Browsing named entities in Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4. You can also browse the collection for Carl Schurz or search for Carl Schurz in all documents.

Your search returned 82 results in 13 document sections:

1 2
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 44: Secession.—schemes of compromise.—Civil War.—Chairman of foreign relations Committee.—Dr. Lieber.—November, 1860April, 1861. (search)
obody who wishes to succeed should hail from Massachusetts or New York. Their claims are said to be exhausted. He valued most highly the accomplishments of George P. Marsh, who was appointed to the Italian mission, on account of his familiarity with languages and his rank among savans. He pleaded in vain with Mr. Lincoln for Theodore S. Fay's retention at Berne, Ante, vol. II. p. 120, note. and also failed in securing for Motley the mission to the Hague. He approved the appointment of Carl Schurz to Madrid, and also procured that of secretary of legation at the same court for Mr. H. J. Perry, without the latter's request or knowledge,—deeming Mr. Perry's previous experience in the same office, and his attainments in the Spanish language, to be of special advantage to our country. He was very desirous that John Jay should receive an important mission, in view of his personal fitness, his unselfish patriotism, and his devotion to the antislavery cause; but unfortunately his name an
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 45: an antislavery policy.—the Trent case.—Theories of reconstruction.—confiscation.—the session of 1861-1862. (search)
so clearly right in their position that during the waiting period there should be no declarations or action adverse to an antislavery policy by the President or Congress, or by generals in the field, or in correspondence with foreign powers. Mr. Schurz's Essay on Lincoln, pp. 77, 93, implies a criticism of the pressure which was made on the President by the radical antislavery men This class includes Mr. Schurz himself, as his letter from Madrid to Sumner, Nov. 14, 1861, shows, in which he urMr. Schurz himself, as his letter from Madrid to Sumner, Nov. 14, 1861, shows, in which he urged the adoption of a policy of emancipation. This proclamation, followed by the later one of January 1, 1863, yields in importance to no event in American or even in modern history. It had not, indeed, the sanction of States as a constitutional provision, or of Congress as a statute, or of a high tribunal as a rule of law. It could not perhaps have been pleaded in any court as securing the liberty of a single slave. But in its significance and effect it stands before any edict, secular or
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 46: qualities and habits as a senator.—1862. (search)
to instruct foreign journals. He was likewise in communication with a large proportion of the legations and consulates of the United States, from which came statements of their needs and the aspect of our Civil War as it was regarded at their posts, and advice as to modes of enlisting foreign opinion in our favor. Among correspondents of this class at this time were John Bigelow, Henry Adams, J. E. Harvey, W. S. Thayer, Seth Webb, Jr., J. S. Pike, B. Taylor, J. R. Giddings, T. Corwin. Carl Schurz. II. J. Perry, C. D. Cleveland, and B. R. Wood. No one outside of the state department had at command equal sources of information of this kind. He was the one senator to whom advanced antislavery men looked for the expression and promotion of their views; and every mail at this time, and indeed during his entire service in Congress, brought him a large number of letters from this class, in which they stated, often at great length, their hopes and fears, and their interest in the vari
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 50: last months of the Civil War.—Chase and Taney, chief-justices.—the first colored attorney in the supreme court —reciprocity with Canada.—the New Jersey monopoly.— retaliation in war.—reconstruction.—debate on Louisiana.—Lincoln and Sumner.—visit to Richmond.—the president's death by assassination.—Sumner's eulogy upon him. —President Johnson; his method of reconstruction.—Sumner's protests against race distinctions.—death of friends. —French visitors and correspondents.—1864-1865. (search)
ts as liberal as the President's scheme, carrying restrictions and disabilities no further; Mr. Schurz is in error when he says that this scheme of reconstruction was much more stringent in its pro was safe with the new President. There were, however, not wanting some disturbing signs. Carl Schurz wrote Sumner, May 9, warning against the schemes of Southern leaders in Mississippi, Georgia,has been attributed to his egotism, which was plied by the flatteries of Southern leaders; Carl Schurz in two letters, June 27 and July 8, urged Sumner to go to Washington in order to counteract ts, vol. XI. p. 18; Blaine's Twenty Years of Congress, vol. II. pp. 63, 67, 68, 83. 108. Carl Schurz, to whom the President showed his proclamation for North Carolina before it was issued, urged him to modify it so as to include the colored people as voters. In July General Schurz visited, by commission from the President, the Southern States to examine their condition; but when he returned
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 51: reconstruction under Johnson's policy.—the fourteenth amendment to the constitution.—defeat of equal suffrage for the District of Columbia, and for Colorado, Nebraska, and Tennessee.—fundamental conditions.— proposed trial of Jefferson Davis.—the neutrality acts. —Stockton's claim as a senator.—tributes to public men. —consolidation of the statutes.—excessive labor.— address on Johnson's Policy.—his mother's death.—his marriage.—1865-1866. (search)
nate made on Sumner's motion, sent to the Senate, December 19, the reports of Generals Grant and Schurz on the condition of the States lately in rebellion. The latter's report, containing a full descn a similar inspection as incidental to a military tour. The two reports were in conflict. General Schurz discovered in the South, with exceptions, an entire absence of that national spirit which focommunicating the reports called attention to General Grant's, but avoided a like mention of General Schurz's, and avowed his own belief that sectional animosity is surely and rapidly merging itself and General Grant's report having been read from the desk, Sumner called for the reading of General Schurz's report, but this was found to be impracticable on account of its length. Sumner, in briefwhitewashing message of Franklin Pierce with regard to the enormities in Kansas, and referred to Schurz's report as accurate, authentic, and most authoritative, and to Grant's visit as hasty. Works
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, chapter 10 (search)
der my roof. he kept aloof from parties, but he could now return the courtesies which he had been receiving as a bachelor. Among those known to have dined with him are Seward, Motley, Fish, Conking, Hooper. Reverdy Johnson, ,John Sherman, Carl Schurz, Morrill of Vermont. General Sickles, General Webb, W. M. Evarts, Edmund Quincy, Agassiz. Ex-President Roberts of Liberia, Berthemy the French minister, Sir Edward Thornton the English minister, Gerolt the Prussian minister, and Blacque Bey t widow of his early friend, Mrs. J. E. Lodge, and Mrs. Claflin, who came with her husband. The Marquis de Cliambrun dined often with him, and few foreigners of distinction came to Washington without partaking of his hospitality. He would say to Schurz, who entered the Senate in 1869, Come and dine with me to-day, and I will show you another Englishman. Those who sat at his table recall his cordial greeting and genial smile, with conversation embroidered with both wisdom and mirth, when he e
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 54: President Grant's cabinet.—A. T. Stewart's disability.—Mr. Fish, Secretary of State.—Motley, minister to England.—the Alabama claims.—the Johnson-Clarendon convention.— the senator's speech: its reception in this country and in England.—the British proclamation of belligerency.— national claims.—instructions to Motley.—consultations with Fish.—political address in the autumn.— lecture on caste.—1869. (search)
s wrong,—not a single word. Such a generous expression would be the beginning of a just settlement, and the best assurance of that harmony between two great and kindred nations which all must desire. This was the conclusion of a speech pacific in tone and moderate in statement. What he sought by the speech was, not to obtain a heavy assessment of damages, but to establish a principle,—the duty of a friendly nation towards another engaged in suppressing a pro-slavery insurrection. As Mr. Schurz well said: Eulogy, April 29, 1874.— What he desired to accomplish was, not to extort from England a large sum of money, but to put our grievance in the strongest light; to convince England of the great wrong she had inflicted upon us, and thus to prepare a composition which, consisting more in the settlement of great principles and rules of international law to govern the future intercourse of nations than in the payment of large damages, would remove all questions of difference, <
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 55: Fessenden's death.—the public debt.—reduction of postage.— Mrs. Lincoln's pension.—end of reconstruction.—race discriminations in naturalization.—the Chinese.—the senator's record.—the Cuban Civil War.—annexation of San Domingo.—the treaties.—their use of the navy.—interview with the presedent.—opposition to the annexation; its defeat.—Mr. Fish.—removal of Motley.—lecture on Franco-Prussian War.—1869-1870. (search)
more magnanimous. It is such things that bring thee nearer to the hearts of the people. Carl Schurz, who had taken his seat in March, 1869, was, at Sumner's instance, put in Fessenden's place oxed in my mind, and I know that I am right. Sumner mentioned the interview the next day to Mr. Schurz, who, being by conviction against tropical acquisitions, asked anxiously what his reply was, ain them. Four day later it made a report adverse to a ratification, in which Sumner, Patterson, Schurz, Cameron, and Casserly joined. Cameron, however, explained at the time that under some circumst been misapplied. The ratification was then supported by Cole, Nye, and Stewart, and opposed by Schurz, Patterson, and Casserly. After a few weeks' debate the Senate laid the subject aside, and did tterson (N. H.), Pool (N. C.), Robertson (S. C.), Ross (Kan.), Saulsbury (Del.), Sawyer (S. C.), Schurz (Mo.). Scott (Penn.), Sprague (R. I.), Stockton (N. J.), Sumner (Mass.), Thurman (O.), Tipton (N
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 56: San Domingo again.—the senator's first speech.—return of the angina pectoris.—Fish's insult in the Motley Papers.— the senator's removal from the foreign relations committee.—pretexts for the remioval.—second speech against the San Domingo scheme.—the treaty of Washington.—Sumner and Wilson against Butler for governor.—1870-1871. (search)
n on the San Domingo question, to drop Sumner, Schurz, or Patterson; but it was not found practicabl and Patterson, however, as well as Sumner and Schurz, voted against taking up the resolution. EdmuYates, and Wilson for the resolution, and from Schurz against it, the Senate concurred unanimously i Brooklyn, wrote from the Senate chamber while Schurz was speaking on his proposed removal, March 10ock (Neb.), Caldwell (Kan.), Corbett (Oreron), Schurz (Mo.), Boreman (W. Va.), Kobertson (S. C.), Spd as speaking against the removal were Wilson, Schurz, Fenton, Sherman, Ferry (Conn.), Trumbull, Cormposed upon him; and his request was granted. Schurz moved a postponement of the vote on the list, riety of the removal was earnestly contested. Schurz maintained that the San Domingo scheme was at rviving associates of the senator,—Patterson. Schurz, Casserly, Morrill of Vermont, Trumbull, Fentothout proper weighing inserted at the last. Schurz, who had read the speech before delivery, was [2 more...]
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 57: attempts to reconcile the President and the senator.—ineligibility of the President for a second term.—the Civil-rights Bill.—sale of arms to France.—the liberal Republican party: Horace Greeley its candidate adopted by the Democrats.—Sumner's reserve.—his relations with Republican friends and his colleague.—speech against the President.—support of Greeley.—last journey to Europe.—a meeting with Motley.—a night with John Bright.—the President's re-election.—1871-1872. (search)
s absent when the bill passed, was paired with Schurz, who was opposed to it. A week later, when thed that it must be looked into. A month later, Schurz, whom the marquis had seen, reported what he h19 and 20,—Conkling having the former day, and Schurz the latter. On the first day the friends of tanner, gesture, and style. The next day, when Schurz was to reply, ladies were admitted into the Se. New York Tribune, February 21. See as to Schurz's other speeches in the debate, New York Tribuf Stevenson, the only Democrat chosen, to have Schurz take his place. Sumner was absent at the timegress, second session, Senate Reports No. 183. Schurz, by its invitation,—an invitation which was a Sumner, while in relations of confidence with Schurz and Trumbull, kept himself in reserve, avowinghe editorial department (Mr. Curtis's) Sumner, Schurz, and Trumbull with fairness, went beyond the l. Pillsbury, attorney-general; in Missouri, Carl Schurz, Secretary of the Interior; in Ohio, James [23 more...]<
1 2