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

Your search returned 80 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)
House,—some of his colleagues from Massachusetts joining with him, but the greater number separating from him. McPherson's History of the Rebellion, pp. 57-62; Congressional Globe, pp. 1262-1264, 1284, 1285, 1327, 1328, 1330. In the House, John Sherman, Schuyler Colfax, and William Windom voted for the proposed constitutional amendment. John Sherman agreed with Adams as to the admission of New Mexico without the prohibition of slavery. R. H. Dana, Jr., in speeches at Manchester, N. H. (FebJohn Sherman agreed with Adams as to the admission of New Mexico without the prohibition of slavery. R. H. Dana, Jr., in speeches at Manchester, N. H. (February 19), and Cambridge, Mass. (February 11), took substantially Adams's view. Boston Advertiser, February 20; Adams's Biography of Dana, vol. II. pp. 252, 253. Governor Andrew is also understood to have communicated to Mr. Adams his approval of the latter's course at this time; but the antislavery men of Massachusetts were as a body against compromise. He used no persuasions with them, and seemed indifferent as to their action. In the committee of Thirty-three, two members alone—Washburn
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)
,—an inference which Sumner avoided by treating it as levied on a claim, and as recognizing a fact rather than a right. Sherman, who led in opposition to the amendment, took Sumner to task for not being sufficiently considerate and restrained in hito the power of Congress over the rebel States which they had at first repudiated. Hendricks did this in a passage with Sherman and Fessenden, Jan. 30, 1868. (Congressional Globe, p. 860.) Doolittle upbraided (Feb. 24, 1868) Republican senators foessenden, Dixon, and Doolittle—were prompt to disavow emphatically any responsibility of the Republican party for them. Sherman went so far as to say that they acknowledged the right of secession, and he could draw no distinction between them and tevidence competent in such a case. He led the debate, Feb. 13, 1868, in co-operation with Conness, Edmunds, Howard, and Sherman, against the admission of Philip F. Thomas, senator-elect from Maryland, specifically on the ground that he had permitte
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 48: Seward.—emancipation.—peace with France.—letters of marque and reprisal.—foreign mediation.—action on certain military appointments.—personal relations with foreigners at Washington.—letters to Bright, Cobden, and the Duchess of Argyll.—English opinion on the Civil War.—Earl Russell and Gladstone.—foreign relations.—1862-1863. (search)
army before Richmond in June, 1862, marks an important stage in the controversy concerning emancipation and the arming of negroes, whether free or slave. This appears in the debates in the Senate, July 9 and 10, particularly in the speeches of Sherman, Fessenden, Collamer, and Rice of Minnesota, A committee of senators, headed by Trumbull, waited on the President to urge more vigorous measures,—among them the arming of negroes. New York Tribune, July 21, 1862.—none of whom had been disposge and counsel may change the plans. I cannot disguise my own conviction, entertained for a long time, that Charleston is to be taken on the field of battle, The prediction proved true. Charleston fell in February, 1865, with the advance of Sherman's army.—that is, by breaking the chief army of slavery; and this we are now permitted to believe will be done. Our army near Washington, under Hooker, will move in a day or two. All concur in representing it in admirable condition, hardy, well<
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 49: letters to Europe.—test oath in the senate.—final repeal of the fugitive-slave act.—abolition of the coastwise slave-trade.—Freedmen's Bureau.—equal rights of the colored people as witnesses and passengers.—equal pay of colored troops.—first struggle for suffrage of the colored people.—thirteenth amendment of the constitution.— French spoliation claims.—taxation of national banks.— differences with Fessenden.—Civil service Reform.—Lincoln's re-election.—parting with friends.—1863-1864. (search)
expressed their dissent in letters to him. John Sherman approved, Feb. 8, 1869, in the Senate such from a number of Republican senators, led by Sherman and Foster, who sought to save the statute of 1793. Sherman's amendment, excluding this early statute from repeal,—legislation which in his vie in the debate, replying to Reverdy Johnson. Sherman and Trumbull, wishing to keep legislative matd in ribaldry. Republican senators—Trumbull, Sherman, Doolittle, and Grimes, as well as Reverdy Joc senators alone voted against it. Foster and Sherman now joined him, and Grimes and Trumbull did ned soldiers and their families, he replied to Sherman, who desired to have it wait for action on thss, Howard, Lane of Indiana, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sherman, Sprague, Wilkinson, and Wilson. Sumner recerals from whom a choice might be made,—Grant, Sherman, and Butler. Among others active in the moved he is no boaster. He gives great praise to Sherman, saying he is the best soldier on this contin[6 more...
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)
thousand men. Against him is Grant at Petersburg, a corps now demonstrating at Wilmington, and Sherman marching from Georgia. The latter will not turn aside for Augusta or Charleston, or any fortifsible to take the vote. Trumbull renewed, with repetition, the charge of factious opposition. Sherman now interposed with a plea for immediate attention to the revenue and appropriation bills, which statements as to the proceedings in Louisiana. The debate had gone on thus far since noon on Sherman's motion to take up a revenue bill, each senator, contrary to strict rule, discussing the main rden, a reproach, and a wrong. At the end of his next sentence, which was pointed at Trumbull, Sherman insisted on conforming the debate strictly to his motion to take up a revenue bill. Senators at last recognized the impossibility of reaching a vote on the pending resolution, and Sherman's motion was carried by a vote of thirty-four to twelve. Works, vol. IX. pp. 311-328, give extracts f
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 52: Tenure-of-office act.—equal suffrage in the District of Columbia, in new states, in territories, and in reconstructed states.—schools and homesteads for the Freedmen.—purchase of Alaska and of St. Thomas.—death of Sir Frederick Bruce.—Sumner on Fessenden and Edmunds.—the prophetic voices.—lecture tour in the West.—are we a nation?1866-1867. (search)
in the Senate, Dec. 14, 1866 (Globe, p. 124). Sherman said, March 11, 1867 (Globe, p. 55). A year aat 11 A. Mr., when a committee, consisting of Sherman, Fessenden, Howard, Harris, Howe is likely to have served instead of Harris; Sherman, Feb. 10, 1870. Congressional Globe. p. 1182. Frelinghct on the impeachment trial of the next year. Sherman, hitherto averse to it, maintained it in the h they had escaped. Other senators, however (Sherman for instance), thought that they must stop sogradually follow. Sumner went further than Sherman in favoring the exclusion of rebels from votivol. XII. pp. 526, 527. they were opposed by Sherman and Frelinghuysen on the ground that such supso this important requirement was adopted. Mr. Sherman, as chairman of the committee, was directed on the appropriation bills, in contrast with Sherman, who was always amiable. Further, he said of503-544. which required toilsome research. John Sherman, writing, September 6, from Mansfield, Ohio[4 more...]
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, chapter 10 (search)
ward, Motley, Fish, Conking, Hooper. Reverdy Johnson, ,John Sherman, Carl Schurz, Morrill of Vermont. General Sickles, Gene better. From other senators, like Anthony, Frelinghuysen, Sherman, and Dixon, though often or generally voting against him oanything else to his selection for the Presidency in 1880. Sherman, chairman of the Senate finance committee, made a speech, Edward Atkinson, of Boston, wrote to Sumner, February 29: Sherman's speech has created more distrust here than anything thatst, which were published in a pamphlet, with the title Senator Sherman's Fallacies. William Endicott, Jr., of the same city, to remonstrate against the national perfidy proposed by Mr. Sherman. The country will always be grateful to Mr. Sherman fMr. Sherman for his later services, both in the Senate and in the Cabinet, in promoting the resumption of specie payments, and in resistintheir encounter with the Western senators, who were led by Sherman and supported by Frelinghuysen and Conkling. The measure
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)
e instituted by this Act shall directly or indirectly be concerned in carrying on the business of trade or commerce In order to qualify Mr. Stewart, Patterson and Sherman urged the instant repeal of this disabling provision. Sumner, when the measure was about to pass, interposed, and insisted on a preliminary consideration by a committee. A few moments later a message was received from the President, in which he asked that Mr. Stewart be exempted from the Act. When Sherman sought to have a bill at once carried to that effect, Sumner again interposed an objection to such summary action, saying that the bill ought to be most profoundly considered before it i spirit of hostility and revenge, and representing the views of the senators as well as public opinion. Fessenden was the first to approve; and he was followed by Sherman, Howard, Morton, Scott, Thurman, Casserly, Stockton, Chandler, and Warner. Fessenden and other senators, in personal congratulations and in public remarks, comme
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)
epared efforts. He had come to them late, and he developed unexpected power in treating them. Sherman said of him in 1874, that he had of late years carefully studied these questions, and had contrrch 9, Globe, p. 1795; March 10, Globe, pp. 1839, 1841; March 11, Globe, pp. 1861, 1871. Except Sherman, no senator at this session contributed so much to the debate on the refunding and consolidatiooversy: With all his faults there is hardly a better-natured man in the Senate than Mr. Sumner. Sherman, who regretted the waste of time in such controversies, said that the senator from Massachusettim from sitting on the case. Sumner, while maintaining the fairness of his committee, accepted Sherman's friendly suggestion that the petition be referred to a special committee. The special commitairs against the treaty,--Banyard (Del.). Buckinghamn (Conn.), Kellogg (La.), and Yates (111.). Sherman, though in his seat, did not vote. The Senate records might show a slight variation from the a
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 the morning of March 9. The chairman, Anthony, appointed as the committee to present a list Sherman, Morrill of Vermont, Howe, Nye, and Pool. Anthony was friendly to Sumner, and if in naming theoposed exclusion of Sumner, he supposed at least the first three favorable to his retention, as Sherman and Morrill proved to be. Howe had, however, as it appeared, taken a position against Sumner. he longest speech. Those reported as speaking against the removal were Wilson, Schurz, Fenton, Sherman, Ferry (Conn.), Trumbull, Corbett, and Morrill (Vt.). The caucus met again the next morning, whe instrumentality of the senator from Massachusetts as of any other individual in the country. Sherman felt bound by the action of the caucus built he recorded his deliberate conviction that it was ht or hearing. Diplomatists, judges, members of the Cabinet, and army officers (including General Sherman) were present. The House having adjourned in expectation of the speech, its members throng
1 2