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
United States (United States) 30 0 Browse Search
John Wade 26 0 Browse Search
J. R. Anderson 18 0 Browse Search
G. T. Beauregard 16 0 Browse Search
Canada (Canada) 12 0 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 12 0 Browse Search
O. P. Hare 10 0 Browse Search
Green (Kentucky, United States) 10 0 Browse Search
William V. Mott 10 0 Browse Search
Lincoln 10 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: October 19, 1861., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 25 total hits in 9 results.

United States (United States) (search for this): article 5
as to the relations of the State and the Federal Union. Some held that the authority of each came from the people, that there was a divided sovereignty, and each in its sphere supreme. But now there could be no pretence of this. The Confederate States were limited by a grant jealously phrased. The old Constitution set forth that it was the work of the people. The present recites that the deputies of sovereign States had framed it. There was a grant of authority to execute all powers neess it were claimed that we were wiser than those historical men. The very nature of language forbade the idea of sequestration being a term applicable to captures on land and sea. Debt was an idea. He had heard the learned counsel for the Confederate States say that debts could be captured. That was only poetical license. Government would scarcely claim to administer law by a metaphor. Was that strict construction to say that inasmuch as one thing could be done, therefore something like it
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): article 5
e. Government would scarcely claim to administer law by a metaphor. Was that strict construction to say that inasmuch as one thing could be done, therefore something like it might also be done? Mr. Petigru read from the first volume of South Carolina Statutes. Was all this (his quotation,) false? Had Dr. Cooper lived in vain, spoken in vain, thought in vain, written in vain? The Confederacy was but an agent. The State was sovereign. All through South Carolina, from the Santee to the South Carolina, from the Santee to the Pee Dee, there was but one sovereign. Sovereigns could do wrong. It was of the essence of sovereignty to do wrong, otherwise law would be above that power.--Such things as this writ had been tried before. The Star Chamber subpœna, the general warrant, but these have all found resistance. Mr. Petigru, in the course of his argument, illustrated his positions by reference to the course of English history, the lives of Chief Justice Pratt, John Wilkes, and Lord Camden. The District Attorney
Mitchell (search for this): article 5
was the savage contest it had been. The influence of Christianity was spreading, and human governments were approaching the principles of Him "whose power was in righteousness." Mr. Petigru illustrated these views in the presentation of his points with a matchless wealth of language and force of logic. In conclusion, he said he had been compelled to speak in defence of right. He did it when life had lost much of its energy — since the fire of youth is exhausted — and he would that younger advocates had stood up with youthful energy and more prevailing eloquence. Such as he had done, however, he had done. What we have given above is but a meagre abstract of Mr. Petigru's eloquent argument, which we hope to be able to lay before our readers in full in a later issue of the Courier. Isaac W. Hayne, Esq., replied on behalf of the Government, followed by Mr. Mitchell in reply. These arguments we also shall take pleasure in laying before our readers in another issue.
John Wilkes (search for this): article 5
hrough South Carolina, from the Santee to the Pee Dee, there was but one sovereign. Sovereigns could do wrong. It was of the essence of sovereignty to do wrong, otherwise law would be above that power.--Such things as this writ had been tried before. The Star Chamber subpœna, the general warrant, but these have all found resistance. Mr. Petigru, in the course of his argument, illustrated his positions by reference to the course of English history, the lives of Chief Justice Pratt, John Wilkes, and Lord Camden. The District Attorney had referred to the authority of Lord Hale. Lord Hale's book was prepared from an uncorrected posthumous work. Grant, however, the text was pure. Lord Hale it was who held the famous assizes and burnt three old women. For this he had no more authority than that debts were confiscable. He had scripture for his belief in witchcraft. It was not true that aliens had no rights. They had the rights of humanity. War no longer was the savage contest
Petigru (search for this): article 5
s against the process issued under the Sequestration Act: Mr. Petigru opened his argument by stating that the demurrer would be sustait submit to be commanded where there is no right to command Mr. Petigru, after speaking of the irregularities of the writ, and the dangethat the war power included sequestration? This was untrue, Mr. Petigru argued, from the language of treaties and the legislative constrld be done, therefore something like it might also be done? Mr. Petigru read from the first volume of South Carolina Statutes. Was all , the general warrant, but these have all found resistance. Mr. Petigru, in the course of his argument, illustrated his positions by refg the principles of Him "whose power was in righteousness." Mr. Petigru illustrated these views in the presentation of his points with a done. What we have given above is but a meagre abstract of Mr. Petigru's eloquent argument, which we hope to be able to lay before our
Grant (search for this): article 5
otherwise law would be above that power.--Such things as this writ had been tried before. The Star Chamber subpœna, the general warrant, but these have all found resistance. Mr. Petigru, in the course of his argument, illustrated his positions by reference to the course of English history, the lives of Chief Justice Pratt, John Wilkes, and Lord Camden. The District Attorney had referred to the authority of Lord Hale. Lord Hale's book was prepared from an uncorrected posthumous work. Grant, however, the text was pure. Lord Hale it was who held the famous assizes and burnt three old women. For this he had no more authority than that debts were confiscable. He had scripture for his belief in witchcraft. It was not true that aliens had no rights. They had the rights of humanity. War no longer was the savage contest it had been. The influence of Christianity was spreading, and human governments were approaching the principles of Him "whose power was in righteousness."
Pratt (search for this): article 5
sovereign. All through South Carolina, from the Santee to the Pee Dee, there was but one sovereign. Sovereigns could do wrong. It was of the essence of sovereignty to do wrong, otherwise law would be above that power.--Such things as this writ had been tried before. The Star Chamber subpœna, the general warrant, but these have all found resistance. Mr. Petigru, in the course of his argument, illustrated his positions by reference to the course of English history, the lives of Chief Justice Pratt, John Wilkes, and Lord Camden. The District Attorney had referred to the authority of Lord Hale. Lord Hale's book was prepared from an uncorrected posthumous work. Grant, however, the text was pure. Lord Hale it was who held the famous assizes and burnt three old women. For this he had no more authority than that debts were confiscable. He had scripture for his belief in witchcraft. It was not true that aliens had no rights. They had the rights of humanity. War no longer was t
S. Cooper (search for this): article 5
applicable to captures on land and sea. Debt was an idea. He had heard the learned counsel for the Confederate States say that debts could be captured. That was only poetical license. Government would scarcely claim to administer law by a metaphor. Was that strict construction to say that inasmuch as one thing could be done, therefore something like it might also be done? Mr. Petigru read from the first volume of South Carolina Statutes. Was all this (his quotation,) false? Had Dr. Cooper lived in vain, spoken in vain, thought in vain, written in vain? The Confederacy was but an agent. The State was sovereign. All through South Carolina, from the Santee to the Pee Dee, there was but one sovereign. Sovereigns could do wrong. It was of the essence of sovereignty to do wrong, otherwise law would be above that power.--Such things as this writ had been tried before. The Star Chamber subpœna, the general warrant, but these have all found resistance. Mr. Petigru, in the
Isaac W. Hayne (search for this): article 5
was the savage contest it had been. The influence of Christianity was spreading, and human governments were approaching the principles of Him "whose power was in righteousness." Mr. Petigru illustrated these views in the presentation of his points with a matchless wealth of language and force of logic. In conclusion, he said he had been compelled to speak in defence of right. He did it when life had lost much of its energy — since the fire of youth is exhausted — and he would that younger advocates had stood up with youthful energy and more prevailing eloquence. Such as he had done, however, he had done. What we have given above is but a meagre abstract of Mr. Petigru's eloquent argument, which we hope to be able to lay before our readers in full in a later issue of the Courier. Isaac W. Hayne, Esq., replied on behalf of the Government, followed by Mr. Mitchell in reply. These arguments we also shall take pleasure in laying before our readers in another issue.