hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 225 225 Browse Search
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register 54 54 Browse Search
Brigadier-General Ellison Capers, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 5, South Carolina (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 29 29 Browse Search
Knight's Mechanical Encyclopedia (ed. Knight) 28 28 Browse Search
Cambridge History of American Literature: volume 3 (ed. Trent, William Peterfield, 1862-1939., Erskine, John, 1879-1951., Sherman, Stuart Pratt, 1881-1926., Van Doren, Carl, 1885-1950.) 25 25 Browse Search
The Cambridge of eighteen hundred and ninety-six: a picture of the city and its industries fifty years after its incorporation (ed. Arthur Gilman) 11 11 Browse Search
Cambridge History of American Literature: volume 2 (ed. Trent, William Peterfield, 1862-1939., Erskine, John, 1879-1951., Sherman, Stuart Pratt, 1881-1926., Van Doren, Carl, 1885-1950.) 10 10 Browse Search
Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Henry Walcott Boynton, Reader's History of American Literature 9 9 Browse Search
The Photographic History of The Civil War: in ten volumes, Thousands of Scenes Photographed 1861-65, with Text by many Special Authorities, Volume 10: The Armies and the Leaders. (ed. Francis Trevelyan Miller) 9 9 Browse Search
Medford Historical Society Papers, Volume 23. 7 7 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 7. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). You can also browse the collection for 1875 AD or search for 1875 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 2 results in 2 document sections:

Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 7. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Letter from General Hampton on the burning of Columbia. (search)
Fessenden hoped it would not be referred or ordered to lie on the table, but that the Senate would refuse to receive it. Mr. Conness said that a man who would attempt to destroy the Government of the United States would certainly not hesitate to burn a city. He hoped the letter of Wade Hampton would not be received or considered at all by the Senate. Mr. Johnson then withdrew the letter of General Hampton. Times have changed since 1866. General Sherman, in his Memoirs published in 1875, maintains that Columbia was burned by accident and not by design, and makes this most remarkable admission [Memoirs, volume II, page 287]: In my official report of this conflagration I distinctly charged it to General Wade Hampton, and confess I did so pointedly to shake the faith of his people in him, for he was in my opinion a braggart, and professed to be the special champion of South Carolina. In other words General Sherman coolly admits that he deliberately made in his official repor
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 7. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Who burned Columbia?--a Review of General Sherman's version of the affair. (search)
t of the event itself in 1865 General Sherman says: And without hesitation I charge General Wade Hampton with having burned his own city of Columbia, not with a malicious intent, or as the manifestation of a Roman stoicism, but from folly and want of sense in filling it with lint, cotton and tinder. I have thus given in his own words General Sherman's three statements of his version of the story of Columbia's burning. They show a toning down as we come on from 1865 to 1873, and finally to 1875; but this discrepancy is not the matter before me just now. The general idea of the three statements is that the burning of Columbia was an accident, and that General Hampton is responsible for it. I propose to show that the burning of Columbia was a crime, and that General Sherman is responsible for it. First. On page 287 of volume first of the Supplemental report of the joint Committee on the conduct of the war, published officially by the Government, are these words in a dispatch dated