Browsing named entities in Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4. You can also browse the collection for April 18th or search for April 18th in all documents.

Your search returned 7 results in 4 document sections:

Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 50: last months of the Civil War.—Chase and Taney, chief-justices.—the first colored attorney in the supreme court —reciprocity with Canada.—the New Jersey monopoly.— retaliation in war.—reconstruction.—debate on Louisiana.—Lincoln and Sumner.—visit to Richmond.—the president's death by assassination.—Sumner's eulogy upon him. —President Johnson; his method of reconstruction.—Sumner's protests against race distinctions.—death of friends. —French visitors and correspondents.—1864-1865. (search)
ic, which being connected with his blessed memory I am sure you will prize. I am endeavoring to regain my strength sufficiently to be able to leave here in a few days. I go hence broken-hearted, with every hope almost in life crushed. Notwithstanding my utter desolation through life, the memory of the cherished friend of my husband and myself will always be most gratefully remembered. With kindest regards, I remain always Yours very truly, Mary Lincoln. Sumner wrote to Mr. Bright, April 18:— Not even the tragedy here can make me indifferent to the death of Richard Cobden, who was my personal friend and the friend of my country. I felt with you entirely in the touching words which you uttered in Parliament. I wish he could have lived to enjoy our triumph and to continue his counsels. His name will be cherished here as in England. History will be for him more than Westminster Abbey. You will be shocked by the crime in which belligerent slavery, crushed in arms, has s
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)
with an Administration which he and they were now steadily opposing. After the treaty had been considered by the committee from day to (lay for a week, Sumner reported in favor of a ratification, Fessenden alone dissenting. The pendency of the treaty becoming known, the expediency of the purchase, though admitted by some intelligent persons, was questioned by the greater number. The New York Tribune took ground against the acquisition. April 1, 8, 10, 11. The New York Independent, April 18, opposed the purchase. The opposite opinions were brought out in the debate in 1868 in the House, on the bill appropriating the purchase-money. Sumner reported the bill in the Senate, and was chairman of the committee of conference on a difference between the houses. July 17, 22, 24, 1868, Congressional Globe, pp. 4159, 4321, 4404. Sumner's correspondence shows the conflicting opinions,—the purchase being approved by Professor Spencer Baird of the Smithsonian Institution, G. V. Fox, Comm
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 54: President Grant's cabinet.—A. T. Stewart's disability.—Mr. Fish, Secretary of State.—Motley, minister to England.—the Alabama claims.—the Johnson-Clarendon convention.— the senator's speech: its reception in this country and in England.—the British proclamation of belligerency.— national claims.—instructions to Motley.—consultations with Fish.—political address in the autumn.— lecture on caste.—1869. (search)
regret from the British government could not be expected, and that the senator had confounded legal considerations of the first importance with totally distinct moral considerations. Goldwin Smith, then in the United States, wrote front Boston, April 18, to a workingmen's paper in England, that after the speech English emigration to the United States could not be encouraged, and that English residents might soon have to leave this country! This letter was copied generally by the English press,eech, and which, it was feared, might interfere with the negotiation. The New York Times, which approved both the substance and tone of the speech, April 16, changed its position after the report of its reception in England was received, May 13, 18, 19, 22, 23, 26; June 12, 18. Correspondents started the rumor that there were differences between Fish and the senator, New York Times, June 14. and the latter wrote to Cushing, June 16:— I saw Fish last evening, and found him as always w
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)
87, 309-311. or the competency of Congress to impose them. At different stages of the discussion there were collisions between the three senators and Sumner. April 18, Congressional Globe, pp. 2746-2753. Carpenter was a new senator, succeeding Doolittle of Wisconsin. Carpenter, by letter (July 29, 1868), applied to Sumner tew it, saying it was an unfortunate expression, and uttered in the heat of an extempore debate (Feb. 1, 1872, Globe, p. 760). Sumner replied a few days later, April 18. Congressional Globe, pp. 2747-2749. and a running debate April 18. Congressional Globe, pp. 2749-2753. followed, in which he maintained that the DeclaratioApril 18. Congressional Globe, pp. 2749-2753. followed, in which he maintained that the Declaration, though not a grant of power to Congress, was a commanding guide in interpreting the Constitution. Carpenter's ill—will is of little account in estimating the position of a public man whom he disliked; but it must be said that Sumner's way of dismissing reasonable points of law by an appeal to the supremacy of human rights grat