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
Charles Sumner 2,831 1 Browse Search
George Sumner 784 0 Browse Search
Saturday Seward 476 0 Browse Search
Hamilton Fish 446 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 360 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 342 0 Browse Search
Ulysses S. Grant 328 0 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 308 0 Browse Search
H. C. Sumner 288 0 Browse Search
Dominican Republic (Dominican Republic) 216 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4. Search the whole document.

Found 1,034 total hits in 386 results.

... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ...
John Jay (search for this): chapter 6
ought, and so expressed himself in letters to Sumner, that the House bill having passed by a narrow majority should not have been hazarded by amendments in the Senate, and the New York Tribune, April 12, 1864, as well as Sumner's correspondents,—John Jay, Charles E. Norton, John M. Forbes, and E. L. Pierce,—took the same view; but Sumner's reply was that his committee was adverse to the House bill, he being one of the only two members who had sustained it in committee. The Democrats in both Housheir statement is not supported by his letter cited by them of date Sept. 1, 1864, and printed in the New York Sun, June 30, 1889, which is of similar tenor as his letter to Lieber, September 3. This was also the position of Senator Collamer and John Jay. With Sumner, as with Bryant and Greeley and all other patriotic men, the question was settled by the Chicago treason. The fear of an adverse decision of the people in November, felt by Mr. Lincoln himself as well as by others, vanished with th
Hannibal Hamlin (search for this): chapter 6
candidate for Vice-President, Andrew Johnson of Tennessee. This nomination was assisted by some delegates from Massachusetts, who thought that a loyal Southern man would add more strength to the ticket than the present incumbent of the office, Mr. Hamlin. This was a reasonable view, although the history of the next four years proved the selection to have been an unfortunate one. In the change from Hamlin to Johnson, Sumner took no part whatever. While always ready for contests which concerneHamlin to Johnson, Sumner took no part whatever. While always ready for contests which concerned principles and policies, he had no taste for those which concerned only the individual or sectional claims of candidates. No urgency of persuasion would have moved him to leave his seat in the Senate in order to attend a national political convention. Sumner arrived at home, July 17. He passed a week early in August with Longfellow at Nahant, where the air, the breeze, the sea were kindly, and where on the piazza they read together Tennyson's last volume, Enoch Arden, enjoying it more tha
Foster (search for this): chapter 6
ered not only Democratic opposition, led by Buckalew, Hendricks, and Reverdy Johnson, but also resistance 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 view was constitutional and presg. The repeal of both Acts was then consummated by a vote of twenty-seven to twelve. The nays were mostly Democrats; but among Republicans, Collamer, Doolittle, Foster, and Sherman withheld their votes. President Lincoln signed the bill on the 28th. Full notes to Sumner's Works (vol. VIII. pp. 403-406, 415-418) state the fiecurring. At the next session, Jan. 17, 1865, Sumner moved his amendment to an Act incorporating another company, and Democratic senators alone voted against it. Foster and Sherman now joined him, and Grimes and Trumbull did not vote. A few days later he carried a general provision, forbidding exclusions on account of color on t
Historians (search for this): chapter 6
the larger number of them, as the national election approached, were dissatisfied with his candidacy. Greeley's American Conflict, vol. II. p. 655; Wilson's Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, vol. III. p. 545; Julian's Political Recollections, p. 243; New York Tribune, July 2, 1889. An indifference towards him was noted in the commercial centres and among the most intelligent of the loyal people. Lieber to General Halleck, Sept. 1, 1864, in Lieber's Life and Letters, pp. 350, 351. Historians and biographers have hesitated to reveal the state of opinion concerning him, but historical verity loses by the suppression. He was thought to be wanting in the style, in the gravity of manner and conversation, which are becoming in the chief of a nation. His habit of interrupting the consideration of grave matters with stories was attributed to levity, and offended sober-minded men who sought him on public business. A man of infinite jest, the underlying seriousness of his nature was
Joseph Henry (search for this): chapter 6
suggestion from any one. It was not practicable to press it at the time, and at its author's suggestion it was laid on the table. His various labors kept him from calling it up. This earliest recognition of a needed reform, since a subject of agitation in Congress and among the people, found favor at the time with a few leading journals National Intelligencer, May 10; New York Times, May 10; New York Evening Post, May 7; New York Independent, June 9. and some advanced thinkers. Professor Joseph Henry, of the Smithsonian Institution, B. R. Wood, of Albany, and Dr. Lieber Lieber's Life and Letters, pp. 339, 345. wrote approving letters to the senator. Josiah Quincy, now at the age of ninety-two, within a few weeks of his death, and no longer able to use his pen, sent by his daughter's hand his hearty commendation of the measure. The Union League Club of New York appointed a committee to aid its passage. Generally, however, Sumner's correspondents and the newspapers were silen
Theophilus Parsons (search for this): chapter 6
on the seizure of the Florida, a Confederate war vessel, in the neutral waters of Brazil, by the United States steamer Wachusett. While not justifying the seizure, they were a reply in the nature of an argumentum ad hominem to British criticisms of the transaction, with a treatment of precedents similar to that which he had applied to the Trent case. Boston Advertiser, Nov. 29, 1864, Jan. 17, 1865; Works, vol. IX. pp. 141-173. Other writers who took his view in the discussion were Theophilus Parsons, George Bemis, and C. F. Dunbar; but on the other side were Goldwin Smith and Prof. Henry W. Torrey, —the latter writing with the signature of Privatus. Cobden, in the last letter but one which he wrote to Sumner, objected to his use of England's old doings as an excuse for your present shortcomings; and thought the vessel should have been promptly returned to Brazil. （Morley's Life of Cobden, vol. II. pp. 459, 460.) The vessel went to the bottom in Hampton Roads shortly after in a
W. C. Bryant (search for this): chapter 6
ion, with a view to another candidate, for a postponement of the Republican convention, which was advocated in the New York Evening Post Both Mr. Greeley and Mr. Bryant joined with a committee to request the Republican national committee to postpone the convention. Nicolay and Hay's Life of Lincoln, vol. IX. pp. 57, 58. and t, June 30, 1889, which is of similar tenor as his letter to Lieber, September 3. This was also the position of Senator Collamer and John Jay. With Sumner, as with Bryant and Greeley and all other patriotic men, the question was settled by the Chicago treason. The fear of an adverse decision of the people in November, felt by Mr. It is curious to observe how in a few months, when death had set its seal on a great character, Mr. Lincoln's honest critics became his sincere eulogists,—notably Bryant, Greeley, Bancroft, Andrew, and Sumner. Sumner read to the writer, in May, 1865, at his mother's house in Boston, some parts of his eulogy on Lincoln as he was
Parke Godwin (search for this): chapter 6
, and a distrust of his fitness for his place among public men who were associated with him. Visitors to Washington in 1863-1864 were struck with the want of personal loyalty to him. Adams's Biography of Dana, vol. II. pp. 264, 265, 271, 274; Godwin's Life of W. C. Bryant, vol. II. pp. 175, 178; P. W. Chandler's Memoir of John A. Andrew, pp. 111-114; Letter from Washington in Boston Commonwealth, Nov. 12, 1864. They found few senators and representatives who would maintain cordially and pose New York Sun, June 30, 1889, throw light on the movement. Republican conferences were held in the city of New York for the purpose of making a change: one at D. D. Field's house, August 14, where representative men were present,—Greeley, Parke Godwin of the Evening Post, William Curtis Noyes, Henry Winter Davis, Dr. Lieber, Lieber wrote Sumner, September 16, that he wished Lincoln could know that the people were to vote not for him but against McClellan. and twenty or more besides. It
Richard Cobden (search for this): chapter 6
— I have just received the Manchester Examiner, containing the speeches at Rochdale, By Cobden and Bright. which I have read gratefully and admiringly. Cobden's positive testimony must tell Cobden's positive testimony must tell for us; and let me add that I like him the better the nearer he gets to the position that recognition is a moral impossibility. If this were authoritatively declared, the case would soon be closed. rs of England from the Northern cause in the great crisis of the struggle. Sumner wrote to Mr. Cobden, September 18:— Bear witness that I have never been over-confident of sudden success. Ire Goldwin Smith and Prof. Henry W. Torrey, —the latter writing with the signature of Privatus. Cobden, in the last letter but one which he wrote to Sumner, objected to his use of England's old doingcomings; and thought the vessel should have been promptly returned to Brazil. （Morley's Life of Cobden, vol. II. pp. 459, 460.) The vessel went to the bottom in Hampton Roads shortly after in a col
Edward E. Hale (search for this): chapter 6
he next, in February, 1865, a committee of conference, of which Sumner was a member, reported a bill creating an independent department of freedmen and abandoned lands. This passed the House, but Sumner was unable to carry it in the Senate, where Hale of New Hampshire and Lane of Indiana now joined Grimes in opposition. On the last day of the session another committee of conference agreed on a bill which placed the bureau in the war department, limited its term to one year after the war, and ed a general provision, forbidding exclusions on account of color on the railways of the District of Columbia, in the shape of an amendment to a bill amending the charter of an existing company, overcoming the objection made by Dixon, Conness, and Hale that his proposition was irrelevant,—and, as was often the case, failing at one stage of the bill, and at another, as the reward of his pertinacity, carrying his amendment. This Act took effect March 3; Sumner treated the exclusion of colored
... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ...