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) 30 0 Browse Search
Mexico (Mexico, Mexico) 18 0 Browse Search
Sherman 14 2 Browse Search
W. B. Cook 12 0 Browse Search
William H. Seward 12 0 Browse Search
James T. Butler 12 0 Browse Search
R. E. Lee 12 0 Browse Search
Robert Edmund Lee 11 1 Browse Search
Atlanta (Georgia, United States) 10 0 Browse Search
France (France) 10 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: January 7, 1865., [Electronic resource].

Found 640 total hits in 327 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
William H. Seward (search for this): article 1
It is said that Mr. Seward will send a minister to Mexico, and thus give the final kick to the Monroe Doctrine, as hitherto understood in the United States.--What the United States Congress or the people of that subjugated country may think ofn, Monroe or otherwise, which may interfere with their one vital object of overwhelming the South. But, of course, Mr. Seward, in taking this step, gets a good bargain, and insists upon a substantial consideration for what he gives. Seward is tSeward is to let Napoleon alone, and Napoleon is to let him alone. All this is very good, as long as it lasts. That it cannot last always must be plain enough to both parties to the contract. Both are shrewd, experienced diplomatists, and each is aware of thny day, he is the most gullible, instead of the most sagacious, Frenchman now alive. He has studied the character of Wm. H. Seward and the temper of the United States people to little purpose if he supposes he or they will be bound by any such cont
Louis Napoleon (search for this): article 1
good bargain, and insists upon a substantial consideration for what he gives. Seward is to let Napoleon alone, and Napoleon is to let him alone. All this is very good, as long as it lasts. That it Napoleon is to let him alone. All this is very good, as long as it lasts. That it cannot last always must be plain enough to both parties to the contract. Both are shrewd, experienced diplomatists, and each is aware of the complete hollowness of the other's purposes. If we assumeew bond of union for the now warring populations. Is it possible that, foreseeing all this, Louis Napoleon expects to propitiate the United States by agreeing not to interfere on behalf of the Southepart and parcel of the United States. We are, therefore, led to the conclusion, either that Louis Napoleon has abiding faith in the ability of the Southern Confederacy to achieve its independence, orrone, cannot, we should think, be lightly abandoned. However, we are inclined to think that Louis Napoleon retains his confidence in the ability of the Southern Confederacy to make good a resistance
Maximilian (search for this): article 1
ness of the other's purposes. If we assume that the Emperor of the French intends to stand by Maximilian, and render his occupation of Mexico permanent, he must either believe that the Southern Confer as a sagacious and politic statesman. He gains time thereby for consolidating the throne of Maximilian, and, so far as the Confederacy is concerned, he is safe, at any rate, from interruption from achieve its independence, or that he has no serious thoughts of the permanent establishment of Maximilian in Mexico. The latter idea is scarcely reconcilable with the deliberation of his character anich induced him to take so serious a step as the occupation of Mexico and the establishment of Maximilian on the throne, cannot, we should think, be lightly abandoned. However, we are inclined to thi his confidence in the ability of the Southern Confederacy to make good a resistance which is as vital to the security of the power of Maximilian as it is to the independence of the Southern States.
Mexico (Mexico) (search for this): article 1
instead of the most sagacious, Frenchman now alive. He has studied the character of Wm. H. Seward and the temper of the United States people to little purpose if he supposes he or they will be bound by any such contract one moment longer than their political and military necessities require. If the United States come out triumphant from this war, it will have a disposable army of at least three hundred thousand men for the invasion of Mexico. It will have a navy which can blockade every Mexican port and compete with the regular navy of France on the ocean. It can have a swarm of privateers which will sweep every French merchantman from the ocean. It will seek to cement its domestic power by enlisting all the military adventurers of the South, who will be disbanded at the close of hostilities, in the same grand crusade. It will be eager to create in hostility to a foreign power a new bond of union for the now warring populations. Is it possible that, foreseeing all this, Louis
United States (United States) (search for this): article 1
oe Doctrine, as hitherto understood in the United States.--What the United States Congress or the pattempting to secure the good will of the United States is reconcilable with his character as a saul, and is seeking to make a friend of the United States for a rainy day, he is the most gullible, ter of Wm. H. Seward and the temper of the United States people to little purpose if he supposes he and military necessities require. If the United States come out triumphant from this war, it will, Louis Napoleon expects to propitiate the United States by agreeing not to interfere on behalf of st gullible of mankind. The people of the United States have always coveted Mexico. There was rese compelled it to make the surrender. The United States will go to Mexico as its deliverers, and teople will rally around its standard. The United States is no longer unconscious of its own power.Mexico would become part and parcel of the United States. We are, therefore, led to the conclusion
France (France) (search for this): article 1
of at least three hundred thousand men for the invasion of Mexico. It will have a navy which can blockade every Mexican port and compete with the regular navy of France on the ocean. It can have a swarm of privateers which will sweep every French merchantman from the ocean. It will seek to cement its domestic power by enlistingce of the earth. And whoever conquers such soldiers as those of this Southern land, even with the odds of four to one, will have no reason to fear any force that France, or France and England combined, can transport to this continent. Within six months after the conquest of the Southern Confederacy, Mexico would become part and France and England combined, can transport to this continent. Within six months after the conquest of the Southern Confederacy, Mexico would become part and parcel of the United States. We are, therefore, led to the conclusion, either that Louis Napoleon has abiding faith in the ability of the Southern Confederacy to achieve its independence, or that he has no serious thoughts of the permanent establishment of Maximilian in Mexico. The latter idea is scarcely reconcilable with the d
Mexico (Mexico, Mexico) (search for this): article 1
It is said that Mr. Seward will send a minister to Mexico, and thus give the final kick to the Monroe Doctrino stand by Maximilian, and render his occupation of Mexico permanent, he must either believe that the Southerneast three hundred thousand men for the invasion of Mexico. It will have a navy which can blockade every MexiThe people of the United States have always coveted Mexico. There was respect enough for the opinions of mankl sense cannot be offended by taking that, to which Mexico has given up its right, from the hands of those whoo make the surrender. The United States will go to Mexico as its deliverers, and the great mass of the Mexicaths after the conquest of the Southern Confederacy, Mexico would become part and parcel of the United States. hts of the permanent establishment of Maximilian in Mexico. The latter idea is scarcely reconcilable with the him to take so serious a step as the occupation of Mexico and the establishment of Maximilian on the throne,
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) (search for this): article 2
The defence, by the North Carolina troops, of Fort Fisher is almost unprecedented in military warfare. Never, in this, or any other war, has any fort, with the single exception of Sumter, been subjected to such an assault. Twenty thousand shells were thrown into it, during a bombardment the most furious in naval annals. But the Spartan band by whom it was defended never dreamed of surrender. They left such humiliation to those whom the sight of a few gunboats can paralyze out of chivalry and patriotism. The whole Confederacy will do honor to these heroic men. North Carolina has reason to be proud of such sons. No State in the Confederacy has contributed more to the common defence, and none can show a more splendid record of courage and resolution. The handful of malcontents in her borders should no more be permitted to eclipse the fame of such men as fought at Fort Fisher, and upon a hundred other battle-fields, than the spots on the sun to hide its transcendent glory an
1500 AD (search for this): article 3
off — is well known, and may be found in Bishop Meade's well-known work on "The Old Churches and Families of Virginia." The manuscript commences abruptly with the name of "Hugo de Lega, or de Le," without date. The first name with date is that of John de Lee, Miles, to whom Hugo de Hinton gave the lands, as by the old chart. Opposite this name is the date 1333. The father of John de Lee was Thomas de la Lee. The simple name of Lee occurs first as Ricardus Lee, of Langly, about the year 1500.--The first name of Robert is Robertus de la Lee, son of John de la Lee; he married Margarita, daughter and heir of Thomas Astly, of Nordly, about 1400.--The first name written in English is Thomas Lee, of Cotton, in King's Nordley, in the Parish of Alvely, who was the son of Johannes Lee. There are several coats of arms on the manuscript. That of Ricardus Lee, of the direct line, is as follows: A shield with a crescent of a squirrel sejant, eating a nut or flower; a lion in rampant guar
1666 AD (search for this): article 3
it from her father, who received it from his father, General Hull. It consists of several large sheets, and is written partly in Latin and partly in English. Accompanying the pedigree are some mutilated deeds, which, although much injured, exhibit the descending rights and titles to various lands. These deeds are in Latin, and written on the old stamped paper of England, and, to the antiquarian, are a rare object of curiosity and interest. The genealogy of the Lee's, of Virginia, from 1666--just where this pedigree breaks off — is well known, and may be found in Bishop Meade's well-known work on "The Old Churches and Families of Virginia." The manuscript commences abruptly with the name of "Hugo de Lega, or de Le," without date. The first name with date is that of John de Lee, Miles, to whom Hugo de Hinton gave the lands, as by the old chart. Opposite this name is the date 1333. The father of John de Lee was Thomas de la Lee. The simple name of Lee occurs first as Ricard
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...