Browsing named entities in Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 2. (ed. Frank Moore). You can also browse the collection for Dixon or search for Dixon in all documents.

Your search returned 4 results in 3 document sections:

proved what he said, and contended that it was evident that the Constitution was to be put aside. It was utterly subversive of the Constitution and of public liberty to clothe any one with dictatorial powers. He then referred to the speech of Mr. Dixon, of Connecticut, who said, in substance, that if African slavery stood in the way it must be abolished. Mr. Dixon had the secretary read what he did say on the subject, as published. Mr. Breckinridge said it appeared to him that the most Mr. Dixon had the secretary read what he did say on the subject, as published. Mr. Breckinridge said it appeared to him that the most violent Republicans had possession of the Government, and referred to the bill introduced by Mr. Pomeroy to suppress the slave-holder rebellion, and which also contained a provision for the abolition of slavery. He contended that the very title was enough to show that the Constitution was to be put aside. Mr. Bingham (Mich.) asked if he contended this was not a slaveholders' rebellion. Mr. Breckinridge--I do, sir; I do. He then referred to the refusal of last session to make any compromi
left, or gave way, for the entrance of the cavalry and artillery. These dashed through the town at a gallop, and down the road out into the country beyond, in search of the fugitives. After going four miles beyond Fairfax, and finding that the legs of the rebels were evidently the longest,--for they made the fastest time on record in this war, certainly,--our troopers returned, with the cannon, and joined the van again. Our party consisted of Hons. Schuyler Colfax, E. B. Washburn, Messrs. Dixon of New Jersey, Judge McKeon of New York, and two or three reporters for the press. Mr. Russell of the London Times, and Mr. Raymond of the N. Y. Times, were also together, with another party. Hundreds of persons arrived in Washington on Tuesday and Wednesday, who came expressly to see the battle. The hotels were packed full of human beings — the National alone turning away over four hundred guests, whom they could not lodge, for the crowd. A few Union people lingered behind in the v
m the shoulders of all men. These authoritative utterances, emanating from men who occupy the highest official positions in their Government, can well be regarded as pregnant with significance. But later occurrences are not lacking to corroborate this construction of the motive of these bad men. Innumerable lesser lights are constantly developing the sentiment that pervades the public mind of the abolitionists, and their war cry seems with great unanimity to be, down with slavery. Senator Dixon, of Connecticut, has proclaimed in a recent debate in the Congress of the United States, that if slavery stands in the way of the Union, it must be abolished. Pomeroy, of Kansas, another member of that undignified congregation of petty legislators, introduced a bill the other day to suppress those slaveholders' rebellion, containing a provision for the abolition of slavery. Others have uttered sentiments quite as atrocious in relation to the subject. This feeling is exhibiting itsel