Browsing named entities in Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4. You can also browse the collection for January 24th or search for January 24th in all documents.

Your search returned 3 results in 3 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)
which were freely shown among members of the Legislature, were thought to have saved the statute. The statute was amended in one particular, where by a certain construction it might involve a conflict between national and State officers,—this amendment being desired by Governor Andrew. Rhode Island repealed her personal liberty statute; but Vermont stood firm. To A. G. Browne, who wished him to come to Boston to assist in preventing the repeal of the personal liberty law, he wrote, January 24, declining on account of duties at Washington:— But, believe me, I would do much, and suffer too if need be, to save our beloved Commonwealth from the shame of a backward step. There is not a personal liberty law or habeas corpus statute on her books which will not be mentioned among her glories when these events come to be written. He wrote, January 29, a long and earnest letter to Henry L. Pierce, then a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, and afterwards serv
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)
pon one young man. July 12, Congressional Globe, p. 615. Sumner aided Conkling's bill a few days later. July 17, Globe, p. 701. Sumner carried at this time a bill to prevent exclusions from office and juries in the District of Columbia on account of race or color. Works, vol. XI. pp. 414-417. It passed the House, but did not become a law for want of the President's signature. Twice, at the next session, when carried at his instance, it met the same fate; Dec. 5, 12, 1867; Jan. 7, 24: Feb. 24, 1868; Congressional Globe, pp. 38, 151, 344– 346, 720, 1373; Feb. 11, 1869, Globe, p. 1080. He had a prohibition of the discrimination inserted in a bill amending the charter of the city of Washington, April 7, 1868; Globe, pp. 2260-2267. but his fourth effort at the beginning of President Grant's administration was successful. This is an illustration of his pertinacity. Sumner carried through at this time a resolution of sympathy with Crete in her struggle against Turkey, Jul
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)
e passage of the Act of March, 1867, which first secured suffrage to the colored people of the reconstructed States. Sumner in reply reviewed his own record in detail, maintaining by citations and extracts from speeches his early espousal of the cause of equal suffrage and his constant loyalty to it. Jan. 21 and Feb. 10, 1870, Works, vol. XIII. pp. 303-330; Congressional Globe, pp. 640-642; National Antislavery Standard, February 5; letter from Grace Greenwood in the New York Tribune, January 24. In the debate, Drake of Missouri and Fowler of Tennessee disapproved the attacks made on Sumner. (February 11, Globe, p. 1216.) Forney wrote to Sumner, January 22: I hope you will excuse me for adding the expression of my deep regret at the controversy into which you have been forced by the discourteous conduct of Mr. Trumbull. The correspondent of the New York Times, February 11, wrote of the controversy: With all his faults there is hardly a better-natured man in the Senate than Mr. S