Browsing named entities in Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4. You can also browse the collection for January 17th or search for January 17th in all documents.

Your search returned 6 results in 5 document sections:

Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 44: Secession.—schemes of compromise.—Civil War.—Chairman of foreign relations Committee.—Dr. Lieber.—November, 1860– April, 1861. (search)
March speech. The New York Independent, February 7, contains S. H. Gay's criticism of the speech; but the editor a week later took a more favorable view of it. Seward spoke again briefly January 31. Mrs. Seward did not approve her husband's concessions. Seward's Life, vol. II. p. 496. He read the speech before its delivery to Sumner, who pleaded with him in vain to reconsider his purpose. Letter to John A. Andrew, Jan. 17, 1861. Works, vol. v. p. 455. Sumner wrote to Dr. Howe, January 17:— I trust that Massachusetts continues unseduced by any proposition of compromise or concession, in whatever form or name. My best energies have been devoted to keep our men firm, firm, firm. My solicitude is so great that it has touched my health, but I cannot help it. Seward read me his speech four days before its delivery. When he came to his propositions, I protested with my whole soul, for the sake of our cause, our country, and his own good name, and I supplicated him to say
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 48: Seward.—emancipation.—peace with France.—letters of marque and reprisal.—foreign mediation.—action on certain military appointments.—personal relations with foreigners at Washington.—letters to Bright, Cobden, and the Duchess of Argyll.—English opinion on the Civil War.—Earl Russell and Gladstone.—foreign relations.—1862-1863. (search)
land, and therefore grieves now. We are now occupied with the great question what to do for the new-made freedmen, that their emancipation may be a blessing to them and to our country. It is a vast problem, on which we need sympathy and good-will. A happy New Year to you! Some wish for war in Europe, because France and England will then see their duty towards us. I long that these countries may see their duties; but I am against war everywhere, and with my whole heart. To Lieber, January 17:— These are dark hours. There are senators fill of despair,—not I. The President tells me that he now fears the fire in the rear —meaning the Democracy, especially at the Northwest—more than our military chances. But I fear that our army is everywhere in a bad way. I see no central inspiration or command; no concentration, no combination which promises a Jena. Again, January 23:— There can be no armistice, although Greeley has favored mediation, to which an armistice
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 52: Tenure-of-office act.—equal suffrage in the District of Columbia, in new states, in territories, and in reconstructed states.—schools and homesteads for the Freedmen.—purchase of Alaska and of St. Thomas.—death of Sir Frederick Bruce.—Sumner on Fessenden and Edmunds.—the prophetic voices.—lecture tour in the West.—are we a nation?—1866-1867. (search)
xtension of the measure by requiring, where it had not before been required, a confirmation by the Senate in the appointment of a large class of officers; but though supported by a majority of the Republicans, his amendment was lost. January 15, 17, and 18 (Works, vol. XI. pp. 59-81); January 11 (Congressional Globe, p. 40. 5). Sumner made a similar effort to protect pension agents, January 14 (Globe, p. 432). In another debate he called attention to the use of patronage by the Secretary of re-of-office bill and in other debates the impeachment of the President was foreshadowed. A resolution for impeachment was offered in the House, Jan. 14, 1867. Congressional Globe, p. 443. Sumner spoke of him as the enemy of his country, January 17 (Congressional Globe, pp. 525-528). He was called to order by McDougall, but sustained by a vote of the Senate.the successor of Jefferson Davis, in the spirit by which he is governed and in the mischief he is inflicting on his country. Janua
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, chapter 10 (search)
rote to Dr. Howe, Jan. 1869:— It is difficult to understand the precise position of Crete. Can the late telegraphic news be true? I suspect it as an invention of the Turk. I regret that there is no good sympathetic Russian minister here with whom I could confer. Stoeckl has gone home; and even he was little better than an old Democrat, with a Massachusetts wife steeped in Webster whiggery; so, we fight our great battle generally with little support or sympathy. To Mr. Bright, January 17:— Of course I read carefully all that you say, whether to the public, or better still, to myself. Your last letter was full of interest. All the treaties The Johnson-Clarendon treaties. have been sent to the Senate in copy. They would have been ratified at any time last year almost unanimously. I fear that time will be needed to smooth the way now. Our minister has advertised the questions by his numerous speeches, so that he has provoked the public attention if not opposition
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 55: Fessenden's death.—the public debt.—reduction of postage.— Mrs. Lincoln's pension.—end of reconstruction.—race discriminations in naturalization.—the Chinese.—the senator's record.—the Cuban Civil War.—annexation of San Domingo.—the treaties.—their use of the navy.—interview with the presedent.—opposition to the annexation; its defeat.—Mr. Fish.—removal of Motley.—lecture on Franco-Prussian War.—1869-1870. (search)
h the general's memory of what took place in the Cabinet. April 14, 1865. General Grant also stated to George William Curtis that Sumner had neglected to report several treaties; but when Harper's weekly of Dec. 8, 1877, was shown to him, which gave the record of the Senate proving that he had reported them with due promptness, the general continued to assume in an extended conversation that the senator had not reported them. (New York Herald, Feb. 22, 1878. containing letter from Cairo, January 17.) His anachronism in his comments on the Alabama claims has already been pointed out. (Ante, p. 398, note.) General Grant's accuracy as a narrator of military affairs has been contested by several authors. Misunderstandings: Halleck and Grant; J. B. Fry, Magazine of American History, vol. XVI. p. 561. The Mistakes of Grant; by W. S. Rosecrans, North American Review, December, 1885, pp. 580-599. Grant versus The Record; by Carswell McClellan. From Chattanooga to Petersburg; by W. F. Smit