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

Your search returned 223 results in 10 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)
ed in it,—which, however, made no reference to slavery. The session closed August 6. Sumner on his way to Massachusetts made visits to Mr. Jay at Bedford and Mr. Fish at Garrison's. When he reached Boston his first duty—a deeply sad one—was to visit the home of Longfellow, from which had been removed by tragic death the poet's assertion also of the right to hold the men in case of a national exigency was a notice that our government might repeat the act at any time in its discretion. Mr. Fish, then in private life, wrote Sumner, December 29:— The state department's letter to Lord Lyons scarcely justified the declaration attributed to you in youresterday, I feel moved to express to you my satisfaction that you have given the affair such a shape, and have tacitly exposed some of Mr. Seward's errors. Hamilton Fish wrote:— Exactly right. You have done justice to the question, to the country, its history, its policy, and its late action. On such ground as you ha
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 51: reconstruction under Johnson's policy.—the fourteenth amendment to the constitution.—defeat of equal suffrage for the District of Columbia, and for Colorado, Nebraska, and Tennessee.—fundamental conditions.— proposed trial of Jefferson Davis.—the neutrality acts. —Stockton's claim as a senator.—tributes to public men. —consolidation of the statutes.—excessive labor.— address on Johnson's Policy.—his mother's death.—his marriage.—1865-1866. (search)
ad thought a nearer relation probable. Rumors of the new connection were rife late in August, and it was finally acknowledged in September, when Sumner communicated it in notes. Warm congratulations came to him from a wide circle,—from companions of his youth, Howe, Longfellow, Greene, Phillips, Lieber, Agassiz, Palfrey, Whittier, the Waterstons, the Lodges, the Wadsworths, Mrs. R. B. Forbes, and Mrs. Charles Francis Adams; from later associates of his public life, Chief-Justice Chase, Hamilton Fish, Governor Morgan, and Mrs. President Lincoln; from friends across the ocean who had kept up a constant interest in his welfare and followed closely his career, the Duchess of Sutherland, the Argylls, the Cranworths, Robert Ingham, the Count of Paris, and the Laugels. From Washington, the diplomatic corps, particularly Baron Gerolt, its dean, saluted him cordially. The congratulations expressed only one regret,—that he had delayed the step so long. At last he was to enter on a life f
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)
Nov. 25, 1867, a resolution by more than a two-thirds vote against any further purchases of territory, which was intended, as the debate shows, as a protest against the negotiation. President Grant, when he came into office in March, 1869, dismissed the scheme summarily, saying it was one of Seward's, and he would have nothing to do with it. The Senate committee, anxious not to embarrass Raasloff at home, kept the matter alive,—refraining from final adverse action at his written request to Mr. Fish, the new Secretary of State,—and finally, on March 30, after he had been heard and left Washington, laid the treaty on the table, recording on its minutes the words, The understanding being that this was equivalent to a rejection, and was a gentler method of effecting it. A year later it cleared its docket by a report adverse to a ratification. Raasloff returned to Copenhagen, where, by public speech and private letter to Sumner, though not claiming him as a supporter of the ratification,
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, chapter 10 (search)
r,—Dr. Palfrey, E. L. Pierce, Dr. S. G. Howe, G. W. Greene, J. B. Smith, and M. Milmore,—while Emerson, Whittier, Agassiz, Bemis, G. W. Curtis, and James A. Hamilton received invitations which they were unable to accept. To Whittier he wrote: It will be a delight and a solace to me if I know that you are under my roof. he kept aloof from parties, but he could now return the courtesies which he had been receiving as a bachelor. Among those known to have dined with him are Seward, Motley, Fish, Conking, Hooper. Reverdy Johnson, ,John Sherman, Carl Schurz, Morrill of Vermont. General Sickles, General Webb, W. M. Evarts, Edmund Quincy, Agassiz. Ex-President Roberts of Liberia, Berthemy the French minister, Sir Edward Thornton the English minister, Gerolt the Prussian minister, and Blacque Bey the Turkish minister. Geore William Curtis, while at Washington as chairman of the Civil Service Commission, in June. 1871, though not accepting Sumner's invitation to occupy a room at his ho
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)
officer being appointed as a complimented? Hamilton Fish was in washington on the day of the inaugu. This appears in letters in manuscript from Fish to Sumner. Some of them apply coarse epithets e writer has had at hand one hundred letters of Mr. and Mrs. Fish to Sumner,—much the larger numberCorrespondence of J. L Motley, vol. i. p. 261. Mr. and Mrs. Fish expressed their thanks for his atrk, when he was introduced to the audience by Mr. Fish with a very complimentary tribute. During thdisplaced from the consulship at Palermo, but Mr. Fish restored him at Sumner's request. His failureing it afterwards as followed in substance by Mr. Fish's letter to Motley of Sept. 25, 1869; Work this letter, a special despatch, dictated by Mr. Fish, appeared in a leading newspaper of New York,s was (lone by Sumner's advice in the letter of Fish to Motley, Sept. 25, 1869. England must know ouaction unfavorable to a peaceful settlement. Mr. Fish invited Sumner to prepare the paper, but the [88 more...]
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)
nt.—opposition to the annexation; its defeat.—Mr. Fish.—removal of Motley.—lecture on Franco-Prussia but the President kept it in his own hands. Mr. Fish, who is supposed not to have been in sympathymembers of the Cabinet were cordial, and with Mr. Fish still intimate and confidential. He found in position carried greater weight than Nye. Mr. Fish, as might have been expected from one of his especial attention. In the same interview Mr. Fish mentioned other projects of the President whiwhich was as unexpected as it was undesired. Mr. Fish afterwards admitted that he did make the sugghe Senate from considering the treaty against Mr. Fish's pressure for a vote. (Grant in Peace, p. 21 been assured for months. This is not so, as Mr. Fish the same month in which it was rejected did athey continued to address each other as My dear Fish and My dear Sumner. They wrote familiarly of ve minister recently made in executive session. Fish replied at length, endeavoring to remove what h[11 more.
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)
ver said of him and his acts had been said to Mr. Fish and Mr. Boutwell, whom he summoned to bear wion or any reason or even pretext ever given, Mr. Fish proceeded on December 30 to put on record theor, although he was then only fifty-nine, while Fish was sixty-two,—a reference to age which indicatr excuse. Patterson communicated the answer to Fish, and the latter called on the senator on the 15 any intercourse, official or otherwise, with Mr. Fish. William Whiting of Boston, former solicitorofficial. Two days after, he communicated to Mr. Fish his views on the subject of their interview ience, and in the tone of sorrow, not of anger. Fish, on the other hand, even after Sumner's death, fficial characters to answer some question from Fish; Supposed to be a reference to what occurred He produced the offensive passage contained in Fish's despatch to Moran, and justified the senator ded them May 8. The American commissioners were Fish, Schenck, E. R. Hoar, Judge Nelson, and G. H. W[31 more...]
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 57: attempts to reconcile the President and the senator.—ineligibility of the President for a second term.—the Civil-rights Bill.—sale of arms to France.—the liberal Republican party: Horace Greeley its candidate adopted by the Democrats.—Sumner's reserve.—his relations with Republican friends and his colleague.—speech against the President.—support of Greeley.—last journey to Europe.—a meeting with Motley.—a night with John Bright.—the President's re-election.—1871-1872. (search)
awal, the general might yet be a candidate, the House of Representatives, Dec. 15, 1875, passed a resolution, by a vote of two hundred and thirty-three to eighteen, declaring that a departure from the time-honored custom [that of a President retiring after a second term] would be unwise, unpatriotic, and fraught with peril to our free institutions. This ended the question of a third term in 1876; but it was revived again in 1880, when the scheme was supported by Conkling, Cameron, Logan, and Fish. The better sentiment of the country was aroused against it, and it again failed, though this time materially aided by the idea that a strong man or savior of society was needed to maintain order in the Southern States. Among Republicans openly protesting in 1880 against General Grant's candidacy were President Woolsey, Thurlow Weed, Murat Hastead, E. R. Hoar, Henry L. Pierce, Rev. Henry W. Bellows, and Rev. James Freeman Clarke. For articles and opinions adverse to a third term, see New
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, chapter 18 (search)
desired, not a vote with the certainty of a rejection. The non-action of the Senate was at Raasloff's express instance, as proved by a contemporaneous record. Mr. Fish wrote to Mr. Sumner, March 28, 1869, a note containing only these words:— Dear Sumner,—Raasloff does not wish any action on his treaty. He will probably seealoof from Washington. Within a month before General Raasloff left Washington in 1869, there was a new President, General Grant, and a new Secretary of State, Mr. Fish, neither of whom showed favor to the treaty, the former dismissing it summarily as a scheme of Seward's, and he would have nothing to do with it; and the latter sending to Mr. Sumner notes which indicated an adverse leaning. As appears by one bearing date Oct. 8, 1869, Mr. Fish peremptorily refused, at the urgent request of De Bille, the new Danish minister, to ask for another extension of time for the ratification, leaving De Bille to ask for it, and took pains to guard against any expr
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, chapter 19 (search)
for several months, some of them, as near as Mr. Fish could remember, for more than two years. In silence or reserve. Before October, 1877, Mr. Fish seems to have been, not publicly but privatel a formal list of the pigeon-holed treaties. Mr. Fish, at its head, being the only officer connecte but the charge of moral delinquency, such as Mr. Fish originated and spread, and that too against oties being thus reported by Mr. Sumner, which Mr. Fish charged he had pigeonholed in his committee. ould show such a record. Eleven days after Mr. Fish had appeared by letter in the Herald, his chaying by proxy has two advantages: it relieves Mr. Fish of the unpleasant necessity of stating at the adroit, but it will not answer its purpose. Mr. Fish's uniform charge, as given to the public and ed, which were not pressed in the Senate. If Mr. Fish told senators what Mr. Davis asserts, then hen 1877– 1878, in Scotland or in Egypt; nor by Mr. Fish, in his five appearances before the public in[43 more...]