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) 1,628 0 Browse Search
Centreville (Virginia, United States) 530 0 Browse Search
Doc 458 0 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 427 7 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 406 0 Browse Search
Bull Run, Va. (Virginia, United States) 347 1 Browse Search
Irwin McDowell 314 2 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 272 0 Browse Search
Kentucky (Kentucky, United States) 258 0 Browse Search
Daniel Tyler 252 2 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 2. (ed. Frank Moore). Search the whole document.

Found 299 total hits in 60 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6
Judah P. Benjamin (search for this): chapter 13
esent excited state of the South, to hunt up what he may have said in an electioneering canvass. One thing I know, the South did not always view him as specially dangerous, for certainly they did not pursue the course the best, if not the only one, even promising to defeat his election. A speech in the Senate, that became at once a Southern and a Northern campaign document, used to defeat in the one section Judge Douglas, and in the other to promote the cause of Mr. Lincoln, was made by Mr. Benjamin, in May, 1860, with his specious ability and pleasing eloquence. That gentleman on that occasion endeavored to show that Mr. Lincoln was more conservative and true to the South than Mr. Douglas. Referring to the Senatorial contest which they had recently had in Illinois, he said what I read to you. In that contest the two candidates for the Senate of the United States, in the State of Illinois, went before their people. They agreed to discuss the issues; they put questions to each ot
Thomas Jefferson (search for this): chapter 13
ectly or indirectly. Some of these she may, in defiance of gratitude and duty, seize, and in mercy be permitted to hold, but the disbursements for their further use must be hers. And these, in a short, a very short period, would make her a bankrupt. Already, if reports be true, is she sadly suffering. Can she much longer adhere to the reckless course which produces it? Will the wise, reflecting, loyal part of her people much longer submit to it? No. She will be with us again. As Mr. Jefferson, on the 20th of October, 1820, when separation was then apprehended, wrote the late William Rush, it (the separation) will be but for a short time--two or three years trial will bring them back like quarrelling lovers, to renewed embraces and increased affection. Some of the sons of these States possibly look to a re-opening of the slave trade; some of them, we know, have often recommended it. Vain the hope! The horrid traffic is condemned by the judgment of the civilized world, and ac
Stephen A. Douglas (search for this): chapter 13
outhern and a Northern campaign document, used to defeat in the one section Judge Douglas, and in the other to promote the cause of Mr. Lincoln, was made by Mr. Benjed to show that Mr. Lincoln was more conservative and true to the South than Mr. Douglas. Referring to the Senatorial contest which they had recently had in Illin again, within the last few days, of this discussion between Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Douglas, to find that Mr. Lincoln is A far more conservative man, unless he has sinc opinions, than I had supposed him to be. There was no dodging on his part. Mr. Douglas started with his questions. Here they are with Mr. Lincoln's answers: ould not aggravate the slave question among ourselves.--Debates of Lincoln and Douglas, p. 88. The distinguished Senator evidently did not then think, he certainoduced and relied upon to satisfy the South that he would be truer to her than Douglas. And yet, who supposes that if the latter had been the choice of the people,
, and commanded the respect and wonder of the world. And yet, in a State that owes so much to it — whose sons have so nobly and so often fought under it — it has been torn down, and vainly sought to be disgraced and conquered. Vain thought! Hear how a native poet speaks of it: Dread of the proud and beacon to the free, A hope for other lands — shield of our own, What hand profane has madly dared advance, To your once sacred place, a banner strange, Unknown at Bunker, Monmouth, Cowpens, York, That Moultrie never reared, or Marion Saw? If the cannon maintains the honor of our standard, and blood is shed in its defence, it will be because the United States cannot permit its surrender without indelible disgrace and foul abandonment of duty. I have now done, and in conclusion I ask you to do what I am sure you will cheerfully and devoutly do — fervently unite with me in invoking Heaven, in its mercy to us and our race, to interpose and keep us one people under the glorious Unio
O. O. Howard (search for this): chapter 13
s powers are granted by them, and are to be exercised directly on them, and for their benefit. The principle here adjudged was over and over again, under the administration of the same great judge, maintained as the settled judgment of the Court, and without a dissenting voice. It has, with equal clearness, uniformity, and force, been upheld since Chief Justice Taney became the presiding ornament of that high tribunal. It was involved in the case of the United States and Booth in 21st Howard. In that instance the State of Wisconsin, through its courts, resisted the authority of the United States, and denied the validity of an act of Congress, constitutionally passed. It was the object of the writ of error to have the judgment reviewed. The supremacy of the General Government was again denied. The alleged inherent sovereignty of the State was again asserted, and the conduct of Wisconsin vindicated on those grounds. The Court unanimously, through the chief, said what I will r
lded the Executive power, and the Senate chamber was filled with the counsels of Webster. There it ventured in January, 1830, to assert its soundness. A favored son of the State, with South Carolina's reckless, unreflecting daring, was bold enough to challenge the great expounder to the contest. Right nobly, too, did he conduct himself, but his cause was bad — his fate and the fate of his cause was known in advance — they were alike sure of the same destiny — signal, signal defeat. On the 26th of that month the great Northern statesman spoke as no man ever spake before, and the doctrine and its gallant champion fell together. That speech, too, did more than make the name of Webster immortal. It achieved more, much more, than a triumph over the Southerner and his fancy. It fired the patriotic heart of the country. It made it rejoice that that country was ours, then and forever. It planted deep, deep in every true American heart that sentiment so vital to our duty, our honor, ou<
ech already referred to, of January, 1830, in almost every line of it, denounces the doctrine. Which of you has failed to read that speech, and to be convinced? It will remain forever a crushing answer to the heresy. And as it has ever since been, so it will ever continue to be, the brightest gem in the patriotic literature of the age. Secession — peaceable, constitutional secession — asserted even in the Senate Chamber on the authority of Daniel Webster! Hear what he thought of it. In 1850, as in 1830, the country was threatened with destruction. The error again ventured to show itself. Its disciples once more rallied to its support. Do you remember his 7th of March speech? Let me recall a part of its lofty eloquence and its more lofty patriotism: I hear, with pain and anguish and distress, the word secession, especially when it falls from the lips of those who are eminently patriotic, and known to the country and known all over the world for their political services.
May, 1860 AD (search for this): chapter 13
ate of the South, to hunt up what he may have said in an electioneering canvass. One thing I know, the South did not always view him as specially dangerous, for certainly they did not pursue the course the best, if not the only one, even promising to defeat his election. A speech in the Senate, that became at once a Southern and a Northern campaign document, used to defeat in the one section Judge Douglas, and in the other to promote the cause of Mr. Lincoln, was made by Mr. Benjamin, in May, 1860, with his specious ability and pleasing eloquence. That gentleman on that occasion endeavored to show that Mr. Lincoln was more conservative and true to the South than Mr. Douglas. Referring to the Senatorial contest which they had recently had in Illinois, he said what I read to you. In that contest the two candidates for the Senate of the United States, in the State of Illinois, went before their people. They agreed to discuss the issues; they put questions to each other for answer
October 20th, 1820 AD (search for this): chapter 13
of these she may, in defiance of gratitude and duty, seize, and in mercy be permitted to hold, but the disbursements for their further use must be hers. And these, in a short, a very short period, would make her a bankrupt. Already, if reports be true, is she sadly suffering. Can she much longer adhere to the reckless course which produces it? Will the wise, reflecting, loyal part of her people much longer submit to it? No. She will be with us again. As Mr. Jefferson, on the 20th of October, 1820, when separation was then apprehended, wrote the late William Rush, it (the separation) will be but for a short time--two or three years trial will bring them back like quarrelling lovers, to renewed embraces and increased affection. Some of the sons of these States possibly look to a re-opening of the slave trade; some of them, we know, have often recommended it. Vain the hope! The horrid traffic is condemned by the judgment of the civilized world, and accursed of God. The feeling
December, 1828 AD (search for this): chapter 13
te depositories of the Government of the United States and the Governments of the individual States. That the Government of the United States is a Government, in as strict a sense of the term, as the Governments of the States; being, like them, organized into a legislative, executive, and judicial department, operating, like them, directly on persons and things, and having, like them, the command of a physical force for executing the powers committed to it. He writes Mr. Rives, in December, 1828: Were some of the Southern doctrines latterly advanced valid, our political system would not be a Government, but a mere league, in which the members have given up no part whatever of their sovereignty to a common Government, and retain, moreover, a right in each to dissolve the compact when it pleases. It seems to be forgotten, that in the case of a mere league there must be as much right on one side to assert and maintain its obligations as on the other to cancel it, and prudence ough
1 2 3 4 5 6