Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: December 14, 1860., [Electronic resource]. You can also browse the collection for Hamilton or search for Hamilton in all documents.

Your search returned 4 results in 2 document sections:

The Daily Dispatch: December 14, 1860., [Electronic resource], Congressional debate, Wednesday. (search)
K. Y.; Nelson, of Tenn.; Dunn, of Ind.; Taylor, of La.; Reuben Davis, of Miss; Kellogg, of Ill.; Hawkin of Ala.; Phelps, of Mo.; Rusk, of Ark.; Howard, of Mich.; Hamilton, of Texas; Curtis, of Lowe; Barch of Cal.; Wyndham, of Minn.; Stout, of Oregon--21. Mr. Ferry, of Ct., moved the following resolution as a substitute: Winslow, Campbell, Love, Davis of Md., Whiterey, Tappan, Stratton, Bristow, Nelson, Dunn, Taylor, Reuben Davis of Miss. Kellogg, Houston, Phelps, Rusk, Howard, Hamilton, Burch, Wyndham and Stout--23. The original proposition of Mr. Rusk was then adopted, by the following vote: Axes.--Messrs. Corwin, Millson, Winslow, Cessrs. Corwin, Millson, Winslow, Campbell, Love, Davis of Md., Stratton, Bristow, Nelson, Dunn, Taylor, Kellogg, Houston, Phelps, Rusk, Howard, Hamilton, Curtis, Burch, Wyndham and Stout--21. Nays.--Messrs. Adams, Ferry, Humphrey, Robinson, Tappan, Morrill, Morse and Washburne--8. Mr. Davis, of Miss., declined to vote.
The Daily Dispatch: December 14, 1860., [Electronic resource], The English in Russia. (search)
ng Congress from interfering with slavery in the District of Columbia until it is abolished in Maryland, and not then without the consent of the people of the District, and compensation. Fifth, by restraining Congress from disturbing the present ratio of slave representation. Sixth, by providing that these provisions be unamended and unalterable. The resolutions were laid over for future action. Mr. Iverson, of Ga., called up the bill relative to our commerce with Mexico. Mr. Hamilton opposed the motion to take up. Mr. Hale moved an amendment, to postpone its going into effect. On receipt of a message from the House, communicating that body's non-concurrence in the reduction in the $10,000,000 bill, Mr. Hunter said, if the Senate agreed with the House as to the amount, he wished the same restrictions to be applied to that bill as the Senate yesterday applied to the three million bill. The Senate then concurred with the House. Mr. Davis brought up Mi