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

Your search returned 13 results in 6 document sections:

Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 45: an antislavery policy.—the Trent case.—Theories of reconstruction.—confiscation.—the session of 1861-1862. (search)
that power in the wars with France at the close of the last and early in the present century, with the result that the British pretension justified Captain Wilkes, while our constant assertion of neutral rights was against him; and he welcomed England to her new stand upon American principles, which it was our duty to abide by even at the cost of national disappointment and the surrender of two conspicuous leaders of the rebellion. It was, however, hardly worth while to give so much prominenss will not publish it in full unless you can bring, through some of your friends, an influence to bear. Cannot you do so? Sumner wrote to Mr. Bright, December 23:— I wish that I could see the future in our relations with England. Does England mean war? The impression here is that she does; and two foreign ministers have given to-day the opinion that she does. If this be so, then must I despair. It is said that if the Trent question is adjusted, even on English terms, another prete
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 47: third election to the Senate. (search)
transcendent resources. It is to our credit that we had so long and carefully been absorbed in the arts of peace that we wanted generals to command. How was it with England in the Crimea? To the Duchess of Argyll, November 17:— I hope that the English position will be so firmly fixed that it cannot be swayed to the support of slavery, and that the old English sentiment will be quickened to that honorable life which is such a pride to all who truly love England. I do not desire England to step from her neutrality; but I believe that her generous historian hereafter will regret bitterly, if this terrible war to prevent the establishment of a vulgar slave empire and the re-opening of the slave-trade shall be closed without her sympathies being recorded in harmony with her best and most glorious past. Of course, in putting down this rebellion we are putting down a government whose life is slavery; and now, thank God, we shall put it down by freedom All that I hear now
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 48: Seward.—emancipation.—peace with France.—letters of marque and reprisal.—foreign mediation.—action on certain military appointments.—personal relations with foreigners at Washington.—letters to Bright, Cobden, and the Duchess of Argyll.—English opinion on the Civil War.—Earl Russell and Gladstone.—foreign relations.—1862-1863. (search)
ed on such a pretension, seeking admission into the fellowship of Christian States, should have been told at the beginning that there was no place for it. To this England will yet come, unless the Alabama carries her completely into the embrace of the slave-mongers, so that her cause and theirs will be one. The next mistake of Eng and better there. Our only anxiety is for England and France. Nobody can measure the complications which either of these powers may cause. The feeling towards England among those who have been most Anglican is of intense disappointment and sorrow. The Irish and Democrats are naturally against England; but the merchants and thecience, after a constant and minute private correspondence on all the topics of my speech, I felt that the time had come when the case should be plainly stated to England by a friend who meant peace and not war. My speech was a warning, with a pleading for peace; but misconception and misrepresentation have planted in many persons
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)
ulties in the way of finding an arbitrator. What power would dare to decide against England? What power would dare to decide against the United States? Whom will England accept that we will accept? On another occasion Lord Lyons told me that England would accept Switzerland, and I drew up and reported a resolution authorizing the submission. But the war soon diverted attention, and that resolution was never acted on. It was on the San Juan difficulty; but there England was anxious simply fEngland was anxious simply for a settlement. What say you to a commission of wise men? Who shall they be? Will the country be contented with such a submission? Seward thinks not. Give my best regards to my good friend, the judge, Richard Fletcher, an early friend. Ante, vol. i. p. 199. with best wishes for his health. There was an understanding among Republican senators and representatives that if the legislatures of the rebel States organized under President Johnson's scheme of reconstruction accepted the fo
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)
plish was, not to extort from England a large sum of money, but to put our grievance in the strongest light; to convince England of the great wrong she had inflicted upon us, and thus to prepare a composition which, consisting more in the settlement to him that our claims were too large to be settled pecuniarily, and sounded him about Canada, to which he replied that England did not wish to keep Canada, but could not part with it without the consent of the population. Fish desired to know of nts can give assurances that the idea can be carried through. The President told me that he was entirely satisfied that England made the concession of belligerency to injure us. Sumner wrote to Bemis, July 7:— The President, Secretary of gress. Mihi multum cogitanti, it seems best that our case, in length and breadth, with all details, should be stated to England without any demand of any kind. This was (lone by Sumner's advice in the letter of Fish to Motley, Sept. 25, 1869. En
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 56: San Domingo again.—the senator's first speech.—return of the angina pectoris.—Fish's insult in the Motley Papers.— the senator's removal from the foreign relations committee.—pretexts for the remioval.—second speech against the San Domingo scheme.—the treaty of Washington.—Sumner and Wilson against Butler for governor.—1870-1871. (search)
hought; but it seemed to him that the time had come to test the disposition of all concerned in what he regarded as a great consummation. That was his idea, and that was all of it. This is the substance of the explanation of his position as given by him to Perley (B. P. Poore) and printed in the Boston Journal, Feb. 27, 1871. A fuller account is given in the same journal, Jan. 8 and 14, 1878. According to these reports he declared it a pure invention that he wished to dictate terms to England, or to require a cession of the British provinces as a condition of a settlement; and he referred, for a statement of his position, to his address Sept. 22, 1869 (Works, vol. XIII. pp. 127, 128; compare Springfield Republican, March 25-27, 1871). The senator's letter to Bemis, Jan. 18, 1871 (ante, p. 464), asks counsel as to another part of the memorandum, but does not mention the clause concerning Canada. The omission is proof that he did not regard the cession of that province as a pere