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
Seward 30 18 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 20 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 16 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 10 0 Browse Search
England (United Kingdom) 10 0 Browse Search
Sigel 9 1 Browse Search
Fremont 8 0 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 8 0 Browse Search
Eugene Lynch 8 0 Browse Search
John Adams 8 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: July 15, 1863., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 30 total hits in 8 results.

United States (United States) (search for this): article 10
The decision in the case of the Alexander--Great Britain drifting into hostilities with the United States. The London correspondent thinks Greet Britain is in earnest in attempting to force hostilities on the United States. The decision releasing the ship Alexandra was intended to be an affront to Yankeedom, and the correspondent thinks the verdict was a foregone conclusion months ago, andtoo frequent a visitor and too cordially received at Fontainebleaux to bode any good for the United States. We take from the London Post a synopsis of the decision in the case of the Alexandra. Thed a key to its interpretations. In a case brought on appeal before the Supreme Court of the United States, that great jurist, Mr. Justice Story, laid it down that although by the terms of the Foreig out" within her Majesty's dominion for purposes of aggression against the Government of the United States. The act does not prohibit the "building" of ships of any description, and as it was shown
Birmingham (Mississippi, United States) (search for this): article 10
ce with a high American authority in his interpretation of the law, and it will be impossible for the American Government to question the soundness of his opinion without also impugning that of the greatest of their lawyers, Mr. Justice Story. [from the London times, June 25.] * * * Had the Foreign Enlistment act mentioned writhes, gunpowder, or shot and shell, instead of ships of war, we may be sure that the Confederates would have spared no pains to intercept the consignments of Birmingham "hardware." For the purpose of watching questionable proceedings agents must be employed, and agents so employed are neither more nor less than spies. Work of this kind is distasteful to very scrupulous men, and it follows that it will generally be carried on by persons of easy conscience and unenviable character. In this case, perhaps, such extreme vigilance was hardly requisite, for there seems to have been little concealment. No evidence was produced for the defendants, because they
England (United Kingdom) (search for this): article 10
The decision in the case of the Alexander--Great Britain drifting into hostilities with the United States. The London correspondent thinks Greet Britain is in earnest in attempting to force hostilities on the United States. The decision releasing the ship Alexandra was intended to be an affront to Yankeedom, and the correspondent thinks the verdict was a foregone conclusion months ago, and is precisely what Earl Russell and Lord Palmerston intended it should be. It was perfectly well unde for the equipping and fitting out of ships or armaments for the purposes of aggression against a friendly Power. Passing from the purely legal consideration of the case, it is manifest that, on grounds of expediency, a maritime nation like Great Britain, possessing commercial relations with every quarter of the globe, is bound faithfully and strictly to fulfill the duties appertaining to strict neutrality. We are neutrals to-day; we may be belligerents to-morrow; and as we do to others so w
Story (search for this): article 10
wards of had a century had a Foreign Enlistment act similar to our own, and the decisions of American Judges afford a key to its interpretations. In a case brought on appeal before the Supreme Court of the United States, that great jurist, Mr. Justice Story, laid it down that although by the terms of the Foreign Enlistment act the subjects of a neutral State were precluded from equipping or arming vessels for the purpose of aggression against a friendly Power, they were not precluded from equicted in accordance with a high American authority in his interpretation of the law, and it will be impossible for the American Government to question the soundness of his opinion without also impugning that of the greatest of their lawyers, Mr. Justice Story. [from the London times, June 25.] * * * Had the Foreign Enlistment act mentioned writhes, gunpowder, or shot and shell, instead of ships of war, we may be sure that the Confederates would have spared no pains to intercept the cons
Napoleon (search for this): article 10
decision releasing the ship Alexandra was intended to be an affront to Yankeedom, and the correspondent thinks the verdict was a foregone conclusion months ago, and is precisely what Earl Russell and Lord Palmerston intended it should be. It was perfectly well understood and arranged what the ruling of the Court should be on every point likely to be raised and as perfectly understood what the verdict of the jury would be under such ruling. He also fears a private understanding between Napoleon and Mr. Slidell. The latter is too frequent a visitor and too cordially received at Fontainebleaux to bode any good for the United States. We take from the London Post a synopsis of the decision in the case of the Alexandra. The vessel was seized on the suspicion that she was intended for the Confederate service. The Post says: Nominally, the point left for the decision of the jury was whether the Crown or a firm of Liverpool merchants were the rightful owners of an unfinished shi
John Adams (search for this): article 10
ience and unenviable character. In this case, perhaps, such extreme vigilance was hardly requisite, for there seems to have been little concealment. No evidence was produced for the defendants, because they did not rely on their ignorance, but on the character of the transaction, as proved by the witnesses for the Crown. It was on the latter that the burden of proof lay, and the result shows not that our courts are disposed to favor illegal privateering, but that a law against equipping privateers in this country must be a dead letter so long as they can be built here and equipped at sea or elsewhere. This result, which Mr. Adams's representations have been the means of bringing out into strong relief, is not altogether satisfactory, and leaves the morality of aiding either side in a civil war exactly where it found it; but it could not have been avoided without importing into jurisprudence a new principle, which the Americans, of all nations, have the most reason to deprecate.
Slidell (search for this): article 10
sing the ship Alexandra was intended to be an affront to Yankeedom, and the correspondent thinks the verdict was a foregone conclusion months ago, and is precisely what Earl Russell and Lord Palmerston intended it should be. It was perfectly well understood and arranged what the ruling of the Court should be on every point likely to be raised and as perfectly understood what the verdict of the jury would be under such ruling. He also fears a private understanding between Napoleon and Mr. Slidell. The latter is too frequent a visitor and too cordially received at Fontainebleaux to bode any good for the United States. We take from the London Post a synopsis of the decision in the case of the Alexandra. The vessel was seized on the suspicion that she was intended for the Confederate service. The Post says: Nominally, the point left for the decision of the jury was whether the Crown or a firm of Liverpool merchants were the rightful owners of an unfinished ship; but, practi
June 25th (search for this): article 10
st of it) that its provisions can be very easily evaded. However, with consequences neither judges nor juries have anything to do. It is at all events, a satisfaction to feel that the Lord Chief Baron has acted in accordance with a high American authority in his interpretation of the law, and it will be impossible for the American Government to question the soundness of his opinion without also impugning that of the greatest of their lawyers, Mr. Justice Story. [from the London times, June 25.] * * * Had the Foreign Enlistment act mentioned writhes, gunpowder, or shot and shell, instead of ships of war, we may be sure that the Confederates would have spared no pains to intercept the consignments of Birmingham "hardware." For the purpose of watching questionable proceedings agents must be employed, and agents so employed are neither more nor less than spies. Work of this kind is distasteful to very scrupulous men, and it follows that it will generally be carried on by persons