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
French Forrest 25 1 Browse Search
United States (United States) 20 0 Browse Search
C. L. Vallandigham 18 0 Browse Search
Thomas J. Jackson 14 2 Browse Search
Privates Adams 12 0 Browse Search
Hooker 11 3 Browse Search
George B. McClellan 10 0 Browse Search
Barksdale 9 1 Browse Search
France (France) 8 0 Browse Search
Richmond (Virginia, United States) 7 1 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: May 13, 1863., [Electronic resource].

Found 518 total hits in 279 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
Hooker (search for this): article 1
l should be called the Battle of the Wilderness. The matter of fact, however, is stronger than anything else in behalf of the name. The great battle was really fought in the Wilderness--a country of gravelly clay soil, and a black-jack growth, presenting in many places an almost impenetrable thicket. There were occasional small openings of cleared and cultivated fields, in which the enemy had his works for defence.--The position was one of great strength and was very probably alluded to by Hooker a short time since as one he knew of, from which the whole Confederate army could not dislodge him. If he thought he knew such an one he would certainly go to it, and no doubt did, in preference to all others accessible to him. It was indeed a strong one. Yet Jackson's impetuous charge in the very jaws of death, as it were, could not be resisted by the Yankees, and they were driven from it. The name "Wilderness" will perpetuate the nature of the position thus heroically stormed and carried
Thomas J. Jackson (search for this): article 1
Battle of the Wilderness. We stated briefly a few days ago some moral and fanciful reasons why the great battle in which Jackson fell should be called the Battle of the Wilderness. The matter of fact, however, is stronger than anything else in behalf of the name. The great battle was really fought in the Wilderness--a country of gravelly clay soil, and a black-jack growth, presenting in many places an almost impenetrable thicket. There were occasional small openings of cleared and cultivated fields, in which the enemy had his works for defence.--The position was one of great strength and was very probably alluded to by Hooker a short time since as one he knew of, from which the whole Confederate army could not dislodge him. If he thought he knew such an one he would certainly go to it, and no doubt did, in preference to all others accessible to him. It was indeed a strong one. Yet Jackson's impetuous charge in the very jaws of death, as it were, could not be resisted by the Y
Chancellorsville (Virginia, United States) (search for this): article 1
f great strength and was very probably alluded to by Hooker a short time since as one he knew of, from which the whole Confederate army could not dislodge him. If he thought he knew such an one he would certainly go to it, and no doubt did, in preference to all others accessible to him. It was indeed a strong one. Yet Jackson's impetuous charge in the very jaws of death, as it were, could not be resisted by the Yankees, and they were driven from it. The name "Wilderness" will perpetuate the nature of the position thus heroically stormed and carried — it will commemorate the last great fight of that Hero of many bloody fields whose last achievement was his greatest. On the other hand, "Chancellorsville" is the name of a place with only one dwelling-house situated several miles from the great fight of the two days combat; and unsuggestive as it is at best, it could not therefore be applied with topographical truthfulness to designate the bloody struggle with the ruthless invader.
23rd (search for this): article 2
England and the United States. The debate in the House of Commons on the 23d, upon the pass given by Mr. Adams to an English ship to a Mexican port, displays the existence of much feeling on the subject. Mr. Rosbuck, a converted Radical, formerly our enemy, now our friend, leaped boldly into the ring and called out for justice to the "dignity" and "honor" of England, and for the protection of her commerce from the "sneering insolence of an upstart race!"--He was lustily cheered by the Opposition.--He declared that if the demand for this justice and this protection of the commerce of Great Britain led to war the English people were prepared for it. No other member went so far in a bellicose demonstration; but the act of Mr. Adams, U. S. Minister, was severely censured. While these outgiving are interesting, as displaying the sentiment of the British people through their representatives, the main point is as to the reply of Earl Russell, in the House of Lords, and the course
April 25th (search for this): article 2
S. Minister, was severely censured. While these outgiving are interesting, as displaying the sentiment of the British people through their representatives, the main point is as to the reply of Earl Russell, in the House of Lords, and the course of the Government. The Earl declared Mr. Adams's conduct "most unwarrantable." The Government, he stated, had declined to hold communication with him on the subject, but would forward a statement of the case to the Washington Cabinet on the 25th of April. This thrusting of Mr. Adams aside, in order to present the matter directly to his Government, is a happy proceeding for the Lincoln Cabinet, and suggests to them a means of composing the difficulty which they will most assuredly avail themselves of. The reply of Earl Russell being general, we are not informed as to the exact nature of the communication to the Washington Government. His mild language about it as "a representation of the facts," would suggest the inference that it wa
John Bull (search for this): article 2
d language about it as "a representation of the facts," would suggest the inference that it was not very sharp; that it was hardly up to the example of the United States itself, when it not only demanded that the British Government should disapprove Mr. Crampton's (British Minister to the United States) agency in the matter of enlisting troops in the United States for the Crimean war, but that it should withdraw Mr. Crampton from Washington. One would think that the opportunity being good John Bull would seize it to retort this practice precisely upon Jonathan. Possibly he may have done so; but Earl Russell's statement does not encourage the belief that he has. The British Cabinet is evidently afraid of Jonathan; it will do anything to avoid a difficulty with him. It refuses to recognize the Confederacy. It will most scrupulously preserve that centrality which is throwing every facility in the hands of the Yankees, and putting the most inconvenient and serious obstacles in our
Crampton (search for this): article 2
uage about it as "a representation of the facts," would suggest the inference that it was not very sharp; that it was hardly up to the example of the United States itself, when it not only demanded that the British Government should disapprove Mr. Crampton's (British Minister to the United States) agency in the matter of enlisting troops in the United States for the Crimean war, but that it should withdraw Mr. Crampton from Washington. One would think that the opportunity being good John Bull wMr. Crampton from Washington. One would think that the opportunity being good John Bull would seize it to retort this practice precisely upon Jonathan. Possibly he may have done so; but Earl Russell's statement does not encourage the belief that he has. The British Cabinet is evidently afraid of Jonathan; it will do anything to avoid a difficulty with him. It refuses to recognize the Confederacy. It will most scrupulously preserve that centrality which is throwing every facility in the hands of the Yankees, and putting the most inconvenient and serious obstacles in our way. I
Privates Adams (search for this): article 2
England and the United States. The debate in the House of Commons on the 23d, upon the pass given by Mr. Adams to an English ship to a Mexican port, displays the existence of much feeling on the subject. Mr. Rosbuck, a converted Radical, formerly our enemy, now our friend, leaped boldly into the ring and called out for justiple through their representatives, the main point is as to the reply of Earl Russell, in the House of Lords, and the course of the Government. The Earl declared Mr. Adams's conduct "most unwarrantable." The Government, he stated, had declined to hold communication with him on the subject, but would forward a statement of the case to the Washington Cabinet on the 25th of April. This thrusting of Mr. Adams aside, in order to present the matter directly to his Government, is a happy proceeding for the Lincoln Cabinet, and suggests to them a means of composing the difficulty which they will most assuredly avail themselves of. The reply of Earl Russell bein
Rosbuck (search for this): article 2
England and the United States. The debate in the House of Commons on the 23d, upon the pass given by Mr. Adams to an English ship to a Mexican port, displays the existence of much feeling on the subject. Mr. Rosbuck, a converted Radical, formerly our enemy, now our friend, leaped boldly into the ring and called out for justice to the "dignity" and "honor" of England, and for the protection of her commerce from the "sneering insolence of an upstart race!"--He was lustily cheered by the Opposition.--He declared that if the demand for this justice and this protection of the commerce of Great Britain led to war the English people were prepared for it. No other member went so far in a bellicose demonstration; but the act of Mr. Adams, U. S. Minister, was severely censured. While these outgiving are interesting, as displaying the sentiment of the British people through their representatives, the main point is as to the reply of Earl Russell, in the House of Lords, and the course
England (United Kingdom) (search for this): article 2
by Mr. Adams to an English ship to a Mexican port, displays the existence of much feeling on the subject. Mr. Rosbuck, a converted Radical, formerly our enemy, now our friend, leaped boldly into the ring and called out for justice to the "dignity" and "honor" of England, and for the protection of her commerce from the "sneering insolence of an upstart race!"--He was lustily cheered by the Opposition.--He declared that if the demand for this justice and this protection of the commerce of Great Britain led to war the English people were prepared for it. No other member went so far in a bellicose demonstration; but the act of Mr. Adams, U. S. Minister, was severely censured. While these outgiving are interesting, as displaying the sentiment of the British people through their representatives, the main point is as to the reply of Earl Russell, in the House of Lords, and the course of the Government. The Earl declared Mr. Adams's conduct "most unwarrantable." The Government, he stat
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...