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 descending order. Sort in ascending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
Charles Sumner 1,590 8 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 850 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 692 0 Browse Search
Kansas (Kansas, United States) 400 0 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 360 0 Browse Search
Europe 232 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 206 0 Browse Search
John Lothrop Motley 200 0 Browse Search
Mexico (Mexico, Mexico) 188 0 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 188 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of C. Edwards Lester, Life and public services of Charles Sumner: Born Jan. 6, 1811. Died March 11, 1874.. Search the whole document.

Found 69 total hits in 33 results.

1 2 3 4
New Jersey (New Jersey, United States) (search for this): chapter 37
are provisions, borrowed from the Articles of Confederation, securing to citizens of each State equal privileges in the several States; giving faith to the public records of the States; and ordaining the surrender of fugitives from justice. But this draft, though from the flaming guardian of the slave interest, contained no allusion to fugitive slaves. In the course of the Convention other plans were brought forward on the 15th June a series of eleven propositions by Mr. Patterson, of New Jersey, so as to render the Federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of Government, and the preservation of the Union; on the 18th June, eleven propositions by Mr. Hamilton of New York, containing his ideas of a suitable plan of Government for the United States; and on the 19th June, Mr. Randolph's resolutions, originally offered on the 29th May, as altered, amended, and agreed to in Committee of the Whole House. On the 26th, twenty-three resolutions, already adopted on different days in
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 37
bsolute restraint on Congress. John Rutledge said: If the Convention thinks North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia will ever agree to this plan [the Federal Constitution] unless their right to ites will never be such fools as to give up so important an interest. Charles Pinckney said: South Carolina can never receive the plan [of the Constitution] if it prohibits the slave trade. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney thought himself bound to declare candidly, that he did not think South Carolina would stop her importation of slaves in any short time. The effrontery of the slave-masters was matcre was no allusion to fugitive slaves. On the same day, Charles Pinckney, of slaveholding South Carolina, laid before the Convention what is called A draft of a Federal Government, to be agreed upofor the surrender of fugitives from justice. Mr. Butler and Mr. Charles Pinckney, both from South Carolina, now moved openly to require fugitive slaves and servants to be delivered up like criminals.
Georgia (Georgia, United States) (search for this): chapter 37
is moment, sends twenty-one members to the other House. There was a third compromise, which cannot be mentioned without shame. It was that hateful bargain by which Congress was restrained until 1808 from the prohibition of the foreign slave trade, thus securing, down to that period, toleration for crime. This was pertinaciously pressed by the South, even to the extent of an absolute restraint on Congress. John Rutledge said: If the Convention thinks North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia will ever agree to this plan [the Federal Constitution] unless their right to import slaves be untouched, the expectation is vain. The people of those States will never be such fools as to give up so important an interest. Charles Pinckney said: South Carolina can never receive the plan [of the Constitution] if it prohibits the slave trade. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney thought himself bound to declare candidly, that he did not think South Carolina would stop her importation of slaves in a
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 37
wer has been constant, and, at this moment, sends twenty-one members to the other House. There was a third compromise, which cannot be mentioned without shame. It was that hateful bargain by which Congress was restrained until 1808 from the prohibition of the foreign slave trade, thus securing, down to that period, toleration for crime. This was pertinaciously pressed by the South, even to the extent of an absolute restraint on Congress. John Rutledge said: If the Convention thinks North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia will ever agree to this plan [the Federal Constitution] unless their right to import slaves be untouched, the expectation is vain. The people of those States will never be such fools as to give up so important an interest. Charles Pinckney said: South Carolina can never receive the plan [of the Constitution] if it prohibits the slave trade. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney thought himself bound to declare candidly, that he did not think South Carolina would sto
Connecticut (Connecticut, United States) (search for this): chapter 37
es from justice. Mr. Butler and Mr. Charles Pinckney, both from South Carolina, now moved openly to require fugitive slaves and servants to be delivered up like criminals. Here was no disguise. With Hamlet it was now said in spirit: Seems, madam, nay, it is; I know not seems. But the very boldness of the effort drew attention and opposition. Mr. Wilson, of Pennsylvania, at once objected: This would oblige the Executive of the State to do it at the public expense. Mr. Sherman, of Connecticut, saw no more propriety in the public seizing and surrendering a slave or servant, than a horse. Under the pressure of these objections, the offensive proposition was quietly withdrawn— never more to be renewed. The article for the surrender of criminals was then adopted. On the next day, 29th August, profiting by the suggestions already made, Mr. Butler moved a proposition—substantially like that now found in the Constitution—not for the surrender of fugitive slaves, as originally prop<
United States (United States) (search for this): chapter 37
ere was no allusion to fugitive slaves. On the same day, Charles Pinckney, of slaveholding South Carolina, laid before the Convention what is called A draft of a Federal Government, to be agreed upon between the free and independent States of America, an elaborate paper, marked by considerable minuteness of detail. Here are provisions, borrowed from the Articles of Confederation, securing to citizens of each State equal privileges in the several States; giving faith to the public records of to render the Federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of Government, and the preservation of the Union; on the 18th June, eleven propositions by Mr. Hamilton of New York, containing his ideas of a suitable plan of Government for the United States; and on the 19th June, Mr. Randolph's resolutions, originally offered on the 29th May, as altered, amended, and agreed to in Committee of the Whole House. On the 26th, twenty-three resolutions, already adopted on different days in the Conven
New England (United States) (search for this): chapter 37
r will it be easy to find any authority for it in any contemporary document, speech, published letter or pamphlet of any kind. It is true that there were compromises at the formation of the Constitution, which were the subject of anxious debate; but this was not of them. There was a compromise between the small and large States, by which equality was secured to all the States in the Senate. There was another compromise finally carried, under threats from the South, on the motion of a New England member, by which the Slave States were allowed Representatives according to the whole number of free persons, and three-fifths of all other persons, thus securing political power on account of their slaves, in consideration that direct taxes should be apportioned in the same way. Direct taxes have been imposed at only four brief intervals. The political power has been constant, and, at this moment, sends twenty-one members to the other House. There was a third compromise, which cannot
Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): chapter 37
Arabian tale, to the power and dimensions of a giant. The next article under discussion provided for the surrender of fugitives from justice. Mr. Butler and Mr. Charles Pinckney, both from South Carolina, now moved openly to require fugitive slaves and servants to be delivered up like criminals. Here was no disguise. With Hamlet it was now said in spirit: Seems, madam, nay, it is; I know not seems. But the very boldness of the effort drew attention and opposition. Mr. Wilson, of Pennsylvania, at once objected: This would oblige the Executive of the State to do it at the public expense. Mr. Sherman, of Connecticut, saw no more propriety in the public seizing and surrendering a slave or servant, than a horse. Under the pressure of these objections, the offensive proposition was quietly withdrawn— never more to be renewed. The article for the surrender of criminals was then adopted. On the next day, 29th August, profiting by the suggestions already made, Mr. Butler moved a p
James Madison (search for this): chapter 37
is now insisted that the term persons held to service is an equivalent or synonym for slaves. This interpretation is rebuked by an incident, to which reference has been already made, but which will bear repetition. On the 6th September—a little more than one brief week after the clause had been adopted, and when, if it was deemed to be of any significance, it could not have been forgotten—the very word service came under debate, and received a fixed meaning. It was unanimously adopted as a substitute for servitude in another part of the Constitution, for the reason that it expressed the obligation of free persons, while the other expressed the condition of Slaves. In the face of this authentic evidence of the sentiments of the Convention, reported by Mr. Madison, it is difficult to see how the term persons held to service can be deemed to express anything beyond the obligations of free persons. Thus in the light of calm inquiry, does this exaggerated clause lose its importa
Patterson (search for this): chapter 37
of detail. Here are provisions, borrowed from the Articles of Confederation, securing to citizens of each State equal privileges in the several States; giving faith to the public records of the States; and ordaining the surrender of fugitives from justice. But this draft, though from the flaming guardian of the slave interest, contained no allusion to fugitive slaves. In the course of the Convention other plans were brought forward on the 15th June a series of eleven propositions by Mr. Patterson, of New Jersey, so as to render the Federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of Government, and the preservation of the Union; on the 18th June, eleven propositions by Mr. Hamilton of New York, containing his ideas of a suitable plan of Government for the United States; and on the 19th June, Mr. Randolph's resolutions, originally offered on the 29th May, as altered, amended, and agreed to in Committee of the Whole House. On the 26th, twenty-three resolutions, already adopted on
1 2 3 4