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) 1,170 0 Browse Search
Kentucky (Kentucky, United States) 573 1 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 566 0 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 532 0 Browse Search
Texas (Texas, United States) 482 0 Browse Search
Charleston (South Carolina, United States) 470 8 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 449 3 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 405 1 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 340 0 Browse Search
Maryland (Maryland, United States) 324 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I.. Search the whole document.

Found 64 total hits in 45 results.

1 2 3 4 5
1816 AD (search for this): chapter 10
questions in its longer Catechism, wherein, expounding and applying the Eighth Commandment, it affirmed that the Biblical condemnation of manstealers comprehends all who are concerned in bringing any of the human race into Slavery, or retaining them therein. Stealers of men are those who bring off slaves or freemen, and keep, sell, or buy them. To steal a freeman, says Grotius, is the highest kind of theft, etc., etc. But this note was directed to be erased by the General Assembly of 1816, in a resolve which characterizes Slavery as a mournful evil, but does not direct that the churches be purged of it. In 1818, a fresh Assembly adopted an Expression of views, wherein Slavery is reprobated as a gross violation of the most precious and sacred rights of human nature, utterly inconsistent with the law of God, which requires us to love our neighbor as ourselves, and totally irreconcilable with the spirit and principles of the gospel of Christ, which enjoin that all things what
1754 AD (search for this): chapter 10
rom their native country and relations, by Friends, not a commendable or allowable practice. Nearly thirty years before, the yearly meeting in Philadelphia (1696) took a step in advance of this, admonishing their members to be careful not to encourage the bringing in of any more negroes, and that those who have negroes be careful of them, bring them to meeting, etc., etc. It thus appears that Quakers, like other Christians, were then not only slaveholders, but engaged in the Slave-Trade. In 1754, the American Quakers had advanced to the point of publicly recommending their societies to advise and deal with such as engage in the Slave-Trade. Again: slaveholding Quakers were urged — not to emancipate their slaves — but to care for their morals, and treat them humanely. The British Quakers came up to this mark in 1758--four years later; and more decidedly in 1761 and 1763. In 1774, the Philadelphia meeting directed that all persons engaged in any form of slave-trading be disowned; an
1761 AD (search for this): chapter 10
. It thus appears that Quakers, like other Christians, were then not only slaveholders, but engaged in the Slave-Trade. In 1754, the American Quakers had advanced to the point of publicly recommending their societies to advise and deal with such as engage in the Slave-Trade. Again: slaveholding Quakers were urged — not to emancipate their slaves — but to care for their morals, and treat them humanely. The British Quakers came up to this mark in 1758--four years later; and more decidedly in 1761 and 1763. In 1774, the Philadelphia meeting directed that all persons engaged in any form of slave-trading be disowned; and in 1776 took the decisive and final step by directing that the owners of slaves, who refused to execute the proper instruments for giving them their freedom, be disowned likewise. This blow hit the nail on the head. In 1781, but one case requiring discipline under this head was reported; and in 1783, it duly appeared that there were no slaves owned by its members.
1828 AD (search for this): chapter 10
hodox, irreverent, and infidel tendencies which have been so freely, and not always unreasonably, ascribed to the apostles of Abolition. These have justly felt that the organized and recognized religion of the country has not treated their cause as it deserved and as they had a right to expect. The pioneers of modern Abolition were almost uniformly devout, pious, church-nurtured men, who, at the outset of their enterprise, took the cause of the slave Witness Lundy and Garrison at Boston, 1828. to the Clergy and the Church, with undoubting faith that it would there be recognized and by them adopted as the cause of vital Christianity. Speaking generally, they were repulsed and resisted, quite as much to their astonishment as their mortification; and the resulting estrangement and hostility were proportioned to the fullness of their trust, the bitterness of their disappointment. Alas! they had been friends in youth; But whispering tongues can poison truth, And constancy lives i
1758 AD (search for this): chapter 10
eful of them, bring them to meeting, etc., etc. It thus appears that Quakers, like other Christians, were then not only slaveholders, but engaged in the Slave-Trade. In 1754, the American Quakers had advanced to the point of publicly recommending their societies to advise and deal with such as engage in the Slave-Trade. Again: slaveholding Quakers were urged — not to emancipate their slaves — but to care for their morals, and treat them humanely. The British Quakers came up to this mark in 1758--four years later; and more decidedly in 1761 and 1763. In 1774, the Philadelphia meeting directed that all persons engaged in any form of slave-trading be disowned; and in 1776 took the decisive and final step by directing that the owners of slaves, who refused to execute the proper instruments for giving them their freedom, be disowned likewise. This blow hit the nail on the head. In 1781, but one case requiring discipline under this head was reported; and in 1783, it duly appeared that
1696 AD (search for this): chapter 10
it to Barbadoes, against the prevalent cruelty and inhumanity with which negro slaves were then treated in that island, and urged their gradual emancipation. His letter implies that some of his disciples were slaveholders. Yet it was not till 1727 that the yearly meeting of the whole society in London declared the importing of negroes from their native country and relations, by Friends, not a commendable or allowable practice. Nearly thirty years before, the yearly meeting in Philadelphia (1696) took a step in advance of this, admonishing their members to be careful not to encourage the bringing in of any more negroes, and that those who have negroes be careful of them, bring them to meeting, etc., etc. It thus appears that Quakers, like other Christians, were then not only slaveholders, but engaged in the Slave-Trade. In 1754, the American Quakers had advanced to the point of publicly recommending their societies to advise and deal with such as engage in the Slave-Trade. Again: s
1766 AD (search for this): chapter 10
as reported; and in 1783, it duly appeared that there were no slaves owned by its members. Clarkson's History. The coincidence of these later dates with the origin, progress, and close of our Revolutionary struggle, is noteworthy. The New York and Rhode Island yearly meetings passed almost simultaneously through the same stages to like results; that of Virginia pursued a like course; but, meeting greater obstacles, was longer in overcoming them. It discouraged the purchasing of slaves in 1766; urgently recommended manumission in 1773; yet, so late as 1787, its annual reports stated that some members still held slaves. But it is understood that Slavery and Quakerism, throughout the South, had very little communion or sympathy after the Revolution, and were gradually and finally divorced so early as 1800. Hence, as Slavery grew stronger and more intolerant there, Quakerism gradually faded out; so that its adherents were probably fewer in that section in 1860 than they had been eig
1763 AD (search for this): chapter 10
appears that Quakers, like other Christians, were then not only slaveholders, but engaged in the Slave-Trade. In 1754, the American Quakers had advanced to the point of publicly recommending their societies to advise and deal with such as engage in the Slave-Trade. Again: slaveholding Quakers were urged — not to emancipate their slaves — but to care for their morals, and treat them humanely. The British Quakers came up to this mark in 1758--four years later; and more decidedly in 1761 and 1763. In 1774, the Philadelphia meeting directed that all persons engaged in any form of slave-trading be disowned; and in 1776 took the decisive and final step by directing that the owners of slaves, who refused to execute the proper instruments for giving them their freedom, be disowned likewise. This blow hit the nail on the head. In 1781, but one case requiring discipline under this head was reported; and in 1783, it duly appeared that there were no slaves owned by its members. Clarkson'
1776 AD (search for this): chapter 10
American Quakers had advanced to the point of publicly recommending their societies to advise and deal with such as engage in the Slave-Trade. Again: slaveholding Quakers were urged — not to emancipate their slaves — but to care for their morals, and treat them humanely. The British Quakers came up to this mark in 1758--four years later; and more decidedly in 1761 and 1763. In 1774, the Philadelphia meeting directed that all persons engaged in any form of slave-trading be disowned; and in 1776 took the decisive and final step by directing that the owners of slaves, who refused to execute the proper instruments for giving them their freedom, be disowned likewise. This blow hit the nail on the head. In 1781, but one case requiring discipline under this head was reported; and in 1783, it duly appeared that there were no slaves owned by its members. Clarkson's History. The coincidence of these later dates with the origin, progress, and close of our Revolutionary struggle, is notew
1843 AD (search for this): chapter 10
e required to choose between their connection with the Church and persistence in buying, holding, and selling men, women, and children, as slaves. Nor did the division of this Church, which occurred not long afterward, work any improvement in this respect. A majority of the slaveholding members, doubtless, adhered to the Old school; but the New school did not see fit to make slaveholding a bar to its communion. On the contrary, certain Presbyteries having done so, the General Assembly of 1843 censured their action, and required that it be rescinded. And though, in 1846, the next General Assembly reiterated, in substance, the broad condemnation of Slavery contained in the Expression of Views in 1818, and in 1849 proclaimed that there has been no information before this Assembly to prove that the members of our Church, in the Slave States, are not doing all they can (situated as they are, in the providence of God) to bring about the possession and enjoyment of liberty by the en
1 2 3 4 5