hide Matching Documents

Browsing named entities in Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). You can also browse the collection for H. W. M. Washington or search for H. W. M. Washington in all documents.

Your search returned 7 results in 6 document sections:

Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Degrading influence of slavery—Reply of Judge Critcher to Mr. Hoar. (search)
of his residence, than the gentleman could name from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. He would proceed to name them, and yield the floor to the gentleman to match them if he could. On one side of his estate is Wakefield, the birth-place of Washington. On the other side is Stratford, the residence of Light Horse Harry Lee, of glorious Revolutionary memory. Adjoining Stratford is Chantilly, the residence of Richard Henry Lee, the mover of the Declaration of Independence, and the Cicero of tCharles Lee, at one time Washington's Attorney-General; and Arthur Lee, the accomplished negotiator of the treaty of commerce and alliance between the Colonies and France in 1777. Returning, as said before, you come first to the birth-place of Washington; another hour's drive will bring you to the birth-place of Monroe; another hour's drive to the birth-place of Madison, and if the gentleman supposes that the present generation is unworthy of their illustrious ancestors, he has but to stand on
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Last letters and telegrams of the Confederacy—Correspondence of General John C. Breckinridge. (search)
2. Therefore it reads as follows. I will add that the alteration is evidently old, and may have been made by my father, as his endorsement on the back—Mill. Papers, April, 1865—is the only writing in ink contained in this paper. My father likewise endorsed on the back in pencil: Telegram from General J. E. Johnston—ans' d. C. R. B. Greensboroa, April 24—6:30 P. M. Hon. J. C. Breckinridge, Sec. War,—I have just rec'd dispatches from Gen. Sherman informing me that instructions from Washington direct him to limit his negotiations to my command, demanding its surrender on the terms granted to Gen. Lee, and notifying me of the termination of the truce in forty-eight hours from noon to-day. Have you (I presume he meant your—C. R. B.) instructions. We had better disband this small force to prevent devastation of country. J. E. Johnston, General. Headquarters Gilbert's House, May 2, 1865. Major-Gen'l J. C: Breckinridge, Secretary of War: Sir,—For the purpose of execut
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), The story of the Arkansas. (search)
nt at the time indicated: I. N. Brown, Mississippi, Commander. Lieutenants—Henry K. Stevens, South Carolina; John Grimball, South Carolina; A. D: Wharton, Tennessee; Charles W. Read, Mississippi; Alphonse Barbot, Louisiana, and George W. Gift, Tennessee. Masters—Samuel Milliken, Kentucky, and John L. Phillips, Louisiana. Midshipmen—Dabney M. Scales, Mississippi; Richard H. Bacot, South Carolina, and Clarence W. Tyler, Virginia. Master's Mate, John A. Wilson, Maryland; Surgeon, H. W. M. Washington, Virginia; Assistant Surgeon, C. M. Morfit, Maryland; First Assistant (acting Chief) Engineer, George W. City, Virginia; Second Assistant Engineer, E. Covert, Louisiana; Third Assistant Engineers, W. H. Jackson, Maryland; J. T. Dolan, Virginia; C. H. Browne, Virginia; John S. Dupuy and James Gettis, Louisiana; Gunner, T. B. Travers, Virginia; Pilots—John Hodges, James Brady, William Gilmore and J. H. Shacklett. Captain Brown is now a successful planter, on his place in Bolivar cou
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Military operations of General Beauregard. (search)
been under some malign star that he allowed his biographer to make such claims as we have quoted. There is no better commentary to be found upon the claim that General Beauregard was prevented from taking Washington and thus perhaps ending the war, than in Beauregard's own action after Manassas. Colonel Roman's claim is that if Johnston had been ordered to join Beauregard on July 15th, McDowell would have been overthrown, and next Patterson, and next, perhaps, McClellan, and that then Washington might have fallen before the Confederates advancing on both sides of the Potomac. Well, Johnston was ordered to join Beauregard with his whole force on July 17, and eluding Patterson with great skill he reached Manassas in time to secure a victory over McDowell, a victory one of the most thorough and complete upon record. This was in accordance with General Beauregard's programme. What then became of the rest of that plan? We do not hear that Beauregard urged the return of Johnston to
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Sherman's bummers, and some of their work. (search)
ers on the other side are coming to admit that the war was in no just sense a rebellion. We took occasion in our December (1883) number to protest against the use of this inaccurate and offensive term as the title of the publications of the War Records Office, and this elicited from our friend E. L. Wells, of Charleston, S. C., the following well put comment. Our friend's point is decidedly well taken: I notice that in criticising the title Rebellion affixed to certain State Papers by Washington officials, you speak of the term as one which is as inapplicable to the popular movement of 1861 as it would be if applied to that of 1776. I should think there was this difference: The uprising of 1776, however justifiable morally it may have been, was legally a rebellion of disloyal subjects against their government. The war of secession, on the contrary, was in pursuance of legal right, and was not against a government at all, but was waged between States or sectional populations; t
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 12. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Some great constitutional questions. (search)
rth as an amendment to the articles of confederation; that all the States had carefully instructed their deputies to make such alterations and provisions as would make the Federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of the Government and the preservation of the Union, and had not authorized them to go further; that the preamble adopted declared this union of States to be (in comparision) a more perfect Union; that the Convention, after maturing the plan, unanimously, through the pen of Washington, stated their aim to be the Federal Government, and that the Congress of States declared on the 13th of September, 1788, that they had received and filed the ratifications of the States, which were provided by the Constitution itself, to be sufficient for the establishment of it. At the conclusion of his most exhaustive historical and constitutional argument, the author asserts that the whole case against Davis, Lee et als, is based on a perversion of the principles of our polity— base