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) 466 0 Browse Search
Doc 320 0 Browse Search
W. T. Sherman 206 6 Browse Search
A. H. Foote 201 9 Browse Search
Fort Donelson (Tennessee, United States) 185 3 Browse Search
A. E. Burnside 176 4 Browse Search
U. S. Grant 169 5 Browse Search
Edgefield (Tennessee, United States) 167 9 Browse Search
Columbus, Ky. (Kentucky, United States) 162 10 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 156 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 4. (ed. Frank Moore). Search the whole document.

Found 258 total hits in 66 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
Oregon (Oregon, United States) (search for this): chapter 26
commend that the resolution do not pass. After a protracted and able debate, the vote was taken, with the result which the telegraph has announced. The resolution was passed by a vote of thirty-two to fourteen, the majority being one and one third more than two thirds of the members present. The Senators who voted against the resolution are: Bayard, of Delaware; Cowan, of Pennsylvania; Carlisle, of Virginia; Harris, of New-York; Kennedy, of Maryland; Latham, of California; Nesmith, of Oregon; Pearce, of Maryland; Powell, of Kentucky; Rice, of Minnesota; Saulsbury, of Delaware; Ten Eyck, of New-Jersey; Thomson, of New-Jersey; and Willey, of Virginia. Among these are five of the seven members of the Committee of the Judiciary; and two, Harris, of New-York, and Cowan, of Pennsylvania, are Republicans. The debate was distinguished by signal ability on both sides. Undoubtedly the most complete speech in favor of the resolution was that of Mr. Sumner, of Massachusetts,, which, vi
Texas (Texas, United States) (search for this): chapter 26
Doc. 27.-the case of Jesse D. Bright. On the sixteenth of December, 1861, Mr. Wilkinson, of Minnesota, introduced into the Senate of the United States, the following resolution: Whereas, Hon. Jesse D. Bright, heretofore, on the first day of March, 1861, wrote a letter, of which the following is a copy: Washington, March 1, 1861. my dear sir: Allow me to introduce, to your acquaintance, my friend Thomas B. Lincoln, of Texas. He visits your capital mainly to dispose of what he regards a great improvement in firearms. I recommend him to your favorable consideration, as a gentleman of the first respectability, and reliable in every respect. Very truly, yours, Jesse D. bright. To His Excellency Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederation of States. And, whereas, we believe the said letter is evidence of disloyalty to the United States, and is calculated to give aid and comfort to the public enemies, therefore, Be it resolved, That the said Jesse D. Bright
New Hampshire (New Hampshire, United States) (search for this): chapter 26
ebate here will suppose that the letter really has anything to do with the attack on him. But he was considered unfit to associate with such patriarchs in the country's service as the Senator from Massachusetts, (Sumner,) and the Senator from New-Hampshire, (Clark,) and even the Senator from Pennsylvania, (Wilmot,) and the Senator from Tennessee, (Johnson,) were afflicted by his presence here as not loyal enough for them. Oh! he must have degenerated in ten years. In 1850 he was appointed on a, with one flag, not a star effaced, and I will travel it with him as long as there is one gleam of light to guide us. And, sir, forgetting and forgiving, I would even consent to take as travelling companions, the Senators from Massachusetts, New-Hampshire, and Pennsylvania, with all their heresies. The Senator from Tennessee has done one great injustice. Smarting under blows inflicted by the conduct of those he called a close corporation when here, he points to my association with them, forg
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) (search for this): chapter 26
al ability on both sides. Undoubtedly the most complete speech in favor of the resolution was that of Mr. Sumner, of Massachusetts,, which, viewed as a clear, clean, and exhaustive argument on the case, as presented by the strict and simple record,ck on him. But he was considered unfit to associate with such patriarchs in the country's service as the Senator from Massachusetts, (Sumner,) and the Senator from New-Hampshire, (Clark,) and even the Senator from Pennsylvania, (Wilmot,) and the Senuide us. And, sir, forgetting and forgiving, I would even consent to take as travelling companions, the Senators from Massachusetts, New-Hampshire, and Pennsylvania, with all their heresies. The Senator from Tennessee has done one great injustice. take it. Let it come. I may fall as the gallant — the brave — the chivalric — the classic — the learned Senator from Massachusetts said I might fall — into the bastile. That is a matter I cannot control. That is in the hands of those who have
New Jersey (New Jersey, United States) (search for this): chapter 26
eferred to the Committee on the Judiciary. The members of this Committee are: Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, Chairman; Mr. Foster, of Connecticut; Mr. Ten Eyck, of New-Jersey; Mr. Cowan, of Pennsylvania; Mr. Harris, of New-York; Mr. Bayard, of Delaware; and Mr. Powell, of Kentucky. In addition to the letter embodied in the resolutnedy, of Maryland; Latham, of California; Nesmith, of Oregon; Pearce, of Maryland; Powell, of Kentucky; Rice, of Minnesota; Saulsbury, of Delaware; Ten Eyck, of New-Jersey; Thomson, of New-Jersey; and Willey, of Virginia. Among these are five of the seven members of the Committee of the Judiciary; and two, Harris, of New-York, anNew-Jersey; and Willey, of Virginia. Among these are five of the seven members of the Committee of the Judiciary; and two, Harris, of New-York, and Cowan, of Pennsylvania, are Republicans. The debate was distinguished by signal ability on both sides. Undoubtedly the most complete speech in favor of the resolution was that of Mr. Sumner, of Massachusetts,, which, viewed as a clear, clean, and exhaustive argument on the case, as presented by the strict and simple record,
United States (United States) (search for this): chapter 26
respectability, and reliable in every respect. Very truly, yours, Jesse D. bright. To His Excellency Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederation of States. And, whereas, we believe the said letter is evidence of disloyalty to the United States, and is calculated to give aid and comfort to the public enemies, therefore, Be it resolved, That the said Jesse D. Bright is expelled from his seat in the Senate of the United States. This resolution was referred to the Committee on thhe last Administration, as well as the present, was the best with regard to affairs at Charleston, yet I never hesitated in my duty to my own Government, which was to sustain it in all its efforts to fully enforce obedience to the laws of the United States, within all constitutional limits. Mr. President, I have said all I proposed saying on this occasion; yet I wish to add a few words more. I will inquire, who is it that is asking for my expulsion? My record as a public man is before the co
California (California, United States) (search for this): chapter 26
and they therefore recommend that the resolution do not pass. After a protracted and able debate, the vote was taken, with the result which the telegraph has announced. The resolution was passed by a vote of thirty-two to fourteen, the majority being one and one third more than two thirds of the members present. The Senators who voted against the resolution are: Bayard, of Delaware; Cowan, of Pennsylvania; Carlisle, of Virginia; Harris, of New-York; Kennedy, of Maryland; Latham, of California; Nesmith, of Oregon; Pearce, of Maryland; Powell, of Kentucky; Rice, of Minnesota; Saulsbury, of Delaware; Ten Eyck, of New-Jersey; Thomson, of New-Jersey; and Willey, of Virginia. Among these are five of the seven members of the Committee of the Judiciary; and two, Harris, of New-York, and Cowan, of Pennsylvania, are Republicans. The debate was distinguished by signal ability on both sides. Undoubtedly the most complete speech in favor of the resolution was that of Mr. Sumner, of Mas
New York (New York, United States) (search for this): chapter 26
Illinois, Chairman; Mr. Foster, of Connecticut; Mr. Ten Eyck, of New-Jersey; Mr. Cowan, of Pennsylvania; Mr. Harris, of New-York; Mr. Bayard, of Delaware; and Mr. Powell, of Kentucky. In addition to the letter embodied in the resolution of Mr. Wiors who voted against the resolution are: Bayard, of Delaware; Cowan, of Pennsylvania; Carlisle, of Virginia; Harris, of New-York; Kennedy, of Maryland; Latham, of California; Nesmith, of Oregon; Pearce, of Maryland; Powell, of Kentucky; Rice, of Mind Willey, of Virginia. Among these are five of the seven members of the Committee of the Judiciary; and two, Harris, of New-York, and Cowan, of Pennsylvania, are Republicans. The debate was distinguished by signal ability on both sides. Undoubtet feel that my personal rights are involved in this controversy, and when this blow comes, as the honorable Senator from New-York has announced it will come, I, sir, shall wrap my robes about me and take it. Let it come. I may fall as the gallant —
Washington (United States) (search for this): chapter 26
1861, Mr. Wilkinson, of Minnesota, introduced into the Senate of the United States, the following resolution: Whereas, Hon. Jesse D. Bright, heretofore, on the first day of March, 1861, wrote a letter, of which the following is a copy: Washington, March 1, 1861. my dear sir: Allow me to introduce, to your acquaintance, my friend Thomas B. Lincoln, of Texas. He visits your capital mainly to dispose of what he regards a great improvement in firearms. I recommend him to your favorableto my friends. For my enemies I care not. Sincerely yours, Jesse D. bright. J. Fitch, Madison, Ind. The other letter, addressed to a loyal gentleman who was, at one time, Superintendent of the Capitol Extension, is as follows: Washington, June 27, 1860. dear sir: I take pleasure in introducing to you an old and valued friend, Mr. Thomas B. Lincoln. He has a proposition to make you connected with a kind of machine he understands you are using in the public improvements under
Connecticut (Connecticut, United States) (search for this): chapter 26
Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederation of States. And, whereas, we believe the said letter is evidence of disloyalty to the United States, and is calculated to give aid and comfort to the public enemies, therefore, Be it resolved, That the said Jesse D. Bright is expelled from his seat in the Senate of the United States. This resolution was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. The members of this Committee are: Mr. Trumbull, of Illinois, Chairman; Mr. Foster, of Connecticut; Mr. Ten Eyck, of New-Jersey; Mr. Cowan, of Pennsylvania; Mr. Harris, of New-York; Mr. Bayard, of Delaware; and Mr. Powell, of Kentucky. In addition to the letter embodied in the resolution of Mr. Wilkinson, two other letters of Mr. Bright's got before the Committee, though informally, and figured, more or less, in the final debate. One of these letters is as follows: at my farm, September 7, 1861. In reply to your favor of the twentieth, just received, I have to say that I h
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...