hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 1,078 0 Browse Search
Frederick H. Dyer, Compendium of the War of the Rebellion: Regimental Histories 442 0 Browse Search
Brig.-Gen. Bradley T. Johnson, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 2.1, Maryland (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 440 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 1. (ed. Frank Moore) 430 0 Browse Search
Benson J. Lossing, Pictorial Field Book of the Civil War. Volume 1. 330 0 Browse Search
Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I. 324 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events, Diary from December 17, 1860 - April 30, 1864 (ed. Frank Moore) 306 0 Browse Search
Hon. J. L. M. Curry , LL.D., William Robertson Garrett , A. M. , Ph.D., Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 1.1, Legal Justification of the South in secession, The South as a factor in the territorial expansion of the United States (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 284 0 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 29. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 254 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Poetry and Incidents., Volume 5. (ed. Frank Moore) 150 0 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I.. You can also browse the collection for Maryland (Maryland, United States) or search for Maryland (Maryland, United States) in all documents.

Your search returned 162 results in 28 document sections:

1 2 3
Continental. Militia. New Hampshire 12,496 2,093 Massachusetts 68,007 15,155 Rhode Island 5,878 4,284 Connecticut 32,039 7,792 New York 18,331 3,304 New Jersey 10,726 6,055 Pennsylvania 25,608 7,357 Delaware 2,317 376 Maryland 13,912 4,127 Virginia 26,668 5,620 North Carolina 7,263   South Carolina 6,417   Georgia 2,679     Total 232,341 56,163 The number of slaves in the States respectively, at the time of the Revolution, is not known. But it may be closely approximated by the aid of the census of 1790, wherein the slave population is returned as follows: North. South. New Hampshire 158 Delaware 8,887 Vermont 17 Maryland 103,036 Rhode Island 952 Virginia 293,427 Connecticut 2,759 North Carolina 100,572 Massachusetts Massachusetts adopted a new State Constitution in 1780, to which a bill of rights was prefixed, which her Supreme Court soon after decided was inconsistent with the maintenance of Slavery, which h
t to the reservation in behalf of her soldiers already noted. This deed being formally accepted, Mr. Jefferson moved the appointment of a select committee to report a plan of government for the western territory; and Messrs. Jefferson, Chase of Maryland, and Howell of Rhode Island, were appointed such committee. From this committee, Mr. Jefferson, in due time, reported an Ordinance for the government of the territory, ceded already, or to be ceded, by individual States to the United States, sp ay, No vote. By the Articles of Confederation, two or more delegates were required to be present to cast the vote of a State. New Jersey, therefore, failed to vote. Pennsyl Mr. Mifflin ay, Ay.   Mr. Montgomery ay,   Mr. Hand ay, Maryland Mr. Henry no, No.   Mr. Stone no, Virginia Mr. Jefferson ay, No.   Mr. Hardy no,   Mr. Mercer no, N. Carolina Mr. Williamson ay, Divided.   Mr. Spaight no, S. Carolina Mr. Read no, No.   Mr. Beresford no, The votes
, with the misery and poverty which overspreads the barren wastes of Virginia, Maryland, and the other States having slaves. Travel through the whole continent, and apers, vol. III., p. 1261. Tuesday, August 21st: Mr. Luther Martin [of Maryland] proposed to vary Article VII., Section 4, so as to allow a prohibition or taxrolina may, perhaps, by degrees, do of herself what is wished, as Virginia and Maryland have already done. Adjourned. --Ibid., p. 1388. Again: in the debate ofeir hands. But their folly dealt by the slaves as it did by tile Tories. * * * Maryland and Virginia, ho said, had already prohibited the importation of slaves. Nort Slaves; in fact, several, if not all, of these States, including Virginia and Maryland, had already expressly forbidden it. But the ultimatum presented by the still s prohibiting the importation of slaves by several of our States, Virginia and Maryland inclusive, prior to the framing of our Federal Constitution, and the provision
e cultivation slowly and fitfully expanded throughout the following century, extending northward to the eastern shore of Maryland and the southernmost point of New Jersey--where, however, the plant was grown more for ornament than use. It is stated t1, and at considerably higher prices per pound. But the relatively frigid climate and superficially exhausted soil of Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina--wherein the greater number of slaves were originally held — were poorly, or not at all, ared for slaves, as we have seen evinced in the case of Indiana Territory. Impoverished, but salubrious and corn-growing Maryland, Virginia, etc., were ready to supply them. Enterprising, adventurous whites, avaricious men from the North and from Eu likely to live, was deemed an addition to his master's wealth of not less than one hundred dollars, even in Virginia or Maryland. It had now become the interest of the master to increase the number of births in his slave-cabins; and few evinced scr
re exceedingly favorable to the Southern side. Its advocates, in accordance with their general policy of defending and promoting Slavery in the abused name of Liberty, fought their battle under the flag of State Sovereignty, State Equality, etc. The Right of the People to form and modify their institutions in accordance with their own judgment, interest, feelings, or convictions, was the burden of their strain. Said Mr. William Pinkney, Speech in the U. S. Senate, February 15, 1820. of Maryland, their most pretentious and ornate, if not their ablest champion: Slavery, we are told in many a pamphlet, memorial, and speech, with which the press has lately groaned, is a foul blot on our otherwise immaculate reputation. Let this be conceded — yet you are no nearer than before to the conclusion that you possess power which may deal with other objects as effectually as with this. Slavery, we are further told, with some pomp of metaphor, is a canker at the root of all that is excell
she must behave herself. The Governor talked loudly, but did not see fit to proceed from words to blows. The Indian Springs fraud proved abortive; but Georgia and her backers scored up a heavy account against Mr. Adams, to be held good against him not only, but all future Yankee and Puritan aspirants to the Presidency. General Jackson was chosen President in 1828, receiving more than two-thirds of the Electoral votes, including those of all the Slave States but Delaware and a part of Maryland. In Georgia, there were two Jackson Electoral tickets run, but none for Adams. And the first Annual Message of the new President gave the Indians due notice that Georgia had not so voted from blind impulse — that their dearest rights, their most cherished possessions, were among her spoils of victory. In this Message, the solemn obligations which our Government had volunteered to assume, in treaty after treaty with the Creeks and Cherokees, were utterly ignored, and the rights and posses
d in 1774. The New York Manumission Society was founded in 1785: John Jay was its first President; Alexander Hamilton its second. Rhode Island followed in 1786; Maryland in 1789; Connecticut in 1790; Virginia in 1791; New Jersey in 1792. The discovery that such societies were at war with the Federal Constitution, or with the rece till nearly forty years afterward. These Abolition Societies were largely composed of the most eminent as well as the worthiest citizens. Among them were, in Maryland, Samuel Chase, a signer of the Declaration, and Luther Martin, one of the framers of the Constitution; in Delaware, James A. Bayard, Father of one of her presinsight into the cruelties and villainies of slaveholding — Wheeling being at that time a great thoroughfare for negro-traders and their prey on their route from Maryland and Virginia to the lower Mississippi. Before he made Wheeling his home, he had spent some time at Mount Pleasant, Ohio, whither he returned after learning his
the county of Washington, and including the cities of Washington and Georgetown — were ceded by Maryland in 1788, and now compose the entire District; so that Washington is commanded, within easy shelacceptance of Congress, become the seat of the Government of the United States. The cession by Maryland was without qualification. But Congress proceeded, soon after, to pass an act, apparently without much consideration or forecast, whereby the then existing laws of Maryland and Virginia were to continue in full force and effect over those portions of the Federal District ceded by them respectiensive mart for the prosecution of the domestic Slave-Trade. Some of the largest purchasers in Maryland and Virginia for the cotton and sugar region located themselves at this point, fitted up their , two years later, January 18, 1840. the House, on motion of William Cost Johnson (Whig), of Maryland, further Resolved, That upon the presentation of any memorial or petition, praying for the
iction. Gen. Harrison was, therefore, on the whole, quite as acceptable, personally, to the Slave Power as Mr. Van Buren; and he received the votes of Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Louisiana. He failed, however, to win the favor of Mr. Calhoun, and so had no considerable support in Sountial canvass that soon followed, he was supported by the Whigs, or anti-Jackson men, of the Slave States for Vice-President, and received the electoral votes of Maryland, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee. In 1838, he was elected as a Whig to the Legislature of Virginia, and as such made a delegate to the Whig National Convoral votes to 134 for his opponent. As it was, Mr. Clay received the electoral votes of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Vermont, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee--105 in all, being those of eleven States; while Mr. Polk was supported by Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsyl
m L. Yancey, of Alabama, in the following guise: Resolved, That the doctrine of noninterference with the rights of property of any portion of the people of this confederacy, be it in the States or Territories thereof, by any other than the parties interested in them, is the true Republican doctrine recognized by this body. The party was not yet ready for such strong meat, and this resolve was rejected: Nays 216; Yeas 36--South Carolina 9; Alabama 9; Georgia 9; Arkansas 3; Florida 3; Maryland 1; Kentucky 1; Tennessee 1. The Whig National Convention assembled in Philadelphia, June 7th. Gen. Zachary Taylor, of Louisiana, had on the first ballot 111 votes for President to 97 for Henry Clay, 43 for General Scott, 22 for Mr. Webster, and 6 scattering. On the fourth ballot (next day), Gen. Taylor had 171 to 107 for all others, and was declared nominated. Millard Fillmore, of New York, had 115 votes for Vice-President, on the first ballot, to 109 for Abbott Lawrence, of Massachuse
1 2 3