hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
United States (United States) 1,170 0 Browse Search
Kentucky (Kentucky, United States) 573 1 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 566 0 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 532 0 Browse Search
Texas (Texas, United States) 482 0 Browse Search
Charleston (South Carolina, United States) 470 8 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 449 3 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 405 1 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 340 0 Browse Search
Maryland (Maryland, United States) 324 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of 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.. Search the whole document.

Found 1,201 total hits in 235 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
Dover, N. H. (New Hampshire, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
. Delaware had, in 1858, chosen William Burton (Democrat) for Governor by 7,758 votes to 7,544 for his Opposition rival; Democracy in Delaware being almost exclusively based on Slavery, and having at length carried the State by its aid. The great body of the party, under the lead of Senator James A. Bayard, had supported Breckinridge, and were still in sympathy with his friends' view of Southern rights, but not to the extent of approving South Carolina remedies. Their Legislature met at Dover, January 2, 1861. Gov. Burton, in his Message, said: The cause of all the trouble is the persistent war of the Abolitionists upon more than two billions of property; a war waged from pulpits, rostrums, and schools, by press and people — all teaching that Slavery is a crime and a sin, until it has become the opinion of a portion of one section of the country. The only remedy for the evils now threatening is a radical change of public sentiment in regard to the whole question. The North
Louisiana (Louisiana, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
tion Ordinance of Secession immediately and unanimously passed Georgia follows — so do Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas Arkansas, North Carolina, Virginia, Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware, refuse to do likeessee (no ticket) 11,350 64,209 69,274 Missouri 17,028 58,801 31,317 58,372 Arkansas (no ticket) 5,227 28,732 20,094 Louisiana (no ticket) 7,625 22,681 20,204 Florida (no ticket) 367 8,543 5,437 Texas (no ticket) (no ticket) 47,548 This ant real sentiment of her reading, governing class, than that of any other State which is claimed as having seceded. In Louisiana, Gov. Thomas O. Moore, an extensive planter and slaveholder, cherishing the prejudices of his class, called Novembera301,271402,541703,812 Georgia595,097462,2321,057,829 Alabama529,164435,132964,296 Mississippi354,700436,696791,396 Louisiana376,280333,010709,290 Florida78,68661,753140,439 Texas Texas had seceded; but her delegates had not reached Montgom
Rhode Island (Rhode Island, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
foresaid, from New Jersey. But, though nowhere in the Electoral, Mr. Douglas was second in the Popular, vote, as will be seen by the following table, wherein the Fusion vote is divided between the parties which contributed to it, according to the best estimate that can now be made of their strength respectively: Free states. States. Lincoln. Douglas. Breckinridge. Bell. Maine 62,811 26,693 6,368 2,046 New Hampshire 37,519 25,881 2,112 441 Massachusetts 106,353 34,372 5,939 22,331 Rhode Island 12,244 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the several contributing parties.4,000 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the several contributing parties.1,000 2,707 Connecticut 43,972 15,522 14,641 3,291 Vermont 33,808 6,849 218 1,969 New York 353,804 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the several contributing parties.203,329 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the
Austin (Texas, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
r their own side. It was plain that, while every Secessionist voted and many Unionists abstained, the vote for Union and that for Secession delegates were just about equal. As made up by the Secessionists, they stood: For Secession, 20,448; Against it, 17,296. The vote for Secession is only two-fifths of the vote cast for President just before. The Convention refused--84 to 45--to submit their act to a vote of the people. In Texas, a Convention — called, as we have seen — assembled at Austin, January 28th, passed February 1, 1861. an Ordinance of Secession: Yeas 166; Nays 7. This ordinance was submitted to a popular vote, and ratified by a considerable majority; it being very much safer, in most districts, to vote Secession than not at all, and not to vote at all than to vote Union. Arkansas, in spite of her Governor's reticence, was blest with a Convention; November 16, 1860. her Legislature voting a call for one; but her popular vote showed a Union majority, and the c
Carolina City (North Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
on, the better course will be to empower the Governor to take measures for assembling a Convention so soon as any one of the other Southern States shall, in his judgment, give satisfactory assurance or evidence of her determination to withdraw from the Union. In support of this proposition, Mr. Lesesne spoke ably and earnestly, but without effect. Cooperation had been tried in 1850-1, and had signally failed to achieve the darling purpose of a dissolution of the Union; so the rulers of Carolina opinion would have none of it in 1860. Still another effort was made in the House (November 7th), by Mr. Trenholm, of Charleston — long conspicuous in the councils of the State--who labored hard to make Cooperation look so much like Secession that one could with difficulty be distinguished from the other. His proposition was couched in the following terms: Resolved, That the Committee on the Military of the Senate and House of Representatives, be instructed to meet during the recess
Abbeville, S. C. (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
and to express the readiness of this State to cooperate with the State of Georgia, in the event of Mr. Lincoln's election, in withdrawing at once from the confederacy; and to recommend the calling of a Convention simultaneously in both States, to carry this measure into effect; and to invite the cooperation of all the Southern States in withdrawing from the present Union, and forming a separate Southern Confederacy. These resolves coming up for consideration on the 9th, Mr. McGowan, of Abbeville, made a zealous effort to stem the furious current; pleading earnestly and plausibly for Cooperation — that is, for consultation with other Slave States, and for action in obedience to their mutual determination. He said: Cooperation with our Southern sisters has been the settled policy of South Carolina for at least ten years past. We have long been satisfied with the causes for a dissolution of this Union. We thought we saw long ago what was coming, and only awaited tho action o
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
the Fourth-of-July celebrations throughout South Carolina pointed to the probable election of Mr. Li lead. He wished Virginia was as ready as South Carolina, but, unfortunately, she was not; but, cire duty of other Southern States to sustain South Carolina in the step she was then taking. He woulded the utmost haste in the consummation of South Carolina's secession. He would adjourn to no other, in 1860. And now, the readiness to back South Carolina, or, at least, to shield her from harm, wanjoyed by the United States after the State of South Carolina shall have seceded. consistently witobert Barnwell Rhett-- The Secession of South Carolina is not an event of a day. It is not anythi follows: We, therefore, the people of South Carolina, by our delegates in Convention assembled,th America is dissolved, and that the State of South Carolina has resumed her position among the naic crowd, with a declaration that the State of South Carolina is now and henceforth a free and inde[40 more...]
Virginia (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
r to the God of storms, The lightning and the gale. Mr. Mullins, of Marion, followed; and his reply to McGowan's speech is worthy of record here, since it clearly betrays the consciousness of the disunionists that they were a lean minority of the Southern people, who might be precipitated, bullied, or dragged into treason, but whom there was no rational hope of reasoning or even seducing into it. He said: South Carolina had tried Cooperation, but had exhausted that policy. The State of Virginia had discredited the cause which our Commissioner went there to advocate, although she treated him, personally, with respect; but she had as much as said there were no indignities which could drive her to take the leadership for Southern rights. If we wait for Cooperation, Slavery and State Rights would be abandoned, State Sovereignty and the cause of the South lost forever, and we would be subjected to a dominion the parallel to which was that of the poor Indian under the British East
Delaware (Delaware, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
na, Virginia, Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware, refuse to do likewise the Secessionista a minority in te states. States. Lincoln. Douglas. Breckinridge. Bell. Delaware 3,815 1,023 7,337 3,864 Maryland 2,294 5,966 42,482 41,7 Governors of nearly all the Slave States, including even Delaware, had actively and zealously supported Breckinridge, and hvote of the Slave States for President — as thoroughly in Delaware or Maryland as in Georgia or Arkansas--that they seemed tedress of our grievances by any and all proper means. Delaware had, in 1858, chosen William Burton (Democrat) for Govern758 votes to 7,544 for his Opposition rival; Democracy in Delaware being almost exclusively based on Slavery, and having at we deem it proper, and due to ourselves and the people of Delaware, to express our unqualified disapproval of the remedy forion in 1860.Slaves.Total. Arkansas324,323111,104435,427 Delaware110,4201,798112,218 Kentucky930,223225,4901,155,713 Mary
Connecticut (Connecticut, United States) (search for this): chapter 22
331 Rhode Island 12,244 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the several contributing parties.4,000 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the several contributing parties.1,000 2,707 Connecticut 43,972 15,522 14,641 3,291 Vermont 33,808 6,849 218 1,969 New York 353,804 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated strength of the several contributing parties.203,329 Fusion vote apportioned according to the estimated str and hunted down as a Lincolnite, Submissionist, or Abolitionist. One refugee planter from Southern Alabama, himself a slaveholder, but of northern birth, who barely escaped a violent death, because of an intercepted letter from a relative in Connecticut, urging him to free his slaves and return to the North, as he had promised, stated To Mr. O. J. Victor, author of The History of the Southern Rebellion, who knew him well, and vouches for his integrity. (See his vol. i., p. 134.) See to t
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...