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
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 28 0 Browse Search
China (China) 18 0 Browse Search
Virginia (Virginia, United States) 16 0 Browse Search
James Cook 16 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 16 0 Browse Search
Sherrard Clemens 16 2 Browse Search
Baltimore, Md. (Maryland, United States) 14 0 Browse Search
France (France) 14 0 Browse Search
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) 14 0 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 12 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: January 25, 1861., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 33 total hits in 8 results.

South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): article 6
ill not regard our constitutional rights, then, and then for the first time, arises the doctrine of secession in its practical application. A great man, who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of nullification because it preserved the Union. It was because of his deep-seated attachment to the Union; his determination to find some remedy for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound South Carolina to the other States, that Mr. Calhoun advocated the doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful; to be within the limits of State power, not to disturb the Union, but only to be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal of the States for their judgment. Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be justified upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a time when none denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better c
United States (United States) (search for this): article 6
solemn ordinance of her people in Convention assembled, has declared her separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course my functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me Union. That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to be executed over the United States, and upon the people of the United States.--They have no relation to any foreign country. IUnited States.--They have no relation to any foreign country. It is a perversion of terms, at least it is a great misapprehension of the case, which cites that expression for application to a State which has withdrawn from the Union. You may make war on a foreiay make war against a State which has withdrawn from the Union; but there are no laws of the United States to be executed within the limits of a seceded State. A State finding herself in the conditiupon herself every burden, she claims to be exempt from any power to execute the laws of the United States within her limits. I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before
Mississippi (Mississippi, United States) (search for this): article 6
Farewell speech of Hon. Jeff Davis. We have not space for the publication of the speeches of all the Southern Senators who retired from the U. S. Senate on Monday, and have to content ourselves with copying that delivered by Hon. Jeff Davis. It contains all the views delivered by the others: Mr. Davis.--I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I have satisfactory evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn ordinance of her people in Convention assembled, has declared her separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course my functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, however, that I should appear in the Senate to announce that fact to my associates, and I will say but very little more. The occasion does not invite me to go into argument; and my physical condition would not permit me to do so if it were otherwise; and yet it seems to become me to say something on the part of the State I here repres
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) (search for this): article 6
ve bound her to the Union, and thus divesting herself of every benefit, taking upon herself every burden, she claims to be exempt from any power to execute the laws of the United States within her limits. I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before the bar of the Senate, and when the doctrine of coercion was rife and to be applied against her because of the rescue of a fugitive slave in Boston. My opinion then was the same it is now. Not in a spirit of egotism, but to show that I am not influenced in my opinion because the case is my own, I refer to that time and that occasion as containing the opinion which I then entertained and on which my present conduct is based. I then said if Massachusetts, following her through a stated line of conduct, chooses to take the last step which separates her from the Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one dollar nor one man to coerce her back, but will say to her, God speed, in memory of the kind as
Jeff Davis (search for this): article 6
Farewell speech of Hon. Jeff Davis. We have not space for the publication of the speeches of all the Southern Senators who retired from the U. S. Senate on Monday, and have to content ourselves with copying that delivered by Hon. Jeff Davis. It contains all the views delivered by the others: Mr. Davis.--I rise, Mr. PresHon. Jeff Davis. It contains all the views delivered by the others: Mr. Davis.--I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I have satisfactory evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn ordinance of her people in Convention assembled, has declared her separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course my functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, howMr. Davis.--I rise, Mr. President, for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I have satisfactory evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn ordinance of her people in Convention assembled, has declared her separation from the United States. Under these circumstances, of course my functions are terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, however, that I should appear in the Senate to announce that fact to my associates, and I will say but very little more. The occasion does not invite me to go into argument; and my physical condition would not permit me to do so if it were otherwise; and yet it seems to become me to say something on the part of the State I here repre
Jefferson (search for this): article 6
imed the theory that all men are created free and equal, and this made the basis of an attack upon her social institutions; and the sacred Declaration of Independence has been invoked to maintain the position of the equality of the races. That Declaration of Independence is to be construed by the circumstances and purposes for which it was made. The communities were declaring their independence; the people of those communities were asserting that no man was born, to use the language of Mr. Jefferson, booted and spurred to ride over the rest of mankind; that men were created equal — meaning the men of the political community; that there was no divine right to rule; that no man inherited the right to govern; that there were no classes by which power and place descended to families; but that all stations were equally within the grasp of each member of the body politic. These were the great principles they announced; these were the purposes for which they made their declaration; these
Jonathan Jackson (search for this): article 6
of Mississippi, believing it to be necessary and proper, and should have been bound by their action if my belief had been otherwise; and this brings me to the important point which I wish, on this last occasion, to present to the Senate. It is by this confounding of nullification and secession that the name of a great man, whose ashes now mingle with his mother earth, has been invoked to justify coercion against a seceded State. The phrase, "to execute the laws," was an expression which Gen. Jackson applied to the case of a State refusing to obey the laws while yet a member of the Union. That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to be executed over the United States, and upon the people of the United States.--They have no relation to any foreign country. It is a perversion of terms, at least it is a great misapprehension of the case, which cites that expression for application to a State which has withdrawn from the Union. You may make war on a foreign State. If
, then, and then for the first time, arises the doctrine of secession in its practical application. A great man, who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of nullification because it preserved the Union. It was because of his deep-seated attachment to the Union; his determination to find some remedy for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound South Carolina to the other States, that Mr. Calhoun advocated the doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful; to be within the limits of State power, not to disturb the Union, but only to be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal of the States for their judgment. Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be justified upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a time when none denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better comprehension of the theory of our Gover