Browsing named entities in Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4. You can also browse the collection for April 29th or search for April 29th in all documents.

Your search returned 4 results in 3 document sections:

Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 49: letters to Europe.—test oath in the senate.—final repeal of the fugitive-slave act.—abolition of the coastwise slave-trade.—Freedmen's Bureau.—equal rights of the colored people as witnesses and passengers.—equal pay of colored troops.—first struggle for suffrage of the colored people.—thirteenth amendment of the constitution.— French spoliation claims.—taxation of national banks.— differences with Fessenden.—Civil service Reform.—Lincoln's re-election.—parting with friends.—1863-1864. (search)
t of persons who were conservative and experienced in financial matters. Fessenden, chairman of the Senate committee on finance, gave however his adhesion to the principle of State taxation in a proposition to allow the States to tax the market value of the shares. Sumner was very decided against subjecting the banks to State taxation, and proposed as a substitute a rate of taxation exclusively imposed by Congress. He entered earnestly into the debate on different days, April 26, 27, and 29; May 5 and 6. Works, vol. VIII. pp. 419436. maintaining that the exemption of the national banks from local taxation and interference was essential to the working of the new system and to the support of the public credit at a critical period. His amendment It was drawn by Mr. Chase. was lost; but he was supported by Chandler of Michigan, Conness, Howard, Lane of Indiana, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sherman, Sprague, Wilkinson, and Wilson. Sumner received unstinted praise from Chandler, a banker by
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)
orty gentlemen dined at Bird's room, A Republican club, composed mostly of radical antislavery men, which dined on Saturdays in Boston. and all, nemine dissentiente, approved it, and with full praise. Frederick Douglass wrote from Rochester, April 29:— The friends of freedom all over the country have looked to you and confided in you, of all men in the United States Senate, during all this terrible war. They will look to you all the more now that peace dawns, and the final settlement owhat a regenerated land! I had looked for a bitter contest on this question; but with the President on our side, it will be carried by simple avoirdupois. To Mr. Bright, May 16:— Just before starting for Boston, I acknowledge yours of April 29. The feeling in England is not greater than I anticipated. I hope it will make your government see the crime with which for four years it has fraternized. Mr. Seward's disability causes a suspension of our diplomatic discussions, which I thin
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)
nts at Bradford, May 21, made a reply, in a friendly tone, to the senator's speech. It is not, however, difficult to account for their misconception of his temper and purpose. The mass of men, even of intelligent men, are not critical readers; and they did not take note that he had spoken in the line of all the diplomatic statements of our grievances. In a few instances the conformity of the speech to the preceding statements of the American case was recognized. The Pall Mall Gazette, April 29, wrote: Though Mr. Sumner is more outspoken than Mr. Seward or Mr. Adams, he says nothing which was not contained implicitly in their despatches. Sir Charles Dilke slid in a speech, Jan. 6, 1870 (New York Tribune, January 22), that Sumner had only stated the American case almost in the same words in which it had often been staled before; and he took note that the senator had said nothing about claiming two hundred million pounds sterling, or required an abject apology, but that what he sai