Browsing named entities in Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 27. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). You can also browse the collection for W. H. Seward or search for W. H. Seward in all documents.

Your search returned 16 results in 5 document sections:

Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 27. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), chapter 1.34 (search)
ent was handed to him for perusal. He looked at him and said: Shall we make it $50,000? But I obeyed orders, and $16,000 was ordered to be paid. Upon the receipt of the money, Page paid off the crew to May 19, 1865, and delivered the Stonewall into the hands of the Captain-General of Cuba. In July, 1865, she was delivered to the government of the United States, and the conditions of the surrender are set out in the annexed correspondence between the Spanish Minister at Washington and Mr. Seward, the United States Secretary of State. She was subsequently sold by the United States to the government of Japan. Technical questions. It may be thought by those who are inclined to be severely critical that in the arrangements for despatching the City, of Richmond, some liberty was taken with the municipal law of England, and that there was some violation of her neutral territory. Scarcely anyone, however, will maintain that the shipment of arms by the steamer was illegal; and the
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 27. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), A noble life. (search)
lated; and he further accused Lincoln of managing the war for personal ends. Seward has been much criticised, and accused of rare presumption, for a letter that hsuperiority and condescendingly offered his advice and aid. It is probable that Seward did feel something of the contempt for Lincoln that his brethren in the Cabinetrequently showed to his face throughout their long terms of office. Like them, Seward was a man of the highest social standing and of large experience in the highesthumility, but there is a much more obvious way of accounting for them. Whether Seward's letter gave offense or not, it suggested the policy that Lincoln adopted, whif the war nor the emancipation would have been possible. The policy advised in Seward's letter is, Change the question before the public from the one upon slavery foestion upon Union or Disunion. The letter did not come to light for years, and Seward might well say, as he did, that Lincoln had a cunning that was genius. See Don
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 27. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), chapter 1.52 (search)
lated; and he further accused Lincoln of managing the war for personal ends. Seward has been much criticised, and accused of rare presumption, for a letter that hsuperiority and condescendingly offered his advice and aid. It is probable that Seward did feel something of the contempt for Lincoln that his brethren in the Cabinetrequently showed to his face throughout their long terms of office. Like them, Seward was a man of the highest social standing and of large experience in the highesthumility, but there is a much more obvious way of accounting for them. Whether Seward's letter gave offense or not, it suggested the policy that Lincoln adopted, whif the war nor the emancipation would have been possible. The policy advised in Seward's letter is, Change the question before the public from the one upon slavery foestion upon Union or Disunion. The letter did not come to light for years, and Seward might well say, as he did, that Lincoln had a cunning that was genius. See Don
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 27. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), The Peace conference [from the Richmond, Va., Dispatch, February 25, 1900.] (search)
e, I answer with pleasure. On January 29, 1865, the Confederate commissioners—Stephens, Hunter and Campbell—left Richmond to meet the Federal commissioners at Fort Monroe. There, on January 31st, they met in conference President Lincoln and Mr. Seward, Secretary of State. The conference lasted four hours, and Mr. Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederate States, has left on record a detailed report of the discussion there. Mr. Stephens pressed for a secret military convention betweenlition of slavery, as stated. But, on this subject, he said, he could give no assurance; enter into no stipulation. He barely expressed his own feelings and views, and what he believed to be the views of others upon the subject. Page 617. Mr. Seward said the Northern people were weary of the war. They desired peace and a restoration of harmony, and, he believed, would be willing to pay, as an indemnity for the slaves, what would be required to continue the war, but stated no amount (page 6
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 27. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones), Index. (search)
oat, 221. Rich Mountain campaign in 1861, 38. Rockbridge county, Roster of Company C, 1st Virginia cavalry, from, 377. Rodes, General R E., killed, 5 Ropes, John Codman, historian, 83. Rosser, General T. L., 283. Sailor's Creek, Battle of, 324. Sanders, Palmer, killed, 141. Scott, Colonel W. C., 44. Secession, Right of, 61, 114; advocated by Massachusetts, 65; by the N. Y. Tribune, 67; cause of, 81. Seddon, James A., 317. Sedgwick, General, John, killed, 37. Seward, W. H., 375. Sharpsburg, Battle of, 49, 200. Sheridan, General P. H., 173, 314. Slavery, Virginia did not fight for, 76; pro-tested against continuation of, 77; the emancipation proclamation, 64. Slave trade, Debate on the, in 1858, 99. Smith, Mrs. F. H., 184, 259 South, Vindication of the, 60; cause of the, 119. Southern Historical Society-Its history, 344. Stanton, E. M., 369. Star Spangled Banner, 120. Stephens, Alex. H., 375. Steuart, R. D., 176. Stewart, Colonel W. H.