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) 1,628 0 Browse Search
Centreville (Virginia, United States) 530 0 Browse Search
Doc 458 0 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 427 7 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 406 0 Browse Search
Bull Run, Va. (Virginia, United States) 347 1 Browse Search
Irwin McDowell 314 2 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 272 0 Browse Search
Kentucky (Kentucky, United States) 258 0 Browse Search
Daniel Tyler 252 2 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 2. (ed. Frank Moore). Search the whole document.

Found 184 total hits in 45 results.

1 2 3 4 5
Ohio (United States) (search for this): chapter 12
xclusively relied upon to sustain the position that Congress has any power whatsoever to legislate over the territories, viz.: The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the Territory or other property belonging to the United States. The word territory, used in this provision, obviously means land, and nothing else. The United States, at the time when the Constitution was adopted, owned an immense amount of land north of the Ohio River, and these lands Congress was authorized to dispose of. That the word territory means property, is conclusively shown by its connection with the words and other property --territory and other property. The territory spoken of, therefore, is property in lands. Rules and regulations are a grade of legislation somewhat below the dignity of laws; but admitting them in this case to have the same effect, on what are they to operate? Simply on the property of the United States, not on any
Rhode Island (Rhode Island, United States) (search for this): chapter 12
ndition that they adopt a republican government. But if there be a doubt as to the power of Congress to legislate for the territories, is it not safer and more consistent with democratic principles to deny the power than to assume it? Some of the original States, when admitted into the Union, had not the population of a third-rate city of the present day, and no harm would be likely to arise by leaving the territories to themselves until they have doubled the population of Delaware or Rhode Island in 1780. But would it not be incomparably better to admit them into the Union as States, with a much less population, than to leave them to be a bone of contention among demagogues and disunionists, disturbing every essential interest of the country and jeopardizing the union of the existing States? Let us briefly consider the practical workings of the remedy for Southern wrongs, which you suggest, in case a black republican is elected to the presidency. You ask, Is it wise, if we do
Texas (Texas, United States) (search for this): chapter 12
ugitive slave law. 2. To the untiring efforts of fanatics who come to the slave States under the guise of preachers, teachers, &c., in inveigling away our slaves, and to the general sympathy with their nefarious purposes, evinced by the facilities furnished them by the underground railroad in spiriting away our slaves beyond the reach of their owners. 3. To the raid of John Brown, and the sympathy which his well-merited execution evoked. 4. To the recent insurrectionary movements in Texas--projected and carried out by abolition emissaries, where the incendiary torch of the slave lighted by abolition traitors, has reduced to ashes one million of dollars' worth of property, and where the timely discovery of the hellish scheme alone saved the lives of thousands of men, women, and children. These are the natural and necessary results of the teachings of black republicanism; and if we have such developments under an administration which professes to guard our constitutional rig
Mississippi (Mississippi, United States) (search for this): chapter 12
igns against the institutions of the South, checked as he must necessarily be by a Senate and judiciary, if not a House of Representatives, without one overt act, can justify any portion of the South, even to their own consciences, in an act of rebellion? There is one notable feature in the attitude of the South. The cry of disunion comes, not from those who suffer most from northern outrage, but from those who suffer least. It comes from South Carolina, and Georgia, and Alabama, and Mississippi, whose slave property is rendered comparatively secure by the intervention of other slaveholding States between them and the free States, and not from Delaware, and Maryland, and Virginia, and Kentucky, and Tennessee, and Missouri, which lose a hundred slaves by abolition thieves where the first-named States lose one. Why are not the States that suffer most, loudest in their cry for disunion? It is because their position enables them to see more distinctly than you do, at a distance, th
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 12
to their own consciences, in an act of rebellion? There is one notable feature in the attitude of the South. The cry of disunion comes, not from those who suffer most from northern outrage, but from those who suffer least. It comes from South Carolina, and Georgia, and Alabama, and Mississippi, whose slave property is rendered comparatively secure by the intervention of other slaveholding States between them and the free States, and not from Delaware, and Maryland, and Virginia, and Kentuc Virginia do not intend to become the theatre of desolating wars between the North and the South; Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri do not intend that their peaceful channels of commerce shall become rivers of blood to gratify the ambition of South Carolina and Alabama, who at a remote distance from present danger cry out disunion. I have said that the South has all along had a peaceful remedy and has it still. The union sentiment is overwhelming in all the Middle and Western States, constit
Missouri (Missouri, United States) (search for this): chapter 12
labama, and Mississippi, whose slave property is rendered comparatively secure by the intervention of other slaveholding States between them and the free States, and not from Delaware, and Maryland, and Virginia, and Kentucky, and Tennessee, and Missouri, which lose a hundred slaves by abolition thieves where the first-named States lose one. Why are not the States that suffer most, loudest in their cry for disunion? It is because their position enables them to see more distinctly than you do, where their adversaries are somewhat restrained by constitutional and legal obligations. No, sir; Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia do not intend to become the theatre of desolating wars between the North and the South; Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri do not intend that their peaceful channels of commerce shall become rivers of blood to gratify the ambition of South Carolina and Alabama, who at a remote distance from present danger cry out disunion. I have said that the South has all along
Indiana (Indiana, United States) (search for this): chapter 12
wars between the North and the South; Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri do not intend that their peaceful channels of commerce shall become rivers of blood to gratify the ambition of South Carolina and Alabama, who at a remote distance from present danger cry out disunion. I have said that the South has all along had a peaceful remedy and has it still. The union sentiment is overwhelming in all the Middle and Western States, constituting two-thirds of the republic. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois are as little inclined to become frontier States as Maryland, Virginia, and Kentucky. Had the present Administration cut loose from the disunionists, instead of virtually ministering to their designs, and planted itself firmly on union ground, the secessions at Charleston and Baltimore would never have occurred, the constitutional union party would have been an impossibility, the democracy would have recovered its ascendency in the North, and an united party, embracing two-th
Charleston (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 12
t perceive, sir, that the secession was a part of the programme for breaking up the democratic party? And is it not palpable that after vacating their seats at Charleston, they went to Baltimore for the mere purpose of more effectually completing the work of destruction by drawing off another detachment? I, sir, entertain no dous should be conceded and incorporated into the platform of the democratic party. The concession was made and they had no opportunity to secede. They came to Charleston under the same leader, again instructed to secede unless the convention would put into the platform a new plank, the effect of which, if adopted, would be furth Administration cut loose from the disunionists, instead of virtually ministering to their designs, and planted itself firmly on union ground, the secessions at Charleston and Baltimore would never have occurred, the constitutional union party would have been an impossibility, the democracy would have recovered its ascendency in t
Illinois (Illinois, United States) (search for this): chapter 12
the North and the South; Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri do not intend that their peaceful channels of commerce shall become rivers of blood to gratify the ambition of South Carolina and Alabama, who at a remote distance from present danger cry out disunion. I have said that the South has all along had a peaceful remedy and has it still. The union sentiment is overwhelming in all the Middle and Western States, constituting two-thirds of the republic. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois are as little inclined to become frontier States as Maryland, Virginia, and Kentucky. Had the present Administration cut loose from the disunionists, instead of virtually ministering to their designs, and planted itself firmly on union ground, the secessions at Charleston and Baltimore would never have occurred, the constitutional union party would have been an impossibility, the democracy would have recovered its ascendency in the North, and an united party, embracing two-thirds of the No
Washington (United States) (search for this): chapter 12
ainfully impressed with the conviction that it will never be realized. I am, very truly, your friend and obedient servant, James L. Orr. Hon. Amos Kendall, Washington, D. C. Mr. Kendall's reply. Washington, Sept. 10, 1860. Hon. James L. Orr--My Dear Sir: Your letter of the 16th ult. reached Washington while I was abseWashington, Sept. 10, 1860. Hon. James L. Orr--My Dear Sir: Your letter of the 16th ult. reached Washington while I was absent in the North. Though I did not contemplate, when I wrote you on the 9th ult., any thing beyond a limited private correspondence, yet having no opinion on the portentous condition of public affairs which I have a motive to conceal, or am ashamed to avow, I cheerfully comply with your suggestions. You quote from my former lWashington while I was absent in the North. Though I did not contemplate, when I wrote you on the 9th ult., any thing beyond a limited private correspondence, yet having no opinion on the portentous condition of public affairs which I have a motive to conceal, or am ashamed to avow, I cheerfully comply with your suggestions. You quote from my former letter the declaration that my mind is equally clear that the South has long had a peaceful remedy within her reach, and has it still, though impaired by the recent conduct of some of her sons, and you ask of me a full explanation of my opinions on that point as well as the remedy to be resorted to by us — the South--should the Gov
1 2 3 4 5