Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: March 14, 1863., [Electronic resource]. You can also browse the collection for Hopkins or search for Hopkins in all documents.

Your search returned 2 results in 2 document sections:

We find it in our politics to-day, as the Tudor found it three hundred years ago, ever meddling for harm; and yet seeking its own safety by concessions, but never conceding anything for the welfare of others, unless, thereby, it could help itself in larger measure. [Laughter and cheers.] Even in the time of Elizabeth it compromised with its persecutors, by agreeing to the passage of a bill by Parliament which shielded the Presbyterians, but provided a punishment for the separatists. Hopkins closes his history of the Purslane of that time by saying, with discriminating justice, that "we do not claim for them that they had well defined and correct ideas of civil liberty. For example, the dispensing power of the sovereign — utterly in mockery of all legislation, and practically a canker at the root of civil liberty — seems to have been generally admitted by them." Just now, when it suits their object, they clamor for the proclamations and confiscations, which dispense with the C
ttee is the same in substance as that originally passed by the House, and heretofore noticed in this paper.] Mr. West submitted a resolution instructing the Clerk to have published one time in the daily semi-weekly, and weekly issues of the Dispatch Enquirer, Whig, and Examiner, the bill restricting the cultivation of tobacco. Mr. Mallory moved to amend by inserting the Sentinel, and ordering its publication for one time in the daily issue alone, pending which. On motion of Mr. Hopkins, the whole matter was laid upon the tale. At 11 o'clock the order of the day was taken up — the subject of salt — and discussed at considerable length by Messrs Barbour and Forbes, in favor of the contract with Wm. N. Clarkson, as reported by the majority of the committee; and by Messrs. Crockett, Fleming, Bouldin, Robinson of Richmond, and Buford, in behalf of the contract with Chas Scott & Co., as reported by the minority. The previous question was called, which was upon subst