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) 384 0 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 272 0 Browse Search
James Buchanan 162 0 Browse Search
Winfield Scott 148 0 Browse Search
Kansas (Kansas, United States) 118 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 114 0 Browse Search
Mexico (Mexico, Mexico) 100 0 Browse Search
Anderson 68 68 Browse Search
John B. Floyd 60 0 Browse Search
Stephen A. Douglas 58 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of James Buchanan, Buchanan's administration on the eve of the rebellion. Search the whole document.

Found 205 total hits in 59 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6
New York (New York, United States) (search for this): chapter 5
mselves, were also infatuated with the belief, until the very last moment, that in case they should secede they would be sustained by a large portion if not the whole Democratic party of the North. They vainly imagined that this party, which had maintained their constitutional rights whilst they remained in the Union, would sustain them in rebellion after they had gone out of it. In this delusion they were also greatly encouraged by sympathy and support from influential and widely circulated Anti-Republican journals in the North, and especially in the city of New York. It was in vain, therefore, that the late President warned them, as he often did, against this delusion. It was in vain he assured them that the first cannon fired against either Fort Moultrie or Fort Sumter would arouse the indignant spirit of the North—would heal all political divisions amongst the Northern people, and would unite them as one man in support of a war rendered inevitable by such an act of rebellion
United States (United States) (search for this): chapter 5
to the design. Afterwards, in 1828, whilst President of the United States, he reaffirmed the statement made to Mr. Jefferson, and said: Tlly affects the liberties and rights of the whole people of the United States. To me it appears that it would justify a revolution in this c foreign territory, which had been outside of the limits of the United States when the Constitution was adopted. This, he contended, would rer says, that in 1791 he was appointed District Attorney of the United States, by the Father of his country; and the situation of Attorney Gersary of General Washington's Inauguration as President of the United States: In the calm hours of self-possession, the right of a Stan 1824, and afterwards reelected in 1828, Vice-President of the United States, and still held this high office. He possessed eminent reasonifiers. The Convention, in their address to the people of the United States, Con. Debates, vol. IX., Part 2d, Appendix, p. 168. propose
Georgia (Georgia, United States) (search for this): chapter 5
Such, it is our confident belief, continued to be the genuine sentiments of a very large majority of their people even in the cotton States for a number of years after the death of Mr. Calhoun. Still complaining, yet still hoping, they could not be persuaded to adopt rash measures, by all the zeal and eloquence of pro-slavery demagogues with which they were infested. The friends of the Union calculated much upon the persistent opposition to South Carolina doctrines so long maintained by Georgia. Indeed Mr. Cobb, in his canvass for Governor, had made an able and powerful argument before the people of that State against the right of secession; and this was a principal reason for his selection for a seat in the Cabinet of Mr. Buchanan. Without the cooperation of this great and influential State a successful movement toward disunion would have been impracticable. It was not until after the breaking up of the Charleston and Baltimore Conventions, as we have before observed, that t
New England (United States) (search for this): chapter 5
Chapter 4: The heresy of secession originated in New England maintained by Josiah Quincy and the Hartford Convention, by Mr. Rawle and Mr. John Quincy Adams, but opposed by the South Southern secession dates from South Carolina nullification its character and history the Compromise tariff of 1888 the nullifiers aSouthern origin. On the contrary, it first sprung up in the North. At an early period after the formation of the Constitution, many influential individuals of New England became dissatisfied with the union between the Northern and Southern States, and were anxious to dissolve it. This design, according to Mr. John Quincy Adams, hent, I had yet no doubt in 1808 and 1809, and have no doubt at this time, that it is the key of all the great movements of these leaders of the Federal party in New England, from that time forward till its final catastrophe in the Hartford Convention. It is but fair to observe that these statements were denied by the parties impli
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 5
ve tariff. In the belief of the people of South Carolina, the tariff laws afforded extravagant and nder his auspices, the State Convention of South Carolina, in November, 1832, passed the well-known hese acts into effect within the limits of South Carolina, the people of this State will thenceforthon. It asserted the right and the duty of South Carolina to secede from the Union and establish an in the Senate as one of the Senators from South Carolina, for the purpose of advocating the measures he had advised. Strange to say, South Carolina substantially succeeded in accomplishing her objecorted the bill and voted for its passage. South Carolina accepted the concession, and repealed the d on President Jackson. The majority in South Carolina, encouraged by success in bringing Congresnd Democratic parties no longer existed in South Carolina They had passed away amid the din of disunple of the Southern States, yet outside of South Carolina these failed to convince the masses that t[7 more...]
Montgomery (Alabama, United States) (search for this): chapter 5
uch for the question of principle. In this course the Tribune persisted from the date of Mr. Lincoln's election until after his inauguration, employing such remarks as the following: Any attempt to compel them by force to remain would be contrary to the principles enunciated in the immortal Declaration of Independence, contrary to the fundamental ideas on which human liberty is based. Even after the cotton States had formed their confederacy, and adopted a provisional Constitution at Montgomery, on the 23d February, 1861, it gave them encouragement to proceed in the following language: We have repeatedly said, and we once more insist,that the great principle embodied by Jefferson in the Declaration of American Independence, that Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, is sound and just; and that if the Slave rates, the Cotton Stat, or the Gulf States only, choose to form an independent nation, they have A clear Moral right to do 80. Whenever it shal
Fort Moultrie (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 5
selves, were also infatuated with the belief, until the very last moment, that in case they should secede they would be sustained by a large portion if not the whole Democratic party of the North. They vainly imagined that this party, which had maintained their constitutional rights whilst they remained in the Union, would sustain them in rebellion after they had gone out of it. In this delusion they were also greatly encouraged by sympathy and support from influential and widely circulated Anti-Republican journals in the North, and especially in the city of New York. It was in vain, therefore, that the late President warned them, as he often did, against this delusion. It was in vain he assured them that the first cannon fired against either Fort Moultrie or Fort Sumter would arouse the indignant spirit of the North—would heal all political divisions amongst the Northern people, and would unite them as one man in support of a war rendered inevitable by such an act of rebellion
South River, Ga. (Georgia, United States) (search for this): chapter 5
that of secession. In this they were not long after joined by the minority which had resisted nullification. The formidable aspect assumed by anti-slavery at the North consolidated the union between the nullifiers and the anti-nullifiers. Then followed the exchange of violent and virulent denunciations between the slavery and anti-slavery factions, North and South, each furnishing combustibles to the other, as though they had been in alliance to destroy the Union. Although the people of South. Carolina had thus become almost unanimous in their hostility to the Union, they were nevertheless divided into two parties, denominated Disunionists and Cooperationists. Both were equally resolved on secession; they differed merely as to the point of time for making the movement. Whilst the former advocated immediate action by the State alone, the latter were in favor of awaiting the cooperation of one or more of the other slaveholding States. The time-honored and Union-loving Whig an
Louisiana (Louisiana, United States) (search for this): chapter 5
or more States to withdraw from the Union, is not a plant of Southern origin. On the contrary, it first sprung up in the North. At an early period after the formation of the Constitution, many influential individuals of New England became dissatisfied with the union between the Northern and Southern States, and were anxious to dissolve it. This design, according to Mr. John Quincy Adams, had been formed in the winter of 1803-4, immediately after and as a consequence of the acquisition of Louisiana. Letter of Dec. 80, 1828, in reply to Harrison Grey Otis and others. Appendix to Randal's Life of Jefferson, vol. III., p. 685. Vide also vol. III, p. 295. This he disclosed to Mr. Jefferson, in the year 1809. About the same time, to the confidential friends of Mr. Jefferson he urged that a continuance of the embargo much longer would certainly be met by forcible resistance, supported by the Legislature and probably by the judiciary of the State [Massachusetts]. That to quell that r
England (United Kingdom) (search for this): chapter 5
at event, he had no doubt the leaders of the party would secure the cooperation with them of Great Britain. That their object was, and had been for several years, a dissolution of the Union, and thidence, although not provable in a court of law; and that in case of a civil war, the aid of Great Britain to effect that purpose would be assuredly resorted to, as it would be indispensably necessarord Convention, which assembled in December, 1814, during the existence of our last war with Great Britain. We may observe generally, that this body manifested their purpose to dissolve the Union, songress refuse to redress the grievances of which they complained. The peace, however, with Great Britain, terminated their action, and consigned them to lasting and well merited reproach. During te had borne a conspicuous part in the declaration and prosecution of the war of 1812 against Great Britain. He had been Secretary of War during nearly the whole eight years of Mr. Monroe's Presidenc
1 2 3 4 5 6