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
McClellan 32 2 Browse Search
Richmond (Virginia, United States) 20 0 Browse Search
David E. Twiggs 15 1 Browse Search
Anthony C. Hesing 14 2 Browse Search
Hanover Court House (Virginia, United States) 12 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 12 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 10 0 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 10 0 Browse Search
Bedford Forrest 9 1 Browse Search
Fort Delaware (Delaware, United States) 8 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

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

Found 24 total hits in 8 results.

England (United Kingdom) (search for this): article 11
her sovereign. The whole question is, whether the Pope, having lost Romagna, the Marches, and Umbria, should retain the whole of the territory now occupied by France, or whether the French troops should occupy for the Pope only the Patrimony of St. Peter, including the Vatican. Setting aside all difference between a Protestant and Roman Catholic sovereign, it is manifest that the principle thus upheld is at variance with the principles maintained everywhere else by France as well as by Great Britain. Rome is foreign territory; the Romans are to have nothing, and foreign troops everything, to say to the form of its Government. This system can hardly be of long duration; it is too directly opposed to the maxims of international law and the wishes of the Italian people. Earl Russell, deeming the information he has obtained all that can at present be had by discussion, does not wish it to be continued, but he sends an arrow into the French camp as he retires from the subject:
Umbria (Italy) (search for this): article 11
l summarises the result of the discussions, which he thinks have been attended with considerable advantages. He says: "M. Thouvenel no longer speaks of the difficulty of persuading the Italian Government to accept of such conditions as her Majesty's Government had suggested. Nor is there any question of forcing the Pope to abandon his temporal power and remain in Italy as the subject of another sovereign. The whole question is, whether the Pope, having lost Romagna, the Marches, and Umbria, should retain the whole of the territory now occupied by France, or whether the French troops should occupy for the Pope only the Patrimony of St. Peter, including the Vatican. Setting aside all difference between a Protestant and Roman Catholic sovereign, it is manifest that the principle thus upheld is at variance with the principles maintained everywhere else by France as well as by Great Britain. Rome is foreign territory; the Romans are to have nothing, and foreign troops everything,
St. Peter (Minnesota, United States) (search for this): article 11
be expected of us would be the restoration of Rome to the Romans. " Lord Cowley sent a report of this conversation to Earl Russell, whose reply is pointed: "Thouvenel asks:' Why are we to be asked to give up Rome and the patrimony of St. Peter to the King of Italy? The utmost that can be expected of us would be the restoration of Rome to the Romans.' This is an objection rather captious than conclusive. The grand objection made to the evacuation of Rome by the French troops, as staer sovereign. The whole question is, whether the Pope, having lost Romagna, the Marches, and Umbria, should retain the whole of the territory now occupied by France, or whether the French troops should occupy for the Pope only the Patrimony of St. Peter, including the Vatican. Setting aside all difference between a Protestant and Roman Catholic sovereign, it is manifest that the principle thus upheld is at variance with the principles maintained everywhere else by France as well as by Great B
France (France) (search for this): article 11
rcing the Pope to abandon his temporal power and remain in Italy as the subject of another sovereign. The whole question is, whether the Pope, having lost Romagna, the Marches, and Umbria, should retain the whole of the territory now occupied by France, or whether the French troops should occupy for the Pope only the Patrimony of St. Peter, including the Vatican. Setting aside all difference between a Protestant and Roman Catholic sovereign, it is manifest that the principle thus upheld is at variance with the principles maintained everywhere else by France as well as by Great Britain. Rome is foreign territory; the Romans are to have nothing, and foreign troops everything, to say to the form of its Government. This system can hardly be of long duration; it is too directly opposed to the maxims of international law and the wishes of the Italian people. Earl Russell, deeming the information he has obtained all that can at present be had by discussion, does not wish it to be con
M. Thouvenel (search for this): article 11
The French occupation of Rome. The official correspondence in relation to the French occupation of Rome has been laid before Parliament. It appears that M. Thouvenel said to Lord Cowley, the British Ambassador in Paris: "Why are we to be asked to give up Rome and the patrimony of St Peter to the King of Italy? The utmost tpected of us would be the restoration of Rome to the Romans. " Lord Cowley sent a report of this conversation to Earl Russell, whose reply is pointed: "Thouvenel asks:' Why are we to be asked to give up Rome and the patrimony of St. Peter to the King of Italy? The utmost that can be expected of us would be the restoratio a concluding dispatch Earl Russell summarises the result of the discussions, which he thinks have been attended with considerable advantages. He says: "M. Thouvenel no longer speaks of the difficulty of persuading the Italian Government to accept of such conditions as her Majesty's Government had suggested. Nor is there a
St Peter (search for this): article 11
The French occupation of Rome. The official correspondence in relation to the French occupation of Rome has been laid before Parliament. It appears that M. Thouvenel said to Lord Cowley, the British Ambassador in Paris: "Why are we to be asked to give up Rome and the patrimony of St Peter to the King of Italy? The utmost that can be expected of us would be the restoration of Rome to the Romans. " Lord Cowley sent a report of this conversation to Earl Russell, whose reply is pointed: "Thouvenel asks:' Why are we to be asked to give up Rome and the patrimony of St. Peter to the King of Italy? The utmost that can be expected of us would be the restoration of Rome to the Romans.' This is an objection rather captious than conclusive. The grand objection made to the evacuation of Rome by the French troops, as stated frequently by M. Billault, as the parliamentary organ of the French Government, is that anarchy would prevail. " In a concluding dispatch Earl Russell su
Roman Catholic (search for this): article 11
er Majesty's Government had suggested. Nor is there any question of forcing the Pope to abandon his temporal power and remain in Italy as the subject of another sovereign. The whole question is, whether the Pope, having lost Romagna, the Marches, and Umbria, should retain the whole of the territory now occupied by France, or whether the French troops should occupy for the Pope only the Patrimony of St. Peter, including the Vatican. Setting aside all difference between a Protestant and Roman Catholic sovereign, it is manifest that the principle thus upheld is at variance with the principles maintained everywhere else by France as well as by Great Britain. Rome is foreign territory; the Romans are to have nothing, and foreign troops everything, to say to the form of its Government. This system can hardly be of long duration; it is too directly opposed to the maxims of international law and the wishes of the Italian people. Earl Russell, deeming the information he has obtained a
M. Billault (search for this): article 11
d be the restoration of Rome to the Romans. " Lord Cowley sent a report of this conversation to Earl Russell, whose reply is pointed: "Thouvenel asks:' Why are we to be asked to give up Rome and the patrimony of St. Peter to the King of Italy? The utmost that can be expected of us would be the restoration of Rome to the Romans.' This is an objection rather captious than conclusive. The grand objection made to the evacuation of Rome by the French troops, as stated frequently by M. Billault, as the parliamentary organ of the French Government, is that anarchy would prevail. " In a concluding dispatch Earl Russell summarises the result of the discussions, which he thinks have been attended with considerable advantages. He says: "M. Thouvenel no longer speaks of the difficulty of persuading the Italian Government to accept of such conditions as her Majesty's Government had suggested. Nor is there any question of forcing the Pope to abandon his temporal power and r