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
Dec 114 0 Browse Search
Nov 92 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 30 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 28 0 Browse Search
McClellan 15 1 Browse Search
J. T. Westbrook 12 0 Browse Search
Chris Rogers 12 0 Browse Search
Slidell 12 2 Browse Search
Humphrey Marshall 11 1 Browse Search
Cook 10 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: January 2, 1862., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 28 total hits in 12 results.

1 2
England (United Kingdom) (search for this): article 5
ther cruisers had been dispatched. I think I can satisfy you in a few words that you have no serious occasion to feel concerned about our relations with England if, as her rulers profess, she has no disposition to encourage the dissensions in America. In the first place, it is almost superfluous to say to you that every instinct of prudence as well as of good neighborhood prompts our government to regard no honorable sacrifice too great for the preservation of the friendship of Great Britain. This must be obvious to all the world. At no period of our history has her friendship been of more importance to our people — at no period has our government been in a condition to make greater concessions to preserve it. The two nations are united by interests and sympathies — commercial, social, political, and religious — almost as the two arms to one body, and no one is so ignorant as not to know that what harms one must harm the other in a corresponding degree. I am persuaded<
United States (United States) (search for this): article 5
that the British Government can entertain no doubt upon this subject; but if it does, I feel that I might take it upon myself to say that the President of the United States, when made aware of its existence, will lose no opportunity of dispelling it. Nor is there anything, I venture to affirm, in the seizure of these rebel emle of justice and humanity, she will find no ground, in the visit of the Trent, for controversy with our Government. I am sure the President and people of the United States would be but too happy to let these men go free, unnatural and unpardonable as their offences have been, if by it they could emancipate the commerce of the worsurrender any of those maritime privileges of belligerents which are sanctioned by the laws of nations, I feel that I take no responsibility in saying that the United States will be faithful to her traditional policy upon this subject and to the spirit of her political institutions. On the other hand, should England be unprepa
Cuba (Cuba) (search for this): article 5
equent allusion has been made: To ----,Esq.: My Dear Sir: You were right in doubting the declaration imputed to me, to with that the Cabinet at Washington had given orders to seize Messrs. Mason and Slidell even under a neutral flag; for I was not even aware that the government had had that point under consideration: At the time of my leaving New York it was not known that the San Jacinto had returned to the American seas; and it was generally supposed those persons had escaped to Cuba for the purpose of re-embarking in the Nashville, in pursuit of which vessel the James Adger and other cruisers had been dispatched. I think I can satisfy you in a few words that you have no serious occasion to feel concerned about our relations with England if, as her rulers profess, she has no disposition to encourage the dissensions in America. In the first place, it is almost superfluous to say to you that every instinct of prudence as well as of good neighborhood prompts our go
Seward (search for this): article 5
its material bearings, her own naval history affords such numerous precedents. Whether the captives from the Trent were contraband of war or not, is a question which the two Governments can have no serious difficulty in agreeing upon. If Mr. Seward cannot satisfy Earl Russell that they were, I have no doubt Earl Russell will be able to satisfy Mr. Seward that they were not. It they were, as all authorities concur in admitting, agents of the rebellion, it will be difficult to satisfy imparMr. Seward that they were not. It they were, as all authorities concur in admitting, agents of the rebellion, it will be difficult to satisfy impartial minds that they were any less contraband than a file of rebel soldiers or a battery of hostile cannon. But even should there be a difference of opinion upon this point, it is very clear that our Government had sufficient grounds for presuming itself in the right to escape the suspicion of having wantonly violated the relations of amity which the two countries profess a desire to preserve and cultivate. The pretence that we ought to have taken the Trent into port, and had her conde
Wilkes (search for this): article 5
rt, and had her condemned by a prize court, in order to justify our seizure of four of her passengers, furnishes a very narrow basis on which to fix a serious controversy between two great nations.--State in other words, an offence would have been less if it had been greater. The wrong done to the British flag would have been mitigated, if, instead of seizing four rebels, we had seized the ship, detained all her passengers for weeks, and confiscated her cargo. I am not surprised that Capt, Wilkes took a different view of his duty, and of what was due to the friendly relations which subsisted between the two governments. The renowned common sense of the English people, I believe, will approve of his effort to make the discharge of a very unpleasant duty as little vexations as possible to all innocent parties. If, under these circumstances, England should deem it her duty, in the interest of civilization, to insist upon the restoration of the men taken from under the protection o
Slidell (search for this): article 5
General Scott's letter on the Mason-Slidell affair. The following is a copy of the letter of Gen. Scott that appeared in Europe, to which frequent allusion has been made: To ----,Esq.: My Dear Sir: You were right in doubting the declaration imputed to me, to with that the Cabinet at Washington had given orders to seize Messrs. Mason and Slidell even under a neutral flag; for I was not even aware that the government had had that point under consideration: At the time of my leaving New York it was not known that the San Jacinto had returned to the American seas; and it was generally supposed those persons had escaped to Cuba for the purpose of re-embarking in the Nashville, in pursuit of which vessel the James Adger and other cruisers had been dispatched. I think I can satisfy you in a few words that you have no serious occasion to feel concerned about our relations with England if, as her rulers profess, she has no disposition to encourage the dissensions in Amer
England (search for this): article 5
receive an unfriendly construction from England. Her statesmen will not question the legal right of an American vessel-of-war to search any commercial vessel suspected of transporting contraband of war; that right has never been surrendered by England, it was even guaranteed to her by the treaty of Paris, and British guns, frowning down nearly every strait and inland sea upon the globe, are conclusive evidence that she regards this right as one, the efficacy of which may be not yet entirely e liberal recognition of the rights of neutrals than any of the other great maritime nations have yet been disposed to make. But till those rights are secured by proper international guarantees, upon a comprehensive and enduring basis, of course England cannot complain of an act for which, in all its material bearings, her own naval history affords such numerous precedents. Whether the captives from the Trent were contraband of war or not, is a question which the two Governments can have n
Paris (search for this): article 5
put herself in a false position by asking us to do it. In either case, therefore, I do not see how the friendly relations of the two governments are in any immediate danger of being disturbed. The over prompt recognition, as belligerents, of a body of men, however large, so long as they constituted a manifest minority of the nation, wounded the feelings of my countrymen deeply I will not attempt to deny, nor that that act, with some of its logical consequences which have already occurred, has planted in the breasts of many the suspicion that their kindred in England wish them evil rather than good, but the statesmen to whom the political interests of these two great people are confided act upon higher responsibilities and with better lights, and you may rest assured that an event so mutually disastrous as a war between England and America cannot occur without some other and graver provocation than has yet been given by either nation. Winfield Scott. Paris December 2, 1861.
Winfield Scott (search for this): article 5
General Scott's letter on the Mason-Slidell affair. The following is a copy of the letter of Gen. Scott that appeared in Europe, to which frequent allusion has been made: To ----,Esq.: My Dear Sir: You were right in doubting the declaration imputed to me, to with that the Cabinet at Washington had given orders to Gen. Scott that appeared in Europe, to which frequent allusion has been made: To ----,Esq.: My Dear Sir: You were right in doubting the declaration imputed to me, to with that the Cabinet at Washington had given orders to seize Messrs. Mason and Slidell even under a neutral flag; for I was not even aware that the government had had that point under consideration: At the time of my leaving New York it was not known that the San Jacinto had returned to the American seas; and it was generally supposed those persons had escaped to Cuba for the purpose ese two great people are confided act upon higher responsibilities and with better lights, and you may rest assured that an event so mutually disastrous as a war between England and America cannot occur without some other and graver provocation than has yet been given by either nation. Winfield Scott. Paris December 2, 1861.
Mason (search for this): article 5
General Scott's letter on the Mason-Slidell affair. The following is a copy of the letter of Gen. Scott that appeared in Europe, to which frequent allusion has been made: To ----,Esq.: My Dear Sir: You were right in doubting the declaration imputed to me, to with that the Cabinet at Washington had given orders to seize Messrs. Mason and Slidell even under a neutral flag; for I was not even aware that the government had had that point under consideration: At the time of my leaving New York it was not known that the San Jacinto had returned to the American seas; and it was generally supposed those persons had escaped to Cuba for the purpose of re-embarking in the Nashville, in pursuit of which vessel the James Adger and other cruisers had been dispatched. I think I can satisfy you in a few words that you have no serious occasion to feel concerned about our relations with England if, as her rulers profess, she has no disposition to encourage the dissensions in Amer
1 2