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
David Hunter 245 3 Browse Search
United States (United States) 186 0 Browse Search
Robert E. Lee 174 0 Browse Search
Lynchburg (Virginia, United States) 172 6 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 158 0 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 142 0 Browse Search
James 135 1 Browse Search
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) 132 0 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 128 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 116 2 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 30. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 524 total hits in 156 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ...
William R. Calhoun (search for this): chapter 1.1
f a southern fellow-countryman, or a Jacobite Scotch chieftain anterior to the '45. The southern statesman of the old slavery days—the antediluvian period which preceded our mid-century cataclysm—were the outcome and representatives of what has thus been described. As such they presented a curious admixture of qualities. Masterful in temper, clear of purpose, with a firm grasp on principle, a high sense of honor and a moral perception developed on its peculiar lines, as in the case of Calhoun, to a quality of distinct hardness, they were yet essentially abstractionists. Political metaphysicians, they were not practical men. They did not see things as they really were. They thus, while discussing their forty-bale theories and the patriarchal institution in connection with State's rights and nullification, failed to realize that on the two essential features of their policy—slavery and secession—they were contending with the stars in their courses. The whole world was moving i
Westminster Abbey (search for this): chapter 1.1
mphlets. 1850 At about 3 o'clock of the afternoon of September 3, 1658, the day of Worcester and of Dunbar, and as a great tempest was wearing itself to rest, Oliver Cromwell died. He died in London, in the palace of Whitehall; the palace of the great banqueting hall through whose central window Charles I, a little less than ten years before, had walked forth to the scaffold. A few weeks later, with a more than regal solemnity, the body of the great Lord Protector was carried to Westminster Abbey, and there buried amongst kings. Two years then elapsed, and, on the twelfth anniversary of King Charles's execution, the remains of the usurper, having been previously disinterred by order of the newly restored king, were, by a unanimous vote of the Convention Parliament, hung at Tyburn. The trunk was then buried under the gallows, while Cromwell's head was set on a pole over the roof of Westminster Hall. Nearly two centuries of execration ensued, until, in the sixth generation, th
William Gordon (search for this): chapter 1.1
be like of sand and as easily broken. Finally, in the circular letter addressed to the governor of all the States on disbanding the army, June 8, 1783 (Ib., Vol. X, p. 257): There are four things which, I humbly conceive, are essential to the well-being, a way, even venture to say, to the existence of the United States as an independent power. First, on indissoluble union of the States under one federal head. In language even stronger he, July 8, 1783—only a month later—wrote to Dr. William Gordon, the historian (Ib., Vol. X, p. 276): We are known by no other character among other nations than as the United States. Massachusetts or Virginia is no better defined, nor any more thought of, by Foreign Powers, than the county of Worcester in Massachusetts is by Virginia, or Gloucester county in Virginia is by Massachusetts (reputable as they are), and yet these counties with as much propriety might oppose themselves to the laws of the States in which they are, as an individual State
John C. Booth (search for this): chapter 1.1
once fearless and generous. We all remember how by the grim mockery of fate—as if to test to the uttermost American capacity for self-government—Abraham Lincoln was snatched away at the moment of crisis from the helm of State, and Andrew Johnson substituted for him. I think it no doubtful anticipation of historical judgment to say that a more unfortunate selection could not well have chanced. In no single respect, it is safe to say, was Andrew Johnson adapted for the peculiar duties which Booth's pistol imposed upon him. One of Johnson's most unhappy, most ill-considered convictions was that our Civil War was a conventional old time rebellion—that rebellion was treason—that treason was a crime: and that a crime was something for which punishment should in due course of law be meted out. He, therefore, wanted, or thought he wanted, to have the scenes of England's Convention Parliament and the Restoration of 1660 re-enacted here, as a fitting sequel of our great conflict. Most for
Oliver Cromwell (search for this): chapter 1.1
great tempest was wearing itself to rest, Oliver Cromwell died. He died in London, in the palace o61 reversed. To-day the bronze effigy of Oliver Cromwell—massive in size, rugged in feature, chara Hall, Pope wrote, in similar spirit— See Cromwell, damn'd to everlasting fame; and, sixteen years later,—four-fifths of a century after Cromwell's disentombment at Westminster and reburial at Tybood. And now, a century and a half later, Cromwell's statue looms defiantly up in front of the P and indisputably were George Washington, Oliver Cromwell, John Hampden, and William of Orange. Thscent—did his ancestor charge with Rupert or Cromwell—did he fall while riding with leveled point i. The Englishman of to-day does not apply to Cromwell the standard of loyalty or treason, of right l be answered here, as the query in regard to Cromwell's statue put sixty years ago has recently beeat his old home at Arlington, even as that of Cromwell dominates the yard of Westminster upon which [10 mor
Winfield Scott (search for this): chapter 1.1
rominence in the national councils. If John B. Floyd was secretary of war, Winfield Scott was at the head of the army. Torn by conflicting feelings, Virginia, stillare impressed on the military records of our Civil War, indelibly impressed—Winfield Scott, George Henry Thomas and Robert Edward Lee; the last, most deeply. Of theg circumstances—in a word of human environment, moral, material, intellectual. Scott or Thomas or Lee, being as he was, and things being as things were, could not decide otherwise than as he did decide. Consider them in order; Scott first: A Virginian by birth, early associations and marriage, Scott, at the breaking-out of Scott, at the breaking-out of the Civil War, had not lived in his native State for forty years. Not a planter, he held no broad acres and owned no slaves. Essentially a soldier, he was a citizenn to the choice of Hercules—the parting of those terrible ways of 1861. Like Scott and Lee, Thomas was a Virginian; but, again, there are Virginians and Virginian<
George Mason (search for this): chapter 1.1
nthly Magazine, March, 1902, Vol. 89, p. 305.) To a like effect, but in terms even stronger, Mr. Henry Cabot Lodge, now a senator from Massachusetts, has declared, not in a political utterance, but in a work of historical character: When the constitution was adopted by the votes of States at Philadelphia, and accepted by the votes of States in popular conventions, it is safe to say that there was not a man in the country from Washington and Hamilton, on the one side, to George Clinton and George Mason, on the other, who regarded the new system as anything but an experiment entered upon by the States, and from which each and every State had the right peaceably to withdraw, a right which was very likely to be exercised. （Webster, American Statesman, series, p. 172.) Here are two explicit statements of the legal and technical side of the argument made by authority to which no exception can be taken, at least by those of the Union side. On them, and on them alone, the case for the ab
English (search for this): chapter 1.1
those whom Cobden addressed, we like to glorify our ancestors and ourselves, and we do not particularly care to give ear to what we are pleased to term unpatriotic, and, at times, even treasonable talk. In other words, and in plain, unpalatable English, our minds are saturated with cant. Only in the case of others do we see things as they really are. Ceasing to be individually interested, we then at once become nothing unless critical. So, when it comes to rebellions, we, like Cobden's Engli Lee. The two are closely interwoven—for Virginia was always Virginia, and the Lees were, first, over and above all, Virginians. It was the Duke of Wellington who, on a certain memorable occasion, indignantly remarked, in his delightful French-English: Mais avant toutje suis gentilhomme Anglais. So might have said the Lees of Virginia of themselves. As respects Virginia, moreover, I am fain to say there was in the attitude of the State toward the Confederacy, and, indeed, in its bearing t
John Brown (search for this): chapter 1.1
ad grown up indoctrinated with the gospel, or heresy, of State sovereignty, and it was as much part of their moral and intellectual being as was clanship of the Scotch highlanders. In so far they were right, as Governor John A. Andrew said of John Brown. Meanwhile, practically, as a common-sensed man, leading an everyday existence in a world of actualities, John Brown was not right; he was, on the contrary, altogether wrong, and richly merited the fate meted out to him. It was the same with tJohn Brown was not right; he was, on the contrary, altogether wrong, and richly merited the fate meted out to him. It was the same with the secessionists. That, in 1861, they could really have had faith in the practicability—the real working efficiency—of that peaceable secession which they professed to ask for, and of which they never wearied of talking, I cannot believe. I find in the record no real evidence thereof. Of the high-type Southron, as we sometimes designate him, I would speak in terms of sincere respect. I know him chiefly by hearsay, having come in personal contact only with individual representatives of the
George Henry (search for this): chapter 1.1
chitect of his achievements. It had a native affinity for all influences, fine and great, and gave them hospitable welcome and permanent shelter. It had a native aversion for all influences mean and gross, and passed them on. It chose its ideals for him; and out of its patiently gathered materiels, it built and shaped his golden character. And give him the credit. Three names of Virginians are impressed on the military records of our Civil War, indelibly impressed—Winfield Scott, George Henry Thomas and Robert Edward Lee; the last, most deeply. Of the three, the first two stood by the flag; the third went with his State. Each, when the time came, acted conscientiously, impelled by the purest sense of loyalty, honor and obligation, taking that course which, under the circumstances and according to his lights, seemed to him right; and each doubtless thought he acted as a free agent. To a degree each was a free agent; to a much greater degree each was the child of anterior co
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ...