manly letter of Major Anderson, protesting against the action of the Federal Government misstatements of the Count of Paris correspondence relative to proposed evacuation of the Fort a crisis. The course pursued by the government of the United States with regard to the forts had not passed without earnest remonstrance from the most intelligent and patriotic of its own friends during the period of the events which constitute the subject of the preceding chapter. In the Senate of the United States, which continued in executive session for several weeks after the inauguration of Lincoln, it was the subject of discussion. Douglass of Illinois—who was certainly not suspected of sympathy with secession, or lack of devotion to the Union—on March 15th offered a resolutio
be brought here, but I make no point of bringing them through Baltimore. On the next day, the 21st, Mayor Brown and other influential citizens, by request of the President, visited him. The interview took place in presence of the cabinet and General Scott, and was reported to the public by the mayor after his return to Baltimore. From that report I make the following extracts. Referring to the President, the mayor uses the following language: The protection of Washington, he asseverated stness, was the sole object of concentrating troops there, and he protested that none of the troops brought through Maryland were intended for any purposes hostile to the State, or aggressive as against the Southern States. . . . He called on General Scott for his opinion, which the General gave at great length, to the effect that troops might be brought through Maryland without going through Baltimore, etc. . . . The interview terminated with the distinct assurance, on the part of the Presiden
hing then foretold what must have been the decision of the Supreme Court on the Missouri Compromise, anticipating the decision subsequently made in the case of Dred Scott; that decision for which the venerable justices have been so often and so violently arraigned. He foretold it as the necessary consequence from the line of pre Constitution had provided to decide questions of law. I ask my friend to read some extracts from the decision. Mr. Chesnut read as follows, from the case of Dred Scott vs. Sandford, pp. 55-57: The Territory being a part of the United States, the Government and the citizen both entered it under the authority of the Constitut kind, in the territory of the United States north of the line therein mentioned, is not warranted by the Constitution, and is therefore void; and that neither Dred Scott himself, nor any of his family, were made free by being carried into this territory, even if they had been carried there by the owner, with the intention of bec
, 58, 59, 177, 178. Nominated for president, 43, 44. Resolution regarding forts, 242-43, 250. Drayton, —, 430. Dred Scott case. Decision of Supreme Court, 70-71. E Early, Gen. Jubal A., 305, 306, 330. Extracts from narrative of Bull, 324, 326, 327. Jordan, Gen. Thomas J., 303. Conference with Davis, 307-09. Judiciary (Federal). Decision in Dred Scott case, 70-71. K Kane, George P., 290. Kansas, 12, 23, 24, 31. Settlement, 26, 27. Speech of Davis on Preside St. John, General, 276. Head of Confederate niter and mining bureau, 409-10. Saunders, Colonel, 325, 370. Scott, General, 234, 238, 289. Sebastian, Senator, 175. Secession, 96, 116, 218. Right of states, 50, 52, 60, 142, 144-47, 15 cause of conflict, 65-66. Summary up to 1860, 66. Under control of states, 67. Recognition by Constitution, 67-69. Dred Scott case, 70. Regulation (Confederate Constitution), 225-26. Status at beginning of war, 262-63. Slaves. Distributio