hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
Galveston (Texas, United States) 127 1 Browse Search
Arkansas (Arkansas, United States) 104 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 102 0 Browse Search
Louisiana (Louisiana, United States) 99 1 Browse Search
John S. Ford 94 8 Browse Search
Sam Houston 81 5 Browse Search
Thomas Green 74 8 Browse Search
John Gregg 71 5 Browse Search
John G. Walker 71 3 Browse Search
San Antonio (Texas, United States) 69 3 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Col. O. M. Roberts, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 11.1, Texas (ed. Clement Anselm Evans). Search the whole document.

Found 93 total hits in 32 results.

1 2 3 4
Jesse Grimes (search for this): chapter 2
s. That brought out all of Senator Houston's powers to arouse the people in vindication of his course in Congress. He styled himself an old-time Democrat, but he was supported by the Americans, disaffected Democrats, and his old Texas friends who would vote for him irrespective of their individual views as to his course in Congress. At the election that year, H. R. Runnels received 32,552 votes, and Houston 23,628. For lieutenant-governor, F. R. Lubbock received 33,379, his opponent, Jesse Grimes, 20,818, and F. Smith 878. Senator Houston continued to occupy his seat in the Senate until his term expired, which was before the next general election. Early in 1858 Governor Runnels delivered a message to the legislature, in which he discussed the revolutionary proceedings in the Territory of Kansas to the injury of Southern interests, and referred to the action of Congress as encouraging and not repressing the growing agitation of the slavery question, all of which made it incumben
John Bell (search for this): chapter 2
sage of the Kansas and Nebraska bill in Congress, in 1854, Senator Houston of Texas voted against the bill, with the Northern Free Soilers, and Senator Rusk of Texas voted for the bill, with the Democratic and Whig senators of the South, except John Bell, of Tennessee, who also voted against it. This, with other votes given by Senator Houston, caused a strong opposition to be made against him politically in Texas. That, however, did not prevent him from openly and vigorously defending his cour State action as a remedy against Federal wrongs, and a legislature with views not at all in harmony with his on that subject. This was made more manifest during the canvass in 1860 for President, in which the governor's leading friends supported Bell, and the great body of Democrats supported Breckinridge, the Southern Democratic nominee for President. Although the vote was somewhat divided, especially in certain counties in northern and western Texas, the aggregate vote in the State in that
Fremont (search for this): chapter 2
party with a platform, as it was regarded in the South, embracing all the leading principles of the Northern States, as held by different portions of their people; they being centralism, federalism, free-soilism and abolitionism, upon which Colonel Fremont ran as a candidate for President in 1856. Though not elected, he received of the popular vote, 1,341,812, and of the presidential electors, 127. This remarkable combination portended danger to all the cherished political principles of Southern Democrats and ultimately to their peculiar industrial institutions; notwithstanding which it was currently reported that if Fremont had been elected an effort would have been made by leading men in Texas for submission to his administration. The political situation was made still more perplexing by the espousal by Northern Democrats, and even by some Democrats in Texas, of what was denominated squatter-sovereignty, which was a contention for the right of a territory before becoming a St
Sam Houston (search for this): chapter 2
African slave trade Agitated election of Governor Houston in 1859 his opposition to separate States and Nebraska bill in Congress, in 1854, Senator Houston of Texas voted against the bill, with theainst it. This, with other votes given by Senator Houston, caused a strong opposition to be made agear, H. R. Runnels received 32,552 votes, and Houston 23,628. For lieutenant-governor, F. R. Lubb, Jesse Grimes, 20,818, and F. Smith 878. Senator Houston continued to occupy his seat in the Senatased in vigor to the end of the canvass. General Houston became again an independent candidate, uncretary and adjutant-general appointed by Governor Houston. Col. Ed Clark, the running mate with GenGeneral Houston, was elected lieutenant-governor. Governor Houston was inaugurated on the 21st of DGovernor Houston was inaugurated on the 21st of December, 1859, and thus was organized at this critical period in Texas a divided administration, witex., a large number of citizens addressed Governor Houston a letter, asking his opinion in regard to[4 more...]
Abraham Lincoln (search for this): chapter 2
fest during the canvass in 1860 for President, in which the governor's leading friends supported Bell, and the great body of Democrats supported Breckinridge, the Southern Democratic nominee for President. Although the vote was somewhat divided, especially in certain counties in northern and western Texas, the aggregate vote in the State in that election restored the democracy to its former overwhelming majority. There were no electoral tickets put out for either Stephen A. Douglas or Abraham Lincoln. During this canvass there were weekly discussions by leaders on both sides, at the capital and in most other parts of the State, and toward the last of it the people were called upon to determine what should be done in the event Abraham Lincoln should be elected by the combined majorities of the Northern States. On the 14th of November, 1860, at Huntsville, Tex., a large number of citizens addressed Governor Houston a letter, asking his opinion in regard to the best course to pursu
Francis R. Lubbock (search for this): chapter 2
d the Democratic party to make nominations for governor and other executive officers in 1857, when H. R. Runnels was nominated for the office of governor, and F. R. Lubbock for that of lieutenant-governor. One of those events was when, upon the passage of the Kansas and Nebraska bill in Congress, in 1854, Senator Houston of Texe of their individual views as to his course in Congress. At the election that year, H. R. Runnels received 32,552 votes, and Houston 23,628. For lieutenant-governor, F. R. Lubbock received 33,379, his opponent, Jesse Grimes, 20,818, and F. Smith 878. Senator Houston continued to occupy his seat in the Senate until his term exphe imputation was fastened on the State administration that the slave trade was favored by the governor. In the summer of 1859, Gov. H. R. Runnels and Lieut.-Gov. F. R. Lubbock were renominated, when the agitation of these political subjects increased in vigor to the end of the canvass. General Houston became again an independe
Rusk (search for this): chapter 2
ical events before the end of that time which tended to make inroads upon the unanimity, and caused the Democratic party to make nominations for governor and other executive officers in 1857, when H. R. Runnels was nominated for the office of governor, and F. R. Lubbock for that of lieutenant-governor. One of those events was when, upon the passage of the Kansas and Nebraska bill in Congress, in 1854, Senator Houston of Texas voted against the bill, with the Northern Free Soilers, and Senator Rusk of Texas voted for the bill, with the Democratic and Whig senators of the South, except John Bell, of Tennessee, who also voted against it. This, with other votes given by Senator Houston, caused a strong opposition to be made against him politically in Texas. That, however, did not prevent him from openly and vigorously defending his course in the Senate, which drew to him large numbers of adherents, who became alienated from the regularly organized Democratic party. Another politica
Sumner (search for this): chapter 2
minds of the people of Texas. That apprehension was justified by the long-continued agitation of the slavery question, which continually increased in virulence in the Congress of the United States, and was led by such distinguished statesmen as Sumner and Seward. The newspapers were teeming with it from day to day. Mr. Sumner said in the Senate in 1854, To the overthrow of the slave power we are summoned by a double call, one political and the other philanthropic: First, to remove an oppressMr. Sumner said in the Senate in 1854, To the overthrow of the slave power we are summoned by a double call, one political and the other philanthropic: First, to remove an oppressive tyranny from the national government; and secondly, to open the gates of emancipation in the slave States. Such sentiments continued to be publicly uttered during the year 1858. Senator Seward, in his speeches at Rochester and at Rome, N. Y., presented what he deemed to be the true issue in the political controversy then pending in the United States. That issue he discussed under the following question: Shall the social organization of the North supplant that of the South? and asserted th
Ed Clark (search for this): chapter 2
Texas would have voted against it. Although the regular Democrats for the most part disregarded these extraneous issues, still they had influence in the election. The vote was for General Houston, 36,257, and for Governor Runnels, 27,500. Notwithstanding this result, there were elected a large majority of regular Democrats as members of the legislature, and the new State executive officers were of the same party, except the secretary and adjutant-general appointed by Governor Houston. Col. Ed Clark, the running mate with General Houston, was elected lieutenant-governor. Governor Houston was inaugurated on the 21st of December, 1859, and thus was organized at this critical period in Texas a divided administration, with a chief executive known to be strongly opposed to separate State action as a remedy against Federal wrongs, and a legislature with views not at all in harmony with his on that subject. This was made more manifest during the canvass in 1860 for President, in which
Seward (search for this): chapter 2
e people of Texas. That apprehension was justified by the long-continued agitation of the slavery question, which continually increased in virulence in the Congress of the United States, and was led by such distinguished statesmen as Sumner and Seward. The newspapers were teeming with it from day to day. Mr. Sumner said in the Senate in 1854, To the overthrow of the slave power we are summoned by a double call, one political and the other philanthropic: First, to remove an oppressive tyranny from the national government; and secondly, to open the gates of emancipation in the slave States. Such sentiments continued to be publicly uttered during the year 1858. Senator Seward, in his speeches at Rochester and at Rome, N. Y., presented what he deemed to be the true issue in the political controversy then pending in the United States. That issue he discussed under the following question: Shall the social organization of the North supplant that of the South? and asserted that free labo
1 2 3 4